Nicholas Johnson KC, for the prosecution, is continuing to cross-examine Lucy Letby.
Before that begins, Benjamin Myers KC, for Letby's defence, rises to make a statement.
He says Letby was cross-examined on a telephone call it was alleged she had made to Child N's father. Letby had disputed what the court said was agreed evidence. Mr Myers says the disupute was raised by Letby in advance with them, and it was the defence team's mistake to agree that evidence in advance

Removal from the ward

Mr Johnson says Letby said, in evidence, she found she was not going back to the neonatal unit the day before she went back to work on June 27, 2016. Letby agrees.
Letby says at the end of June 2016, she "liked all the doctors" she worked with.
Letby says she did not know what the issue was, she had not been informed what was happening.
She says she was worried she had "made a mistake" and "was in trouble for something".
Asked about the timing of the call, she said she was worried about receiving the call "so late in the day" [after 5pm] in advance of working a night shift.
She agrees she was worried it was something serious.
Letby agrees this was in the aftermath of Child Q's collapse and Dr John Gibbs making enquiries.
She said she was "upset and worried".
LL: "I was upset and I was concerned something was wrong."

Letby says she was worried about the next day, but not concerned it had gone 'right to the top'.
NJ: "You knew they were on to you, didn't you?"
LL: "No."
Letby had messaged a doctor about it: "I can't talk about this now."
She writes, 12 minutes later: "Sorry, that was rude. Felt completely overwhelmed & panicked for a minute.
"We all worked tirelessly & did everything possible, i don't see how anyone can question that.
"Im having a meltdown++ but think that's what I need to do"
Letby says she was having a 'dramatic' meltdown.
LL: "It was all happening very last minute and in the evening - it was not normal."
She says this is different from work pressures as "this was personal". She denies that people were 'sussing' her.
A message on Letby's phone at 11.29pm included: >"Death datix x 2 Datix - no bicarb, delay in io access Sign out ffp on meditech & pink chart [Child O] charts obs Fluids in sluice Sign drugs Sign curosurf out Traffic light drug compatibility - inotropes, and no >policy for panc Delay in people doing drugs"
Letby said this was documents she had not yet completed for babies she had cared for.

A message sent by Letby's nursing colleague to Letby: "[doctor] came in chatting to me at the start of last nights shift n I said [baby] needs L.L soon as uvc been in nearly 2wks n he said something about [child O]s already being changed n I said it hadn't n he told me about the open port!"
Letby's responded: "I told her about it that night.
"Yes because Thought it's a massive infection risk and risk of air embolism, don't know how long it had been like that."
A Datix form for the clinical incident is shown to the court - June 30, 2016, 3pm, with the port on one of the lumens noted to not have a bung on the end and was therefore 'open'. Registrar informed. Letby is the reporter of the incident.
Mr Johnson says this was a potential case of accidental air embolus which Letby had reported.
NJ: "You had your thinking cap on, didn't you?"
LL: "No."
Letby said this was something which needed to be reported.
NJ: "You removed the port and covered it as a cinical incident, didn't you?"
LL: "No."
NJ: "This is an insurance policy - so you could show the hospital was so lax..."
LL: "No."
NJ: "It was to cover for accidental air embolus."
LL: "No."

Letby is asked about the investigation and Letby being seconded to an office-based role.
Letby messaged: "Hoping to get as much info together as possible -if they have nothing or minimal on me they'll look silly, not Me"
"Did you think attack was the best form of defence?"
"This was me responding what was happening to me."

Letby's message on August 8: "Tony phoned. He's going to speak to Karen and insist on the review being no later than 1st week of Sept but said he definitely wouldn't advise pushing to get back to unit until it's taken place. Asked about social things and he said it's up to me but would advise not speaking with anyone in case any of them are involved with the review process. Thinks I should keep head down.and ride it out and can take further once over.
Feel a bit like Im being shoved in a corner and.forgotten about by.the trust. It's my life and career."
Letby said she was feeling isolated and not able to speak to anybody on the unit.
Mr Johnson asks if that was really the case.
Letby said she spoke to some friends who she was allowed to speak to about the details of the investigation. They were two nursing colleagues and a doctor.
Letby's message: "It's making me feel like I should hide away by saying not speak to anyone and going on for months etc - I haven't done anything wrong."
NJ: "You knew at this stage you were being blamed for the collapses and deaths of these children?"
LL: "No."

