And so, if the uncircumcised keep the justices of the law, shall not this lack of circumcision be counted as circumcision?
Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
So if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be credited to him as [equivalent to] circumcision?
If therefore the uncircumcision keep the ordinances of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be reckoned for circumcision?
So if the person who isn’t circumcised keeps the Law, won’t his status of not being circumcised be counted as if he were circumcised?