See in Reader
1.4 KiB
Paul continues his imaginary argument with a Jewish person, whom he scolds with rhetorical questions.
For circumcision indeed benefits you
AT: “I say all of this because being circumcised does benefit you”
if you are a violator of the Law
AT: "if you do not obey the commandments found in the Law"
your circumcision becomes uncircumcision
This compares a Jewish person who does not obey the Law to a man who was physically circumcised but reverses the operation: he may be Jewish, but he looks like a Gentile. AT: "it is like you are no longer circumcised" (See: rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-metaphor)
the uncircumcised person
AT: "the person who is not circumcised"
keeps the requirements of the Law
AT: "obeys what is commanded in the Law"
will not his uncircumcision be considered as circumcision? Will not the one who is by nature uncircumcised...judge you
Paul is asking a question to emphasize that circumcision is not what makes one right before God. This can be translated with an active verb: "God will consider him as circumcised. The one who is not physically circumcised...will judge you" (See: rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-rquestion, rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-activepassive)
who by the written scriptures and circumcision are a violator of the Law
AT: "who have the written scriptures and are circumcised but do not obey the Law"