But now relates verse 9 with the previous verse and emphasizes the strong contrast between their pre-Christian and Christian states. Whereas their pre-Christian state is characterized by ignorance of God, their Christian state is characterized by knowledge. The word for know is different from the word translated “know” in verse 8. The word used in verse 8 implies primarily knowledge of facts, whereas the word in verse 9 is often used in the deeper sense of recognition or acknowledgment, not simply of facts, but of persons, and can therefore be used to describe the relationship between God and man and between a husband and his wife (compare Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible “acknowledge”; Knox “recognize”). Clearly in this verse it is important to employ a term for know which involves personal knowledge or experience, for example, “you are personally acquainted with God,” “you have yourselves met with God,” or “you have acknowledged God as your God.”

Paul describes the Galatians as knowing God. But immediately, in order to correct any wrong impressions they might deduce from his statement, he adds: now that God knows you. The emphasis, of course, is that their reconciliation with God has not come through any effort or merit on their part; it came as a result of God’s love and God’s own initiative. In translating now that God knows you, it is essential to use the same type of expression used in the first part of verse 9. For example, one may say “but now that you have met with God—or, I should say, now that God has met with you.” This type of expression may serve well to indicate God’s initiative in the process of reconciliation.

After all that, it is hard to understand why the Galatians would want to go back into slavery. How is it (other translations “how can you”) carries with it both unbelief and dismay. The whole question is rhetorical, making it clear that to Paul it is simply not possible for them to turn back to those weak and pitiful ruling spirits. The word translated spirits is literally “elements” and obviously refers back to verse 3. Paul, however, makes his description more intense by the addition of two adjectives: the first of these, weak, puts emphasis on ineffectiveness (New American Bible “powerless,” Jerusalem Bible “can do nothing,” Phillips “dead”), and the second describes the qualities of a beggar and refers to the poverty and total inadequacy of the religious system which the Galatians are in danger of embracing (compare Jerusalem Bible “can give nothing”; New American Bible “worthless”; New English Bible “beggarly”). Though the two rhetorical questions in this verse are very effective in some languages, it is impossible to employ such expressions in other languages, and therefore a strong negative statement must be employed, for example, “surely you do not want to turn back…,” and “you certainly do not want to become their slaves….”

In languages where such rhetorical questions may be used, how is it may be rendered simply as “why,” but because of the special emphasis involved at this point, an expression such as “why in the world…” would be very appropriate.

It may not be sufficient simply to say turn back to those weak and pitiful ruling spirits. In some languages this would mean nothing more than “turning around to look at.” What is really involved here is “turn around in order to serve,” “return in order to do reverence to,” or “turn back in order to obey.”

There is a problem involved in rendering a phrase such as those weak and pitiful ruling spirits, since in many languages one cannot apply the attributives “weak,” “pitiful,” and “ruling” to a noun such as “spirits.” There are various ways in which such a syntactic construction may be restructured; a typical one would be “those spirits that rule over the world; they are weak and have no value.”

Why do you want to become their slaves all over again? is part of the single rhetorical question in the Greek, but it is made into another rhetorical question in Good News Translation in order to make clear that the result of their turning back to these spirits is to become slaves all over again, thus losing the relationship of sons to a father which they were already enjoying. The reference to slaves must be made more specific in some languages, since one must indicate to whom the persons become slaves, for example, “Why do you want to become the slaves of those spirits all over again?” or “Why do you want to have to obey those spirits all over 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 .

Paul switches from an attitude of despair (4.19-20) to an expression of confidence in his readers.

The first part of the verse is literally “I have confidence in the Lord.” Several things should be noted.

I is emphatic and has the sense either of “I know you well, and therefore I am confident,” or “I, regardless of what others might think.”

The phrase “in the Lord” occurs some forty times in Paul’s writings. In accordance with his usage, it should refer to Christ. The meaning of the expression in this particular context depends on one’s conclusion regarding its relation to Paul’s confidence. It could denote the object of Paul’s confidence, that is, “I am confident about your being in the Lord,” or “… united with the Lord.” Most modern translators, however, understand “in the Lord” as the basis for Paul’s confidence (Jerusalem Bible “I feel sure that, united in the Lord”; New English Bible “united with you in the Lord, I am confident”). The causal relation between our life in union with the Lord and Paul’s confidence may be expressed in some languages by a clause of cause, for example, “because we are all joined together with the Lord, I am sure that….”