Addressing Letby's claims of staffing issues, and the Gang of Four

Mr Johnson asks about the 'gang of four' consultants who were 'out to get' Letby.
Letby had previously said the four were Dr Ravi Jayaram, Dr John Gibbs, Dr Stephen Brearey and one other doctor, who had apportioned blame to her 'to cover failings at the hospital'.
Mr Johnson says he will go through the cases.
He says for Child A, staffing levels were a shortcoming in administering a long line.
For Child B, nothing,
For Child C, nothing.
For Child D, the antibiotics being delayed 'may have had an impact on her'.
For Child E, the delay in giving him a blood transfusion.
For Child F, nothing.
For Child G, possibly the colleague had overfed the baby, but that was later retracted.
For Child H, the location of the chest drains may have had an influence.
For Child I, that Ashleigh Hudson should have put her on a monitor, and that 'potentially' Dr Chang being called away.
For Child J, nothing.
For Child K, nothing, other than the ET Tube may not have been secured.
For Child L, nothing.
For Child M, nothing.
For Child N, nothing other than it was busy.
For Child O, concerns raised by Sophie Ellis were dealt with on the charts.
For Child P, an issue with a chest drain.
For Child Q, nothing.
Letby says she did not know what babies the four consultants were discussing about.
"How do the shortcomings count for their conspiracy?"
Letby says a lot of the babies were not cared for properly on the unit.
Mr Johnson says is it Letby's view that the overall care was not good enough, they pinned the blame on her.
Letby agrees.

Mr Johnson says Letby has failed to identify, specifically, an issue with staffing levels for each of these cases.
Letby says it was raised at times on the unit, in relation to the overall care for babies.
Mr Johnson says the point of this case is to determine sabotage for the babies or naturally occurring deficiencies. He says Letby cannot give specifics.
Letby: "No."
Mr Johnson refers to 'sub-optimal care for the babies', from Letby's defence statement.
NJ: "You are raising the point, aren't you?"
LL: "Yes."
NJ: "And you have been given an opportunity to speak about it."

Facebook Searches

Mr Johnson turns to the Facebook searches Letby made for parents of children in the indictment. Three searches are made for parents in quick succession. Mr Johnson asks what the link is.
Letby: "They are babies that have died and been seriously unwell."
Letby is asked about another series of searches for three parents' names.
LL: "They are babies that had something significant to them and they were on my mind."
Letby is asked why she didn't give that answer to the police.
LL: "Because I couldn't recall why I had looked at some of them."
NJ: "Is that a true answer?"
LL: "Yes."
NJ: "You were checking up on your victims."
LL: "No - I look at a variety of [parents]."
NJ: "You were a killer who was looking at your victims, weren't you?"
LL: "No."
Mr Johnson asks about a series of other searches, and says one of the parents' names has an 'unusual spelling'. Letby is asked to spell that name out in court. She does it incorrectly.
NJ: "You read it [the name of the parent] off a handover sheet, didn't you?"
LL: "No."

Letby is asked about another series of searches.
Letby: "They were on my mind at the time."
One search was made on Christmas Day, for the mother of Child E and Child F.
NJ: "She was the person who caught you in the act?"
LL: "No, [mother of Child E and Child F] and I had a good relationship at the time."

Nick Johnson, the prosecution barrister, then goes back through some of Letby's Facebook searches.
Letby has previously been accused of looking up her alleged victims' families online, and a series of searches are being read to the court.
25 June 2015
At 21:50 Letby searched for the parents of Children A and B.
At 21:51 Letby searched for the parents of Child D - Letby previously said she "didn't remember" this baby.
"What was the connection in your mind between those three people," Mr Johnson asks.
"They are babies who have died from being seriously unwell," Letby says.
5 October 2015
At 01:16 Letby searched for mother of Child I.
At 01:17 Letby searched for father of Children E and F.
"What did they have in common?" Mr Johnson asks.
"Again they are babies that had something significant happen to them and they were on my mind," Letby says.
"You were checking up on your victims, weren't you?"
"No."
He later says: "You were a killer who was looking at your victims."
"No," she replies.
Several other examples are read out to the court.
5 November 2015
At 23:40 Letby searched for the mother of Children E and F.
At 23:40 Letby searched for the mother of Child G.
At 23:44 Letby searched for mother of Child I.
Letby denies these families were grouped together for any reason.
25 December 2015
Letby searched for the mother of Children E and F.
"I often thought of [her]," she tells the court.
"She was the person who caught you in the act," Mr Johnson says, adding that this would have been reason enough to remember her.
"No, [we] had a good relationship."

