GAL 2:3 Interlinear View

SIL Open Translator’s Notes:

Section 2:1–10: The church leaders accepted Paul’s apostleship and his message

In this section, Paul explained to the Galatians one reason why they should hold firm to the gospel that he had taught them. He did this by telling them about the meeting that he had in Jerusalem with the apostles there. At this meeting, the apostles recognized Paul’s authority as an apostle. They also agreed that he preached the true gospel.

This meeting became necessary because of the message of some false teachers. These false teachers insisted that a person was not truly saved unless he also became circumcised and kept the laws of Moses. (See Acts 15:1–2 and Galatians 2:4.) At the meeting, the apostles agreed with Paul. They agreed that no one should force non-Jewish believers to be circumcised and obey the Law that God gave to Moses. This showed the Galatians that these teachers were wrong.

Some other possible headings for this section are:

Paul Was Accepted as an Apostle by the Leaders in Jerusalem (GW)

The apostles accept Paul

Paul’s apostleship and message

The Jerusalem leaders recognized Paul’s apostleship and message

Paragraph 2:1–5

In this paragraph, Paul told about the meeting that he and Barnabas had with church leaders in Jerusalem. In this meeting, Paul wanted to see whether the leaders would accept the message that he was teaching to Gentiles. The fact that the leaders did not require Titus, a Greek, to be circumcised showed that they accepted Paul’s message. They accepted his message in spite of some opposition from false brothers.

2:3

In 2:3, Paul gave some evidence that he had not run in vain. He gave some evidence that the leaders in Jerusalem approved the gospel that he preached. Paul did not state this explicitly, but he showed that they agreed by telling the Galatians that the leaders did not force Titus to be circumcised.

2:3a

Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised,

But I was not running in vain. Titus, who was there with me, was not even forced/required to be circumcised,
And they agreed with me. This was clear because no one even insisted/demanded that my companion Titus should be circumcised.

Yet: There is a contrast between 2:2 and 2:3. The contrast is between what Paul feared might happen and what actually happened. He was concerned that the leaders would not agree with him. He was concerned that he had “run in vain” (2:2). But the leaders did agree with him and his message. Paul did not directly state that they agreed. He showed that they agreed with him by telling about Titus.

Some English versions, such the BSB and NIV, indicate this contrast with the conjunction Yet. Other English versions, such the ESV and NASB, indicate this contrast with the conjunction “but.”

In some languages, it might be necessary to make some of this information explicit. For example:

But I was not running in vain.

And they did agree (NLT96)

not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised: The words not even focus attention on the proof that the church leaders agreed with Paul’s message. The proof was that they did not even require a Gentile to be circumcised. If the church leaders had not agreed with Paul, they would have required that Titus be circumcised. He was right there when they made the decision. But they did not require him to be circumcised. This proved that they agreed with Paul that God accepted Gentile Christians even if they were not circumcised.

Another way to translate this clause is:

They did not even demand that my companion Titus be circumcised (NLT96)

Titus, who was with me: The clause who was with me is a relative clause. It describes Titus. In some languages, using this type of relative clause here would imply that there was another Titus, a Titus who was not with Paul. Even though there were certainly other men with that name, that is not the point here. In those languages, it would be better to translate these words without using a relative clause. For example:

Titus was with me (GW)

my companion Titus (NLT)

was compelled: The phrase was compelled is passive.

Some ways to translate this phrase are:

Use a passive clause. For example:
he was not forced (NCV)
Use an active clause. For example:
no one forced (GW)
they did not require/demand
they did not insist

circumcised: The word circumcised means “cut off the loose skin at the end of a boy’s penis.” Jews circumcised their sons as an act of obedience to the law.

In some cultures, it may be acceptable to use an explicit expression that means “cut off the loose skin at the end of a boy’s penis.” In other cultures, it may be necessary to use a euphemism to describe this event. Some examples are:

cut off some of the skin

receive the mark

ritual cutting

a mark of cutting

This is the first time that Paul mentioned circumcision in Galatians.

2:3b

even though he was a Greek.

even though he was a Greek.
Titus was a Greek and had never been circumcised.

even though he was a Greek: The fact that Titus was a Greek implies that he was not a Jew. So he had never been circumcised. (Most of the first Christians were Jews and had already been circumcised.) Nevertheless, the church leaders did not require Titus to be circumcised in order to be accepted as a believer.

In some languages, it may be clearer to put this clause earlier in the verse. For example:

^3aTitus went to Jerusalem with me. ^3bHe was a Greek, ^3abut still he wasn’t forced to be circumcised. (CEV)

^3aTitus was with me, ^3band although he is Greek, ^3ano one forced him to be circumcised. (GW)

uW Translation Notes:

Note 1 topic: grammar-connect-logic-contrast

ἀλλ’

(Some words not found in SR-GNT: Ἀλλʼ οὐδέ Τίτος ὁ σύν ἐμοί Ἕλλην ὤν ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναι)

Here, the word But is introducing an idea that is in contrast to an idea that was presented in [2:2](../02/02.md). Paul is probably presenting the fact that not even Titus … was forced to be circumcised as being in contrast to the idea in [2:2](../02/02.md) that he might have “run in vain” (labored in vain). Use a natural way in your language for introducing a contrast. Alternate translation: [On the contrary,] (

Note 2 topic: figures-of-speech / distinguish

οὐδὲ Τίτος ὁ σὺν ἐμοί, Ἕλλην ὤν

(Some words not found in SR-GNT: Ἀλλʼ οὐδέ Τίτος ὁ σύν ἐμοί Ἕλλην ὤν ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναι)

The phrase the one with me and the phrase being a Greek both give further information about Titus. Neither of these phrases is making a distinction between Titus and some other person. If it would be helpful in your language, you could make the relationship between these phrases clearer. Alternate translation: [not even Titus, my non-Jewish ministry partner]

Note 3 topic: figures-of-speech / activepassive

οὐδὲ Τίτος ὁ σὺν ἐμοί, Ἕλλην ὤν, ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναι

(Some words not found in SR-GNT: Ἀλλʼ οὐδέ Τίτος ὁ σύν ἐμοί Ἕλλην ὤν ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναι)

The phrase was forced to be circumcised is passive. If your language does not use the passive form in this way, you could state this in active form or in another way that is natural in your language. Alternate translation: [the leaders of the church in Jerusalem did not even require my Greek ministry partner, Titus, to be circumcised]

OET-LV English word order (‘Reverse’ interlinear)

Note: The OET-RV is still only a first draft, and so far only a few words have been (mostly automatically) matched to the Hebrew or Greek words that they’re translated from.

Acknowledgements: The SR Greek text, lemmas, morphology, and VLT gloss are all thanks to the CNTR.

OET interlinear GAL 2:3

SR Greek word order

Section 2:1–10: The church leaders accepted Paul’s apostleship and his message

Paragraph 2:1–5

2:3

2:3a

2:3b

OET-LV English word order (‘Reverse’ interlinear)