You will not take a different view may have as its reference Paul’s general position as reflected in the letter (Revised Standard Version “you will take no other view than mine”; Knox “you will be of the same mind with me”) or Paul’s statement in verses 7-9 (as it seems to be in Jerusalem Bible “you will agree with me”). Many translations, including Good News Translation, leave the statement ambiguous (New English Bible “you will not take the wrong view”; New American Bible “you will not adopt a different view”).

It is possible to interpret the man who is upsetting you as referring to all the false teachers, with a singular standing for the whole (Knox “leaving the disturbers of your peace, be they who they may”), or as a general statement referring to no one in particular but to anyone who disturbs (Jerusalem Bible “anybody who troubles you,” New American Bible “whoever it is that is unsettling you”). Many scholars, however, take the position that Paul has a specific person in mind, perhaps the leader of the false teachers. In that case, the expression whoever he is might indicate that he has quite a high position within the group. It could, however, only emphasize the indefiniteness of the reference.

The expression will be punished by God is literally “will bear the judgment,” but it is clear from the context that this has reference to God’s act in regard to the disturber, and that this act carries with it both judgment and punishment.

Paul’s confidence expresses itself with respect to two situations: (1) that the believers in Galatia will ultimately not have a different view from what Paul has, and (2) that the man who has been causing the trouble will be punished by God. It is necessary in a number of languages to divide the content of these two expressions of confidence into two completely different sentences, for example, “Because we are joined together with the Lord, I am sure that you will not see things differently from the way in which I see them. I am also sure that the man who is disturbing you, whoever that man happens to be, will suffer punishment by God,” or “… God will punish the one who is upsetting you, it makes no difference who he is.”

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 blessing is as terse as the salutation. Only Jesus Christ is mentioned, a departure from Paul’s usual practice of mentioning also the Father and the Holy Spirit. For grace, see the comments on 1.3. One should remember that this term is used here also as part of a benediction formula. One should not read too much theological meaning into it here.

Instead of addressing the Galatians directly, Paul refers to their spirit (Revised Standard Version “grace … be with your spirit”). It is a fitting ending, since the letter, particularly the last two chapters, has been dealing with the subject of the Spirit.

This final benediction is essentially a type of prayer, and in some languages it must be introduced as such, for example, “I pray that the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ will be with you all.” In a number of languages, however, grace is translated as “showing mercy” or “being good to” in the sense of kindness which is unmerited. Therefore, one may translate “I pray that our Lord Jesus Christ may be good to you all.”

Finally, Paul again addresses the Galatians as my brothers. Despite all his misgivings, he has kept faith with them to the end, and in this way he voices the confidence that they will overcome.

Many translators simply transliterate the word Amen since it is widely used in Christian circles for the conclusion of a prayer. In this particular context a transliteration would be quite fitting. However, Amen may be translated as “Indeed, let it be so,” or “That is just what should be.” A number of languages have their own equivalents to Amen, more or less literally translatable as “Yes, indeed,” or “And so it should be.”

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 .

Rather than translating literally wanted it done, it may be better to indicate what it done refers to. These persons, who were simply the causative agents, not the actual agents of the circumcision, “wanted to have him circumcised” or “wanted to cause someone to circumcise him.”

This verse is an incomplete sentence in the Greek. How does it connect with what precedes and what follows? Did Paul mean to say that, because of the false brothers, he did have Titus circumcised? Or did the suggestion for Titus’ circumcision arise out of the presence of these false brothers (Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible)? Or again, did the false brothers themselves urge the circumcision of Titus, an idea which Paul rejected (Good News Translation)? The interpretation of verse 4 is closely linked with the interpretation of verse 3, particularly as to the question of whether Titus was circumcised or not. Good News Translation introduces the clause although some wanted it done as a means of helping to resolve at least certain aspects of the ambiguity in this passage.

