why do you think Gal 1-2 is the weakest narrative construct in Paul’s letters?
Because it is some kind of seemingly feasible scenario, but in fact an unrealistic literary construct invented by an author with no experience or knowledge of how it is supposed to work. You go to the Gentiles and we go to the Jews. So together we go to Antioch, to Corinth, to Jerusalem, to Sephoris, to Alexandria. You say one thing and I say another 2 blocks away. What is the division of the areas of operation? What is this agreement? They themselves can’t get along, what will their faithful ones do? The author goes out of his way to exalt Paul and humiliate the other group of apostles. Lord’s brother doesn’t matter and Piotr is a small man. They are pillars, but not so bright. They want to circumcise the Greeks, but they don’t succeed, so they choose already circumcised ones. They give Paul the largest market, and leave themselves a smaller and significantly more difficult one. And this is the entire account of Paul’s interactions with the other apostles in which Jesus’ brother participates. He doesn’t say anything because no one asks him anything.

There is no realism here. This is a mere caricature designed to discredit the competition in the eyes of readers of Paul’s letters. I extend my hand to them, they reject it in the name of superstition. Only thanks to my wisdom and prudence it was possible to conclude a truce thanks to which I will continue to take care of you, protecting you from those who want to remove your foreskin and change your diet.
Jerusalem of the time of Jesus is a Hellenistic city, a center of pilgrimage to the Hellenistic Temple of Herod. Everyone on the Court of Gentiles has access to the fair. Hellenistic and orthodox Jews can go further, pagans stay. After all, no one checked the sign of the covenant. The fully Hellenized Herodians require their sons-in-law to be circumcised. Unless they manage to get someone with much more influence and a position higher than their own as a son-in-law. What does “not to eat with unclean” mean? There is nothing on the table for you, you drink water. It is your personal choice. If someone does not want to have contact with the impure, he does not contact them at all, and does not make any ridiculous agreements. One of the questions Bart asked himself publicly was what would happen if Paul and Matthew got together. Therefore, they did not meet in person, only through writings. All this literature went to the leaders of the congregations, it was selectively read to the faithful. Paul deliberately squeezes other apostles into a niche of Judaic orthodoxy culturally despised by the readers of his letters. The accusation of a “circumcision requirement” is intended to discourage readers from competing views. The same fictional narrative as those performances of Paul in the presence of the Herodians, the emperor or the letters to Seneca. Some are written better than others.
The multiculturalism of the great empire was a problem for Christianity. That’s why we have culturally conflicting recommendations on diet, women’s position, and circumcision. All in Paul’s letters themselves. To this day in North Africa, male and female circumcision is practiced in Muslim, Christian and Jewish communities. Eritrean women are mostly circumcised Christians.

This is a caricatured description of an imaginary meeting
How they want to implement this “agreement” in multicultural cities. “My message is for Gentiles/Jews and Gentiles/Jews only. Jews/Gentiles are requested to leave the meeting. No offense, respecting your cultural diversity. Your dedicated spiritual guide should be arriving at any moment in the square around the corner. Thank You for your attention, have a nice day.”

The author of the letter builds artificial allegations against the competing heroes in a very thoughtful way. He does not deny their existence because that would be counterproductive. They function in the social imagination. He comes up with a very good narrative of mutual contacts and false events. There was no meeting, no deal. Circumcision was an honor for the candidate who had to show determination to be accepted and allowed to be circumcised. We cannot say how many uncircumcised Hellenistic Jews were in their synagogues who painted bible figures in hitons and tribons and naked girls.
Nothing more than a literary construct. The author saves his hero as best he can. The rivalry of literature and imaginary heroes in an ingenious way.
“Yes, I’ve seen those famous apostles. Believe me, they’re a bunch of mean morons. Even the Lord’s brother. They despise you and your tradition, you’re not clean enough for them.
Rejoice and thank the Lord that you have me. In general, I know everyone and I’ve been everywhere, but now I have to finish, because I’m writing an urgent letter to Seneca. I need to arrange an overdue meeting with Berenica. The Emperor’s men are also waiting for an answer.
Sorry, Thecla doesn’t like me late for dinner. Keep in touch. Paul (Saint)” (I got a little carried away)
The seven “authentic” letters of Paul could have been written by a specific man, chaotic, but also brilliant in impersonating his characters. Art is not magic. It is a result of specific uncommon gift

