Galatians 5:12

Modern versions call for mutilation of the body. Historical bibles such as the German Luther bible, the Russian Synodal Bible, and others read as the KJV as do Tyndale, Geneva, Bishops', etc.

Barnes said: 'I would they were even cut off - That is, as I understand it, from the communion of the church. So far am I, says Paul, from agreeing with them, and preaching the necessity of circumcision as they do, that I sincerely wish they were excluded from the church as unworthy a place among the children of God. For a very singular and monstrous interpretation of this passage, though adopted by Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, Jerome, Grotius, Rosenmuller, Koppe, and others, the learned reader may consult Koppe on this verse. To my amazement, I find that this interpretation has also been adopted by Robinson in his Lexicon, on the word ἀποκόπτω apokoptō. I will state the opinion in the words of Koppe. "Non modo circumcidant se, sed, si velint, etiam mutilant se - ipsa genitalia resecent." The simple meaning is, I think, that Paul wished that the authors of these errors and disturbances were excluded from the church.'

Adam Clarke:'As the persons who were breeding all this confusion in the Churches of Galatia were members of that Church, the apostle appears to me to be simply expressing his desire that they might be cut off or excommunicated from the Church. Kypke has given an abundance of examples where the word is used to signify amputating; cutting off from society, office, etc.; excluding. In opposition to the notion of excommunication, it might be asked: "Why should the apostle wish these to be excommunicated when it was his own office to do it?" To this it may be answered: The apostle's authority was greatly weakened among that people by the influence of the false teachers, so that in all probability he could exercise no ecclesiastical function; he could therefore only express his wish. And the whole passage is so parallel to that, 1 Corinthians 5:6, 1 Corinthians 5:7, that I think there can be no reasonable doubt of the apostle's meaning: Let those who are unsettling the Church of Christ in your district be excommunicated; this is my wish, that they should no longer have any place among you." '

Gill:'that it was his will and desire that these men should be cut off from the communion of the church; with which views he mentions the proverbial expression in Galatians 5:9 with which compare 1 Corinthians 5:6 or that they would cut themselves off, by withdrawing from them, going out from among them, and leaving them as these men sometimes did. '

Peoples New Textament: I would they were even cut off. These men are seeking to make the mark of bondage by cutting your flesh. I would that they would cut themselves off (Revised Version). I take it that he means Cut themselves off from the church so as to have nothing more to do with it.

Wesley's notes: I would they were even cut off - From your communion; cast out of your church, that thus trouble you.

Following new definitions

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary in 1871 and Vincents follow new concepts but don't imply mutilation, but rather ex-communication akin to the act of seperation via circumcision.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary:

were even cut off-even as they desire your foreskin to be cut off and cast away by circumcision, so would that they were even cut off from your communion, being worthless as a castaway foreskin (Ga 1:7, 8; compare Php 3:2). The fathers, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine, and Chrysostom, explain it, "Would that they would even cut themselves off," that is, cut off not merely the foreskin, but the whole member: if circumcision be not enough for them, then let them have excision also; an outburst hardly suitable to the gravity of an apostle. But Ga 5:9, 10 plainly point to excommunication as the judgment threatened against the troublers: and danger of the bad "leaven" spreading, as the reason for it.

Vincents follows a NEW concept not accepted by the English church:

They were cut off (ἀποκόψονται)

More correctly, would cut themselves off. Perhaps the severest expression in Paul's Epistles. It turns on the practice of circumcision. Paul says in effect: "These people are disturbing you by insisting on circumcision. I would that they would make thorough work of it in their own case, and, instead of merely amputating the foreskin, would castrate themselves, as heathen priests do. Perhaps that would be even a more powerful help to salvation." With this passage should be compared Philippians 3:2, Philippians 3:3, also aimed at the Judaisers: "Beware of the concision" (τὴν κατατομήν), the word directing attention to the fact that these persons had no right to claim circumcision in the true sense. Unaccompanied by faith, love, and obedience, circumcision was no more than physical mutilation. They belonged in the category of those referred to in Leviticus 21:5. Comp. Paul's words on the true circumcision, Romans 2:28, Romans 2:29; Philippians 3:3; Colossians 2:11.

Which trouble (ἀναστατοῦντες)

Only here in Paul, and twice elsewhere, Acts 17:6; Acts 21:38. olxx. Stronger than ταράσσειν disturb. Rather to upset or overthrow. The usual phrase in Class. is ἀνάστατον ποιεῖν to make an upset. Used of driving out from home, ruining a city or country. See on madest an uproar, Acts 21:38. Rev. unsettle is too weak.

Obviously using the wrong definition as a forerunner of the new versions.

Why reject the historical usage of the verse because English speaking religious people who cannot read Greek interpret the bible falsely.

External Links

Galatians 5:12 by Scion of Zion

Galatians 5:12

From Textus Receptus

Contents

Greek

Textus Receptus

Other Greek

English Translations

Foreign Language Versions

Albabian

Armenian

Arabic

Bulgarian

Czech

Chinese

Croatian

Danish

Dutch

French

German

Italian

Latin

Russian

Spanish

Swahili

Swedish

Turkish

Thai

Mutilate/Castrate?

Following new definitions

External Links

Views

Personal tools

Navigation

Search

Toolbox