What is the overriding issue within the book of Galatians? It appears that there are three issues going on during this time of Paul being in Galatia.

Is it that the Galatian converts are free from the Law of Moses, Or is it that Christian converts are not subject to the Abrahamic Covenant and therefore are not required to be circumcised,

Or is it because there are Christian-Jews that want them to become God-fearers or apostolates into the religion of the Jews due to their belief in a Jewish Messiah?

This religion of the Jews has been poorly interpreted as Judaism, and today, Judaism has further been defined as, to include, those nonmainstream Christian who keep the seventh-day Sabbath, as well as the seven annual feasts/sabbaths.

So what is the argument that we see coming out of mainstream Christian teaching in regard to the book of Galatians? It is this: that Paul took all Christian gentile converts and removed them from the odious Law of Moses and in doing so removed all Christians from the Law and, in turn, turning Christianity into a religion of lawless peoples! Mainstream Christian, religious, and scholars have even gone so far as to have done away with the seventh-day Sabbath, as well as the seven annual feasts/sabbaths, proclaiming these days as ceremonial, having no God authorized authority to do so while bringing into Christian doctrine two days of the ceremony called Palm and Easter Sundays! Neither of these days has any meaning to God; otherwise, he would have included them in his pantheon of days of importance (feasts).

Nowhere in all the sixty-six books of the Bible do we read of God the Father, nor God, the Word of God (who became Jesus and then took up his former position upon his return to the Father), doing away with the Sabbath(s)!

Therefore, this book is a challenge to that lack of authority, and while mainstream Christianity might pontificate about what Jesus might have said or what he might have meant, they are in violation of the very scriptures that they claim to be an authority of. This is because Paul never did what mainstream Christianity is accusing him of, which is taking Christians away from the law.

Circumcision was only for Abraham and all his seed, from the time of the covenant even until today. However, no one born outside of the house of Abraham was required to get circumcised. While all Israel saw this covenant as law, this requirement to be circumcised did not fall under the Mosaic Law. And if I am not required by law to do something and you come along and tell me not to do that which I am not required to do, then in essence, you did not take me away from anything! In addition, a secondary issue was that there were those who might have been Christian-Jews saw that if a gentile converted from being a pagan and believed in a Jewish Messiah, then that gentile had to immerse themselves into all the religion of the Jews, which required several rituals that had to be performed and once accomplished made a Gentile into a Jew, not a covert into Christianity but a full member of the house of Israel and in turn the house of Judah!

These then are the arguments that Paul is fighting against! He is not going anti-law, nor is he saying to the gentiles, "Here, since you are a convert, you do not have to do this, but as for us Jews, we have to keep the law." Isn't that a house divided? Paul is not guilty of anything more than keeping his charges from getting circumcise while showing them that the laws of God, the Word of God, are to be obeyed as it is what is necessary for salvation!