In Greek the imperative watch out for is repeated three times in this verse. Thus the earnestness and seriousness of the warning is quite apparent. This warning is not against three different groups of people, but against the same group described in three ways. For this reason a number of translations, including Biblia Dios Habla Hoy and Good News Translation, retain only one imperative and restructure the verse into one sentence with a series of appositional clauses. A literal rendering of watch out for can suggest merely “looking around in order to see.” It is important, therefore, to employ a rendering which will clearly mean “beware of” or “be on your guard against.”

Most probably Paul’s opponents were gnostic Jewish Christians who insisted on combining the gospel with the Law. These people are characterized by extremely derogatory terms. Those who do evil things, literally, “evil workers” or “malicious workers,” is reminiscent of the “deceitful workmen” mentioned in 2 Cor 11.13. It is possible that there is a play on words here, a censure against those Judaizers who teach a salvation by “works,” not by faith. The focus, however, seems to be on their works rather than their teachings, so a more generic statement like that of Good News Translation seems desirable. Those who do evil things may be rendered simply as “those who do what is bad” or “those who do what is wrong.” This should not be merely an expression meaning “sinners.”

Dogs were regarded by the Jews as despicable and miserable creatures. They are usually mentioned with contempt in the Old Testament (1 Sam 24.14; Psa 22.16, 20). In Rev 22.15 the word “dogs” stands for those who are so impure that they are barred from the Holy City (cf. Matt 7.6; 15.26). This is the most insulting term of abuse applied by orthodox Jews to Gentiles. Here Paul turns it around and applies it to those Jewish Christians who misrepresent the gospel and subvert the faith.

In English the translation those dogs, in apposition with the clause who do evil things, is very effective. But in some languages it would be understood only as a kind of appositional explanation of “evil things.” Therefore one must often make the phrase those dogs into a complete sentence or into another relative clause, for example, “they are like dogs” or “who are dogs.” In some languages, a word for “dogs” does not carry the bad connotations associated with it in Greek and, to a somewhat lesser extent, in English. It may, therefore, be necessary to qualify the term as “bad dogs” or “foul dogs.”

Those men who insist on cutting the body translates a noun in Greek which means literally “the cutting” (Jerusalem Bible “the cutters,” New English Bible “mutilation”). This word puns on another Greek word meaning “circumcision.” New English Bible adds explicitly “mutilation—‘circumcision’ I will not call it” (cf. Barclay). The “circumcision” is for the Jews a proud title, used to refer to the community set apart as God’s people. But Paul denies those erring Jewish Christians this honored title, instead, he calls them mockingly “the cutters,” comparing them to the self-inflicted mutilations of the prophets of Baal (1 Kgs 18.28). Self-mutilation, which was practiced in pagan cults, is explicitly forbidden in the Law (Lev 21.5).

In some languages the appositional phrase those men who insist on cutting the body may need to be rendered as a separate sentence, for example, “They are men who insist on cutting the body.” Since a literal rendering of cutting the body could suggest “cutting up the body,” it may be necessary to say “make cuts on the body,” or “cut off a part of the body.”

Quoted with permission from Luo, I-Jin. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1977. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .