Galatians was written in Greek, not Hebrew. Feel free to dispute that if you wish, but the onus is upon you to present a Hebrew text of Galatians that clearly predates the Greek, rather than the other way around.
The Greek word translated "faith" in Gal. 3:25 is pistis, which has the same definition as the English word "faith": conviction that something is true, taking someone at his word, etc.
Whether you/he are right or wrong is immaterial - Paul is a Hebrew, studied in the Word at the foot of Gamaliel. To strip the Hebrew sense of what he is saying is to lose a vast amount of context. The same applies throughout.
Paul's meaning in Galatians 3, therefore, is plain: Abraham was declared righteous by God because of his faith: he took God at his word when he was promised that his descendants would be many and great.
TRUE. And everyone saved by grace through faith is inherently a descendant and inheritor of Abraham - Since there is no record of ANYONE ever being saved by any other thing, we can draw the conclusion that All who are saved (even before Messiah, and before Abraham) are saved in and by Messiah, PERIOD.
The law, on the other hand, brought a curse upon anyone who could not perfectly obey it. Jesus Christ redeemed his people from that curse by taking it upon himself on his cross. Those who place their trust in the Christ, share the faith of Abraham and are his spiritual heirs.
I would point out that you correctly declared the redemption from the curse... not the Torah.
Moses' law, which came centuries afterward, cannot nullify the covenant made with Abraham. Its purpose is to show everyone their sin, and to point them to Christ. Paul likens the law to a "schoolmaster," that is, a paidagogos—a slave in the Roman household that was responsible for the moral upbringing of the children, as well as their discipline. Of course, once the children came of age, there was no further need of the paidaogogos; similarly, once the children of God have come of age—placed their trust in their Messiah, Jesus—there is no further need of the law.
This is brilliantly portrayed - What I would point to is that one cannot have been OF the House of YHWH without that paidagogos - My father's torah is 'written upon my heart' - It was ingrained in me as the 'right way' through discipline and pain... For I was a child, and rebellious, and didn't understand what my father was teaching me. Now, as a man, I am not subject to my father's torah. But the curses for not following his wisdom still remain - Not imposed by him, but by the nature of life on this big blue ball... And my torah, the law of my house, is like unto his.
Likewise our Father's Torah. How then can one claiming to be a child of YHWH pay no attention to the Torah of His House? How can one claim to have Torah 'written on their hearts' without even knowing Torah (which most in Christendom have studiously avoided)?
Torah IS for the knowledge of sin. As an evident example, the ten commandments - All of Christendom adheres to them and declares them valid - Yet The Catlicks keep 7, and the Protestants keep 9... Do you believe the Catlicks, the Protestants, or YHWH? In this is the knowledge of sin. Follow the tradition of your fathers, or follow YHWH. This has always been the primary problem.
If Paul were alive today, he would recognize this Hebrew Roots crap as the very thing he opposed in the churches of Galatia. For them, the issue was the necessity of circumcising Gentile Christians, rather than keeping Jewish festivals or intoning the magic Hebrew names for God, but the principle is the same: those who will bind you to a tiny part of the law, really seek to bind you to all of it. You can have the law, or you can have the Christ. You can't have both. I will put my trust in the words of Paul in Scripture, and the Messiah whom he proclaimed, and not in the apostate ravings of this Michael Rood. Amen.
I don't see that - If Yeshua is our (and Paul's) example, and if Yeshua is the head, how then can the body do differently than the head? And Yeshua kept (and keeps) the law perfectly.
I would disagree. The Holy Spirit through Paul was most often addressing a Gentile or Greek speaking audience. In doing that he would have had to keep in mind that they would not understand the Hebrew “sense” but would rather try to communicate to them in something they understood.
I’m waiting for the list out of the 613 and your proof of sacrifice. It would be unwise for us to listen to you if you are simply a hypocrite telling us to do what you do not.
Paul is writing to Gentiles, not Hebrews—the Galatians were descended from Gallic tribes that had invaded Greece 300 years earlier—and he is writing in their language using their definitions, which as an educated Pharisee and a Roman citizen, he certainly understood quite well.
You only argue in circles when you assert that Paul was writing to them from a strictly Hebraic paradigm.
I would point out that you correctly declared the redemption from the curse... not the Torah.
"[A]ll who rely on works of the law are under a curse" (Gal. 3:10). It is the Torah itself that brings the curse on men by its inability to save them from their own sin.
Now, as a man, I am not subject to my father's torah. But the curses for not following his wisdom still remain
Ladies and gentlemen, I present: The Amazing Self-Refuting Assertion.
Likewise our Father's Torah. How then can one claiming to be a child of YHWH pay no attention to the Torah of His House?
By paying attention to his Messiah, whom the Torah foreshadows. That is its purpose. You may revere the mere shadow, if you wish (Colossians 2:6-7); I will worship the One who stands in the light.
I don't see that - If Yeshua is our (and Paul's) example, and if Yeshua is the head, how then can the body do differently than the head?
If you think we should imitate everything Christ did in every respect, then, by all means, feel free to nail yourself up on a pole, atone for the sins of the world, and come back to life the next Sunday. Tell us how it turns out, OK?