Pretending to be fellow believers, these men is literally “the false brothers” (see Revised Standard Version). It may be that they themselves claimed to be a part of the fellowship, even if they were not. (This sense is captured by Revised Standard Version, compare New American Bible “Certain false claimants to the title of brother.”) It could mean, however, that this represents Paul’s own judgment; in other words, that the “false brethren” were really members of the fellowship, but in Paul’s judgment they should not have been (so Phillips “for the presence of some pseudo-Christians”; New English Bible “certain sham-Christians”). Pretending to be fellow believers, these men may be expressed in some languages as “some men who said they were fellow believers but were not,” or “some men who falsely claimed to be believers.”

Slipped into our group translates a combination of a verb and a verbal adjective (see below) which could be interpreted either in a passive sense, implying that these false brothers were brought in (New American Bible “certain false claimants to the title of brothers were smuggled in”); or in an active sense, which would mean that it was through their own initiative that they came in (Good News Translation, compare New English Bible “interlopers who had stolen in”; Jerusalem Bible “have furtively crept in”; Phillips “who wormed their way into our meeting”). In some languages the expression slipped into our group may be expressed as “insisted that they were also a part of our group,” “… part of the believers,” or “… one with the other believers.”

Slipped into our group as spies is a metaphorical expression, the figure being that of a spy who infiltrates an enemy camp. The expression consists of two Greek verbs, the first one meaning “to come in” but usually implying secrecy and stealth, and the second (literally “to spy out”) with the associated idea of hostile intent and with the purpose of destruction. Various translations endeavor to recapture the intensity of the metaphor (for example New American Bible “they wormed their way into the group to spy on”; Jerusalem Bible “who … have furtively crept in to spy”; Moffatt “who had crept in to spy out”). It may also be possible to say “they came in without people realizing what had happened, and they were just like spies.”

Freedom here is the Christian’s freedom from the bondage of the Jewish Law, of which circumcision is a key example. Paul characterized this freedom as the freedom we have through our union with Christ Jesus. The Greek itself (literally “which we have in Christ Jesus”) allows three possible meanings: (1) a causal relation, with Jesus being the cause of the freedom; (2) a relation of association, “in union with,” that is, describing a relationship with Jesus Christ characterized by close fellowship and communion (this is followed by most translations, for example, New English Bible “the liberty we enjoy in the fellowship of Christ Jesus”; New American Bible “the freedom we enjoy in Christ Jesus”; so also Moffatt, Jerusalem Bible, Phillips, Knox); and (3) a combination of the first and second meanings, as in Good News Translation.

To find out about the freedom we have may be expressed in some languages as “to find out how free we are,” “… how we have been delivered,” or “… how we have become free.” In this context to find out should imply more than mere gathering of information. There is definite hostile intent.

The combined meaning of cause and fellowship may be expressed in some languages as “because we are united with Christ Jesus,” “… are one with Christ Jesus,” or “… are joined to Christ Jesus.”

Make slaves of us means “make us slaves to the Jewish Law.” The “us” may refer either to Paul and his companions or to Christians in general, including the Galatian Christians. If understood in the former sense, “us” would be translated in its exclusive form; but if in the latter sense, the inclusive form would be used.

The sentence They wanted to make slaves of us is essentially a metaphor. What these false brethren wished to do was to enslave believers to the system of Jewish ritual. The metaphorical usage may be indicated by shifting into the form of a simile, for example, “They wanted to make us just like slaves.” It may also be necessary in some instances to indicate precisely what kind of servitude is involved, for example, “They wanted us to be just like slaves in having to do exactly what the law said we must do,” or “… what the Jewish law prescribed.”

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 transitional adverb now, which begins this verse, must not be understood in a temporal sense. It is equivalent in some languages to “but note that.”

Verse 16 is judged by some as a parenthetical elaboration of verse 15, since verse 15 can be connected in a natural manner with verse 17. What connects verse 16 with verse 15 is the word “promises,” which now supplants the word “covenant.” Since God’s covenant with Abraham consisted of promises, this substitution is appropriate (see Eph 2.12).

