Galatia 5:4

5:4 You who are trying to be declared righteous ¹  by the law have been alienated ²  from Christ; you have fallen away from grace!

Galatia 5:12

5:12 I wish those agitators ³  would go so far as to ⁴  castrate themselves! ⁵ 

Galatia 3:21

3:21 Is the law therefore opposed to the promises of God? ⁶  Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that was able to give life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. ⁷ 

Galatia 4:15

4:15 Where then is your sense of happiness ⁸  now? For I testify about you that if it were possible, you would have pulled out your eyes and given them to me!

[5:4]  ¹ tn Or “trying to be justified.” The verb δικαιοῦσθε (dikaiousqe) has been translated as a conative present (see ExSyn 534).

[5:4]  ² tn Or “estranged”; BDAG 526 s.v. καταργέω 4 states, “Of those who aspire to righteousness through the law κ. ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ be estranged from Christ Gal 5:4.”

[5:12]  ³ tn Grk “the ones who are upsetting you.” The same verb is used in Acts 21:38 to refer to a person who incited a revolt. Paul could be alluding indirectly to the fact that his opponents are inciting the Galatians to rebel against his teaching with regard to circumcision and the law.

[5:12]  ⁴ tn Grk “would even.”

[5:12]  ⁵ tn Or “make eunuchs of themselves”; Grk “cut themselves off.” This statement is rhetorical hyperbole on Paul’s part. It does strongly suggest, however, that Paul’s adversaries in this case (“those agitators”) were men. Some interpreters (notably Erasmus and the Reformers) have attempted to soften the meaning to a figurative “separate themselves” (meaning the opponents would withdraw from fellowship) but such an understanding dramatically weakens the rhetorical force of Paul’s argument. Although it has been argued that such an act of emasculation would be unthinkable for Paul, it must be noted that Paul’s statement is one of biting sarcasm, obviously not meant to be taken literally. See further G. Stählin, TDNT 3:853-55.

[3:21]  ⁶ tc The reading τοῦ θεοῦ (tou qeou, “of God”) is well attested in א A C D (F G read θεοῦ without the article) Ψ 0278 33 1739 1881 Ï lat sy co. However, Ì⁴⁶ B d Ambst lack the words. Ì⁴⁶ and B perhaps should not to be given as much weight as they normally are, since the combination of these two witnesses often produces a secondary shorter reading against all others. In addition, one might expect that if the shorter reading were original other variants would have crept into the textual tradition early on. But 104 (a.d. 1087) virtually stands alone with the variant τοῦ Χριστοῦ (tou Cristou, “of Christ”). Nevertheless, if τοῦ θεοῦ were not part of the original text, it is the kind of variant that would be expected to show up early and often, especially in light of Paul’s usage elsewhere (Rom 4:20; 2 Cor 1:20). A slight preference should be given to the τοῦ θεοῦ over the omission. NA²⁷ rightly places the words in brackets, indicating doubts as to their authenticity.

[3:21]  ⁷ tn Or “have been based on the law.”

[4:15]  ⁸ tn Or “blessedness.”