Robert, Stephen
Gal. 2:3-5 is pure fiction. Who wrote it and about whom?
Circumcision of an adult convert is for him the last stage of self-preparation for a chaste life. And apparently the simplest. He is to learn and accept several hundred commands and prohibitions. And prove that he respects them.
Jews circumcise their own newborns because parents are the guarantor of their upbringing and preparation for purity described by orders and prohibitions. They choose a wife for him, checking if she will be able to run a decent kosher household.
What would change cutting Titus’s foreskin? Nothing. It’s some weird joke. Even if they cut off his foreskin, they won’t eat with him anyway. Who is supposed to enslave the faithful gathered around Paul? Because they’re certainly not Jews. Maybe some imaginary Judeo Christians?
Who are these Judeo Christians? Some people loudly declaring allegiance to Jewish tradition and Jewish law while accusing the Jews of completely misunderstanding God and the Law from the very beginning. They keep the Law and the 613 commandments? Does Matthew, playing with prophecies, know who he is?
These are just poses and accusations at the level of imaginary heroes created for the public who have no idea about the essence of the issues raised. It is a show for the ignorant.
The God-fearing in Judaism were believers who did not comply with the Law and all these commands and prohibitions. Circumcision is a short procedure of aesthetic medicine compared to lifelong sacrifices imposed by the law. Of course, they did not admit this, but claimed that the Jews wrongly took something literally that should be interpreted figuratively. And that they are right, not the Jews. It was there that Christianity was born as an escape route from the warring parties, at a time when Greeks and Jews began to clash again in Jerusalem, in the Levant.

Paul symbolically leaves Hellenistic Judaism, where most are impure Godfearers, and jumps to pagans. He leaves calling God fearers the party of circumcision which is just a lie.

Robert, In every undertaking your opponent is the one who does the same as you. You work together to achieve an idea by competing against each other.
The enemies of the idea you pursue are someone else entirely. They give you nobility, heroism and credibility. Internal conflicts resulting from competition are what destroy the reputation of you, your opponents and your idea that you share. It’s a dirty fight that hides the real mundane reasons behind it.
God-fearing is a term for a large number of faithful people from the Greek and Persian traditions. If they did not practice circumcision, it was because they regarded it as a sign of ethnicity, not a command of God. As can be seen in Deuteronomy 10:12-17. The heart is important.
Once again, Titus is an adult Greek raised outside of Jewish tradition. In order to be accepted as a Jew, he has to register himself, learn and introduce halacha into his life. Only the acceptance of the entire conversion process and the evaluation of the convert’s behavior by the Jews allows for admission to circumcision and admission to the ranks of the followers. Without it, he’s just a guy with no foreskin.
I was reminded of the story of a Jewish boy who fell over and hit a stone while walking. His babysitter, a young Catholic, was afraid that the boy would die and baptized him. The boy regained consciousness and they returned home together. She told the priest about it. The boy was taken from his parents and given to a Catholic family. It happened in the Papal State in the second half of the 19th century. Incredible scandal. The pope was helpless and the only thing he proposed was to baptize the boy’s parents so that they could get him back. As you can see, the mechanisms are slightly different than in Judaism.
The oldest synagogue in the world discovered in Dura Europos is a synagogue of the God-fearing who do not care about halakhah and decalogue. 3rd century CE.
Paul writes to some Gentile converts and warns them against his competition, whose treacherous purpose is to trap the ignorant in the ethnic law of the Jews. This is a contrived and false accusation based on the ignorance of the recipients. No one is going to circumcise them.

There was no Paul, just the author’s imaginary hero who clashed with something he hadn’t anticipated. He did not foresee that some other writer would be so brazen and come up with a biography of Jesus and his disciples and the audience would accept it. Jesus, of course, is untouchable. His brother isn’t.