Promises is plural in the Greek, the reference apparently being to the repeated occasions on which the promise was made to Abraham, and the various forms in which it was expressed (Gen 12.2 ff.; 13.14 ff.; 15.1,5,18; 17.2 ff.). Elsewhere Paul uses the singular form (for example in verses 17, 18, 22, 29; Rom 4.13,14,16,20), and it seems that to him there is no marked difference of meaning between the singular and the plural. It is in this light that some translators (for example Phillips) render “promises” in the singular. It is even possible to avoid the problem of number altogether by converting the noun into a verb: “God promised….” Or one may introduce something of the plural meaning by translating “God promised on various occasions,” or “… repeatedly.”

It is important in this first sentence of verse 16 to employ a form which will clearly identify only one of Abraham’s descendants. This is necessary if Paul’s interpretation of the scripture passage is to be meaningful. Therefore, one may have to translate “God repeatedly promised to Abraham blessing to him and to one of his descendants.” In some languages it would be impossible to say “promised to Abraham and to one of his descendants,” since the promise was made specifically to Abraham and the blessing simply applied to one of his descendants. The promise itself was not made specifically to one of the descendants since the descendant had not been born at the time that the promise was made.

The scripture does not use is literally “(it) does not say” (the subject is missing in the Greek). It is even possible to understand “God” as the subject. Most translators and commentators, however, understand “scripture” as the implicit subject of the sentence (see Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, Phillips).

The real exegetical problem in this verse is in Paul’s use of “descendant” and “descendants” (literally, “seed” and “seeds”). Although he was certainly aware that the Hebrew and Greek forms of the word “seed” are singular in form but collective in meaning, yet he goes on to distinguish between the singular and the plural in order to prove his point, namely, that the promises of God were given to Abraham and one descendant, not many; and that one descendant is Christ. Some scholars have found rabbinical parallels to Paul’s exegetical method in this verse, and other interpreters have used ingenious ways to justify Paul’s reasoning here. Fortunately, the translator does not have to hold to a particular position regarding these verses in order to translate them accurately.

In some languages it may be necessary to render the second sentence of this verse as “The scripture does not have the words ‘and to your descendants’ (that is, talking about many people).” Likewise, the following sentence may have to begin “but the scripture has the words ‘and to your descendant.’ ” However, in some other languages there is a problem in the expression “and to your descendant,” since this might imply that Abraham had only one descendant. For that reason it may be necessary to say “and to one of your descendants.” Accordingly, the final explanation in this verse may be rendered as “these words refer to only one person, and that person is 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 .

Paul ends this section with an expression of a desire to be with the Galatians at their moment of distress. How I wish I were with you now expresses Paul’s strong desire, at the same time indicating that at the moment the impossibility of its fulfillment. He does not say, however, why he cannot be with them. Such a strong desire or wish may be expressed in some languages as “I want very much to be with you now,” or “I desire with all my heart to be where you are now.”

If he were present, Paul could take a different attitude toward them (literally, “to change my tone,” Revised Standard Version). Several things should be noted. First, it is not that Paul regrets what he has just said, but the way he had to say it. Secondly, the wished-for change of attitude should be understood as from a severe to a gentle attitude, and not vice versa. Finally, the change has reference to the manner of speech which dominates his letter or which he had when he told them the truth (verse 16), and not to that in the immediately preceding verses, in which he has spoken with affection and tenderness. It is often rather difficult to speak of “taking a different attitude toward someone.” What is evidently uppermost in Paul’s mind is the possibility of showing by his speech his true feelings about the Galatians. The purpose of Paul’s desiring to be with them may in some cases be expressed as “so that I could show you by my speech how I really feel toward you.” “… by a change in my language how I feel toward you,” or “… by talking face to face with you….”

Finally, we can picture Paul, with a deep sigh, crying out I am so worried about you. The verb means “to be at a loss” or “to be disturbed,” meanings reflected in some translations (Phillips “I honestly don’t know how to deal with you”; Jerusalem Bible “I have no idea what to do for the best”; New American Bible “you have me at a complete loss!”; New English Bible “I am at my wits’ end about you”; Knox “I am bewildered at you”). It is not the same verb which Good News Translation translates “to be worried” in verse 11, where Paul’s worry is characterized by fear. Here it is perhaps characterized by his feeling of doubt or helplessness.

