Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

9
  • 1
    Since the use of the article is varied throughout, I think some distinction is intended, at least in some places. So, what is the difference between law with and without the article? IOW, even if you are correct in this case, it seems like you need to show this particular non-usage is in agreement with Paul's over use/non-use. Two other issues are present: 1) Is true that no law gives life? 2) Circumcision is the primary issue. How does one distinguish "the" law of circumcision since it is given in Genesis 17, Exodus 12, and Leviticus 12 - each covering something different? Commented May 7, 2023 at 22:51
  • The qualitative use of anarthrous (without article) is sufficient, and due to repeated mention of the same noun, article is unnecessary. The laws's temporal end is explained, and it's ability prior to its end is assumed due to consistency of religion, common sense. Circumcision and function of the law is irrelevant. The que is about the translation of the verse. Commented May 8, 2023 at 2:26
  • 1
    The law is paidagogos until someone accepts Christ. Those who do receive the Spirit. Those who refuse remain as they were. For the Jew who rejects Christ, they remain under the Law, which continues to function as paidagogos. Commented May 8, 2023 at 3:32
  • No it doesn't continue to function as the guardian after it's end. It's function and purpose was temporal until the time comes. The argument is that the law is no longer in effect. No justification possible under law anymore or after the coming of promise. Commented May 8, 2023 at 4:43
  • 1
    You say, No justification possible under law anymore or after the coming of promise. Anymore? That is the fallacy of your argument. Galatians 3:11 says "Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law..." The law never justified anyone. Its current ability is the same now as before the coming of the promise. Commented May 8, 2023 at 13:42