You think all the God-fearers claimed the Jews should have interpreted circumcision figuratively?

God fearers are people who do not follow halacha, i.e. 613 commandments and prohibitions in everyday life. The most controversial requirement is circumcision, but it is not the most vexing requirement. A minor surgical procedure inconsistent with Greek aesthetics. This is how we define God-fearing – followers of Judaism who do not follow Jewish customs.

Why don’t you think Paul’s opponents were orthodox Jews?

Because no Jew would demand circumcision from anyone, only demand full conversion, of which circumcision is the last element. Without it, a circumcised man is just an unclean man without a foreskin.

Why don’t you think Jews living in Jerusalem would have taken the circumcision of Titus as a meaningful sign of his full conversion to Judaism?
Titus himself would come forward and declare that he observes halacha and asks for circumcision. Here in Gal 2 is the expression that the Greek must be circumcised!

Why do you think the Galatians would not have understood what circumcision was?
I believe that the Galatians did not understand the meaning of circumcision because Paul threatens them with an invented false threat and boasts that he protected them from this threat.

Why do you think most Hellenist Jews were only God-fearers who did not follow any of the Jewish customs?
Lecture by JD Crossan on the found lists of donors and founders of synagogues in Hellenistic cities – mostly Greek names, only a few percent of Jewish names.

Why do you think Paul (or your imaginary ghost writer) is lying about the party of circumcision really just being God-fearers?

It is in his direct interest. It slanders direct competitors operating on the same target group, lying to its recipients at the same time. There was no threat, it was a made-up excuse.

Why don’t you think Paul ever met with the Jerusalem apostles?
Because these are literary characters: Paul, James, Cephas. Authors compete with each other. The author of the letters created these contacts in order to caricature his hero’s competition. The author of the letters could afford it because this tradition is his creation. He knew that Cephas and James were also purely invented/literary characters

“I think the question would only come up in the context of conversion. Titus would have abandoned the worship of foreign gods and idols in favor of the worship of Yahweh. Thus Paul would certainly consider him a gentile convert, but absent circumcision not a full convert to ‘orthodox Judaism’ as understood by others, eg, that degree of conversion was being required by the circumcision party.”
Circumcision is a sign that the parents undertake to bring up their son as a Jew according to halacha. Circumcision begins the child’s life as a Jew. Circumcision of a child is the privilege of parents.
Adult circumcision is the final stage of conversion. You will not be circumcised without conversion. Circumcision does not function as a magical cleansing ritual. An Orthodox Jew will not eat in a house that does not follow the rules of halacha, whether the host is circumcised or not. An Orthodox Jew will not refuse hospitality and food to the uncircumcised

“I don’t understand your point here.”
Titus has to want to be circumcised and prove he deserves it. No one has ever required circumcision as a standalone act

“Yes, but why do you think that?”
Anyone with any idea of the place of circumcision in Judaism would laugh at Paul. Paul scares the unsuspecting ignorant with a ritual disgusting from their point of view.

“Any chance you will every come up with anything that is not a circular argument?
I hope so..
“So essentially, your argument is that Paul is a purely literary character, because everyone mentioned in the letters of Paul are literary characters. Or, vice versa, everyone else mentioned in the letters of Paul are literary characters because Paul is a purely literary character.”
Paul is a literary figure because I do not believe in the historicity of the transmission of the letters, nor in their original circulation before the Pauline Corpus. The letter writer who invented Paul cannot otherwise disparage other invented competing characters.

On the one hand, Paul assures about the conclusion of an agreement with James, the brother of Jesus and Cephas, and on the other hand, he trivializes their doubts and mockingly calls them the party of circumcision. He even expresses surprise that Titus was not forced to be circumcised. As if such a risk really existed. As if there really was a party of circumcision. And he does it publicly in a letter addressed to Christians to show what mediocrities those with whom he made an agreement are.

This story only makes sense as an invented literary construct. The author knows that there are imaginary heroes closer to Jesus on the market, successfully introduced by another artist. That is why his hero Paul meets them, shows his moral superiority, makes an agreement and ridicules them with false accusations. Paul’s creator couldn’t have done more for his character.