A Command From God Isn’t The Point Of A Verse??

The other day, I posted an analysis of Galatians 6:1 and noted that the point of the verse is that we are commanded to go to someone who we see in sin and restore them gently.  This is obvious because the subject of that verse is “you” and the verb is “restore”.  The verb “restore” is a present imperative which means it’s a command which means to not do it is to disobey God.

Then, I read something side splittingly funny—someone wrote saying that this command, which Paul was inspired by the Holy Spirit to write, is not the point of the verse.  So, simply by asserting  “This is clearly erroneous…” and “The clear intent of this verse….”, they think they’ve proven that God didn’t mean exactly what He inspired Paul to write.  I guess when you read something you don’t like, you ignore little trivial things like grammar and syntax and just insert your own meaning in there.  Haa.

I mean, that would be like someone substituting in a Sunday School class and during the class when someone disagrees with them, they feel offended.  However, instead of doing what a grown man would do and going to that person (since they felt “attacked” when that person disagreed with them) and talking to them about it, they sull up and pout.  Then two weeks or so afterwards, they write a blog post about the incident, again instead of saying the stuff to the persons face first, but claim that it wasn’t about that person when the Sunday School teacher and two pastors both recognize that it was.  Of course, that’s just a hypothetical situation and would never happen, but in order to justify such infantile behavior, a person would have to do the same sort of theological and grammatical gymnastics as someone claiming a command of God (present imperative) is not the point of a verse.  Too funny!!!