What I find ironic about this discussion (though I appreciate it), is that the Apostle Paul was considered a liberal by his adversaries. He offered low-bar, bladeless (or flint-knifeless) entry into the Faith. He was a church-growth compromiser of the Faith handed through Abraham–one who misled people about what God commanded, and made obedience to them optional.

If Paul was so subversive to his Jewish identity, how do we get the idea he would have anything to do with a Scottish one?