A. It is those who want to make a good showing in the flesh who would force you to be circumcised, and only in order that they may not be persecuted for the cross of Christ.
B. For even those who are circumcised do not themselves keep the law,
C. but they desire to have you circumcised that they may boast in your flesh.
C’ But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.
B’ For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.
A’ And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God. From now on let no one cause me trouble, for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus.
Mark,
This looks good to me. I tried to fiddle with the second half of C’ to make it go with B’, but I like the way you have it better.
I wonder if there is a way to bring out that the clauses in the second part of the chiasm have a stronger force than their corresponding clauses in the first part of the chiasm?
For example: The negation of the optative “far be it/God forbid” in C’ is much stronger than “they desire” in C. In the same way “crucified” in C’ is much stronger than “circumcised” in C.
“New creation” in B’ is more dramatic than not keeping the law in B. Also, “peace and mercy”, “Israel of God”, and “I bear on my body the marks of Jesus” in A’ are all (at least emotively) stronger than “make a good showing”, “in the flesh”, and “not persecuted for the cross of Christ” in A.
David