25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. 26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? 27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? 28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. 1 ¶ What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Bob, would you agree to the following foundational truths concerning this passage: 1. the terms "the law" in verses 25-29 have reference to the law of circumcision under the Mosaic law. 2. That verse 26 and the phrase "if circumcision keep the righteousness of the law" refers to justification by works under Mosaic law in regard to the specific work of circumcision. 3. That the law of circumcision is not part of the ten commandments but part of the ceremonial law of Moses? 4. That Paul is dealing with circumcision in the context of an "advantage" over the gentile in regard to the "righteousness of the law" and this is in keeping with the question posed immediately following in Romans 3:1. 5. That Paul is providing proof or evidence why there is no "advantage" for the Jew in circucmision in keeping with the question in Romans 3:1.