The Orthodox Jewish Bible

Bridging Jewish Tradition with Scripture

Experience the Word where Galatians 5:3 reads like this: "And I testify again to every one of you undergoing bris milah that such is chal (placed under obligation) to do the taryag mitzvot." What makes the Orthodox Jewish Bible (OJB) so unusual—and, in certain passages, genuinely illuminating. Galatians 5:2–3 is one of those places where the OJB’s Jewish linguistic frame sharpens Paul’s argument in a way standard English translations often flatten. Below is a structured analysis that highlights what the OJB is doing, why it differs from mainstream translations, and where it arguably IMPROVES clarity—especially for readers who want to understand Paul as a Jew speaking to Gentiles about Jewish law. ✡️ 1. What the OJB Does in Galatians 5:2–3 OJB Text (key elements) • “if you Goyim undergo the bris milah, Moshiach will profit you nothing.” • “every one of you undergoing bris milah is chal (placed under obligation) to do the taryag mitzvot.” The OJB deliberately replaces: • “circumcision” → bris milah • “obligated to keep the whole law” → chal… to do the taryag mitzvot • “law” → Gezetz (i.e., Torah law) • “justified by the law” → YITZDAK IM HASHEM… by ma'asim of Gezetz This is not cosmetic. It reframes Paul’s argument inside the lived Jewish categories Paul himself used. 📘 2. How This Differs From Standard English Translations Most English translations render Gal 5:2–3 like this (paraphrased): • “If you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.” • “Every man who receives circumcision is obligated to keep the whole law.” These translations are accurate but generic. They use: • “circumcision” (clinical, Greco Roman term) • “the whole law” (abstract, Christianized phrasing) • “obligated” (legalistic but not culturally specific) They do not convey: • the covenantal weight of bris milah • the halakhic reality of taryag mitzvot • the Jewish legal category of chiyuv (obligation) • the Jewish theological category of yitzdak im Hashem (being declared righteous before God) In other words, standard translations present Paul’s argument in Christian theological vocabulary, not Jewish covenantal vocabulary. 🔍 3. What the OJB Clarifies or Improves A. It restores the Jewish covenantal context “Circumcision” sounds like a medical procedure. Bris milah signals: • covenant identity • entry into the obligations of Torah • a binding halakhic status This makes Paul’s warning sharper: He is not talking about a surgery; he is talking about entering the Sinai covenant as a Gentile. B. It makes Paul’s logic explicit Paul’s argument is: 1. If you take on bris milah, 2. you are taking on the entire covenantal obligation of Torah, 3. and therefore you are shifting your basis of righteousness away from Messiah. Standard translations say “obligated to keep the whole law,” which is correct but vague. The OJB’s phrase “chal… to do the taryag mitzvot” makes the halakhic logic unmistakable: • taryag mitzvot = the traditional 613 commandments • chal = a binding legal obligation This is exactly how a first century Jew would have understood the issue. C. It highlights the Jewish nature of Paul’s warning Paul is not anti Torah. He is anti Gentiles taking on Jewish covenantal obligations as a means of justification. The OJB’s vocabulary makes this distinction clearer than most English Bibles. D. It exposes the rhetorical force: “Moshiach will profit you nothing” is strong. But when paired with: • Goyim • bris milah • taryag mitzvot • chumra • ma’asim of Gezetz …the reader feels the intra Jewish tension Paul is addressing. Standard translations often make Paul sound like he is rejecting Judaism. The OJB makes it clear he is rejecting Gentile adoption of Jewish covenantal markers as salvific requirements. 🧠 4. Where the OJB May Be an Improvement ✔ It restores the Jewish categories Paul assumed. Paul’s argument only makes full sense inside Jewish covenantal logic. The OJB brings that logic to the surface. ✔ It clarifies the halakhic consequences of circumcision for Gentiles, who need this clarified because of their pagan ignorance. “Obligated to keep the whole law” becomes a precise halakhic statement: taking on bris milah = taking on the full yoke of Torah, something only the Moshiach Ben Dovid, the Zun fun Der Oybershter could perfectly take on. ✔ It prevents anachronistic Christian readings. Standard translations can make Paul sound like he is rejecting Torah itself. The OJB shows he is rejecting Torah as justification for Gentiles, which is a different issue. ✔ It captures Paul’s Jewish rhetorical voice. The OJB’s diction—Goyim, bris milah, taryag mitzvot—makes Paul sound like the Pharisaic Jew he was. 🎯 5. Conclusion The OJB is not a neutral translation; it is a culturally Jewish, Messianic interpretive translation. But in Galatians 5:2–3, that interpretive lens actually illuminates Paul’s argument by restoring the Jewish categories that underlie it. For readers who want to understand Paul as a Jew speaking to Gentiles about Jewish covenantal obligations, the OJB’s rendering is arguably more contextually accurate than standard English translations.