Don't you understand you're using circular reasoning to make your point?
Call it anything you like, as long as the point is understood.
Non-sinners don't commit sin.
They can be in error about an understanding too, without sin.
You're saying we know the saved Galatians weren't sinning because saved people don't sin. That's called circular reasoning. You're using what you want to defend to prove what you want to defend.
I'm saying the faithful Galatians weren't sinning because faithful people don't commit sin.
Why doesn't that make sense to you?
If anyone was sinning, they were the unfaithful.
We know it was the saved Galatians themselves that were keeping the Mosaic festival cycle for the purpose of justification, and thus, sinning, because it is the saved, Spirit filled Galatians whom Paul is addressing in the letter about this matter.
Even if it was, Paul wrote them enough correction to get them on the right track.
Their zeal to please God had caused them to do the unnecessary.
I suppose the visiting Judaizers must have been very highly esteemed.
That should teach us to examine closely every teacher we listen to and not assume everything any man says is really of God.
I thank God for giving the converted of His Spirit.
No, that is not circular reasoning.
This would make it circular reasoning:
White people can't be black because white people can't be black.
And that's the kind of reasoning you're employing in your argument:
Saved people can't sin because saved people can't sin.
OK then, let be straighten it out.
The Galatians who were sinners, (if they were sinners), were not in or of Christ.