The Greek text starts with a “but” (as in Revised Standard Version, compare New English Bible “yet”; Jerusalem Bible “and what happened?”), indicating that, contrary to his worst fears, Paul’s views prevailed. He cites two incidents to illustrate this: (1) the case of Titus (verses 3-5) and (2) the attitude of the Jerusalem leaders toward himself and his message (verses 6-10).

Titus is already noted in verse 1. He is described as a Greek, a term used here in its broad sense of “Gentile” or non-Jew (see Rom 1.16; 2.9,10). As a non-Jew, Titus had not been circumcised, circumcision being practiced only by the Jews.

My companion Titus may be expressed in some languages as “Titus, who had come with me,” or “Titus, who had accompanied me.”

Even though he is Greek expresses what is referred to as a “concession.” That is to say, one would expect that a Greek would be forced to be circumcised if he was to accompany Jews such as Paul or Barnabas and to associate with Jews, especially in his contacts in Jerusalem. However, contrary to such expectation, he was not required to be circumcised. A concessive clause may involve an additional feature of adversative expression, for example, “My companion Titus was a Greek, but nevertheless he was not forced to be circumcised.” In some languages there may be difficulty involved in the passive expression was … forced to be circumcised, for the causative agent in forced is not specified nor is the causative agent in the passive expression to be circumcised indicated clearly. Such agents may, of course, be indicated, for example, “The leaders of the church did not require that some person circumcise Titus.” Note that obviously there is here a contrast between the requirements made by the church leaders and the insistence of some persons who did want to have Titus circumcised.

The phrase was not forced to be circumcised is in itself ambiguous. Some scholars understand this to mean that Titus was circumcised, but his circumcision was not a result of compulsion (for example, Knox). Most, however, interpret the verb form meaning “was not forced” in a resultative sense: that is, what is denied is not the pressure, but the result. This would mean that Titus was not circumcised at all. Good News Translation makes this clear in verse 4: although some wanted it done, that is, to have him circumcised.

In languages used by people who normally do practice circumcision, there is no difficulty involved in finding a term for the practice which will be acceptable on a so-called formal level of discourse, that is, in language appropriate for a document to be read in church. There are almost always other ways of talking about circumcision, many of which are rather crude or vulgar, and these, of course, must be avoided. For languages spoken by people who have no knowledge of circumcision or who regard it as a wholly inappropriate custom, it may be difficult to find a satisfactory term to designate this kind of religious rite. In most societies in which circumcision is practiced it is actually one of the so-called “rites of passage,” that is to say, rites related to certain important crises in life. Circumcision is frequently associated with puberty and sexual maturity, and it is not religious and ethnic identity as in the case of the Jewish practice performed on male infants eight days of age. In some languages translators have attempted to indicate the meaning of circumcision by translating literally “cutting away the foreskin of the penis,” but this type of expression is often regarded as vulgar and uncouth. As a result, other translators have simply used the expression “ritual cutting,” and still others a somewhat obscure expression such as “cutting around.” It is even possible in some languages to use a phrase such as “a mark of cutting.” What is important is that some expression be employed which will designate this ritual of circumcision in an appropriate way, without introducing connotations which may render the expression inappropriate. If a vague or obscure expression is used, it may be important to have a satisfactory definition or description of circumcision in a glossary.

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 .