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 verb translated surprised includes an element of intense unbelief. I am surprised at you is therefore very close to the English expression “I can’t believe this of you at all!” In some languages it is difficult to express mere surprise about a person. The more usual equivalent would be “surprise about what a person has done.” Therefore, I am surprised at you may be rendered as “I am surprised at what you have done.” In other languages “what you have done” constitutes the cause for surprise, and therefore the first sentence of this verse may be rendered as “What you have done causes me to be surprised,” “… astonishes me,” or “… makes me wonder so that I can scarcely believe it.”

Paul’s surprise stems from the fact that in no time at all the Galatians are deserting the one who called them. In no time at all translates an expression which may refer to (1) the pace of their desertion after it has begun; (2) the short time between their conversion and their desertion, or (3) the short time between Paul’s last visit to them and the writing of this letter. While all three interpretations are possible grammatically, most commentators favor the second of these alternatives.

In no time at all may be rendered in a number of languages as “in such a short time” or “so soon now.” In some languages, however, it is almost necessary to indicate more precisely the length of time involved, presumably the time between the conversion of the Galatian believers and the desertion of their faith in the grace of Christ. If one must choose between expressions which would involve a few days, a few weeks, a few months, or a few years, it is probably best to employ the one which would mean “within a few months you are deserting.”

The word deserting carries with it the idea of changing one’s mind, of a willful forsaking of one’s former loyalty and adoption of another. Paul’s use of the present tense suggests that the process of desertion is still going on, and that it is not yet complete, and therefore it is still possible to check it. In some languages the term deserting may be rendered as “abandoning,” “leaving to the side,” or even “going off and forgetting.”

The object of the desertion is not some doctrine or teaching, but the one who called you, referring not to Paul but to God himself (compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “God has called you”). Because it is so easy to understand the phrase the one who called you as a reference to Paul, it may be essential in some languages to say “you are deserting God, who called you.”

As the footnote indicates, there is a textual problem involving the phrase by the grace of Christ. In the Greek text there are actually four possible readings: (1) “by grace,” (2) “by the grace of Christ,” (3) “by the grace of Jesus Christ,” and (4) “by the grace of God.” The first of these alternatives is probably the original reading of the phrase, and at least one modern translation (New English Bible) follows it, but most translations follow the second alternative. They follow it, however, primarily for translational reasons, so as to indicate clearly that in this context grace is a reference to God’s grace, which comes by means of Jesus Christ.

The expression “by grace” could itself refer either to the purpose of the calling (for example, “who called you to be in a state of grace”) or to the instrument through which the calling was accomplished, that is “by grace.” While both interpretations are possible, most commentators and translators prefer the second. The whole emphasis of the letter is that the Good News is made possible by the free gift of God through Jesus Christ (which is what grace really is) in contrast with obedience to the Jewish Law. The phrase by the grace of Christ expresses the means by which God had called the believers. This may be expressed in some languages as “by means of Christ being so good to you,” “by means of Christ showing you such favor,” or “by means of Christ’s great kindness to you.” If, however, one follows the fourth alternative form of the text, then “God” becomes the active agent of the grace.

The desertion is further explained in the conclusion of the verse: the Galatians are accepting another gospel. The word gospel is the term used to describe the Good News of what God has done in Jesus Christ on behalf of all men. When Paul talks of another gospel, however, he is not talking of this Good News; he is talking about a different message which claims to be the Good News, but really is not (compare Jerusalem Bible “a different version of the Good News” seems to capture accurately Paul’s intention). It may be extremely difficult in some languages to speak of another gospel particularly if the term gospel is rendered as “good news.” Under such circumstances it would seem to mean something like “more good news,” which obviously is not what is intended in this verse. The closest equivalent may be “another message which is said to be good news,” “… claims to be good news,” or “… is spoken of as good news.”

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 .