Letby's Social Life During Investigation

Mr Johnson says Letby had given evidence surrounding her suspension from the unit in her first day of giving evidence to the defence.
She had said she felt very isolated from my friends and family on the unit, and her mental health had deteriorated.
LL: "We were a very supportive unit - regardless of whether we were personal friends, we were a supportive unit.
LL: "At the time the hospital advised me not to contact anyone on the unit...there were two or three friends I could contact, but [not to contact anyone on the unit]."
Letby is asked if that was true. "Yes." And if she abided by that. "Yes."
Letby adds that did change as time went on.
Letby has a document which she received from the prosecution this morning on her social life.

The prosecution says Letby was "given a document this morning".
"What's in the document?" Mr Johnson says.
After a pause, she replies: "My social life."
The prosecution says this "disproves" what Letby has previously said about her contact with the unit.
"I disagree," she says.
Letby is asked if she was "looking for sympathy" when she told the jury she had been cut off and isolated from her friends.
"Yes, it was a very difficult time," she says.
"You thought you'd get sympathy by telling a lie," says Mr Johnson.
"No."
"Was it just a mistake?"
"Yes."

Mr Johnson says it "disproves everything" that Letby had said. Letby disagrees.
"You were telling the jury a sob story, that you had been cut off from your family as you called them, on the unit?" Letby disagrees.
NJ: "Were you looking for sympathy?
LL: "Yes, it was a very difficult time."
NJ: "Was it just a mistake?"
LL: "Yes."
The document includes photos of Letby's nights out and days out with colleagues, Mr Johnson says. They include a trip to London with a doctor colleague. Letby says that happened once.

A 'social timeline' is shown to the court, detailing meetings with the doctor in Harford, Cheshire Oaks (twice) and London between May-June 2017.
LL: I'm near the park next to where you are, let me know where you are finishing up and I'll see you outside
Doctor: Ok will do See you soon ❤️
LL: 🙂 ❤️
Letby denies the doctor was her boyfriend.
Letby agrees she had a "very very active social life".
Letby says a future date on the Facebook diary, for September 2017, was listed as a trip to London, but they had to cancel as the doctor had a medical appointment.
She denies again he was her boyfriend.

In one message, the male colleague she denied was her boyfriend exchanged a series of heart emojis via WhatsApp and travelled together to London at least once.
Letby says they had to cancel the second trip.
"[Colleague] was a married man, it's not a relationship at all it's a friendship," she says.

NJ: "You have deliberately misled the jury about this background."
LL: "No."

Letby's Arrest

NJ: "You have also deliberately misled them about the circumstances of your arrest, haven't you?"
LL: "No."
Letby says the police knocked on her door at 6am when they arrested her. She says she thought she had a nightie and a tracksuit and trainers.
Mr Johnson says Letby was taken away in a blue Lee Cooper leisure suit. Letby says she is not sure. Mr Johnson says video footage can be played of her arrest. Letby agrees she was taken away in that leisure suit.
For the 2019 arrest, Letby agrees she was not taken away in her pyjamas.
NJ: "Why did you lie to the jury about this?"
LL: "I don't know."
Letby says it was the first arrest when she was taken in her pyjamas.
NJ: "Do you want to watch the video?" Letby does not respond.
NJ: "You are a very calculating woman, aren't you"
LL: "No."
NJ: "You tell lies deliberately."
NJ: "And the reason you tell lies is to get sympathy and attention from people."
Mr Johnson says Letby was killing children to get attention.
LL: "I didn't kill the children."
NJ: "You're getting quite a lot of attention now, aren't you?"

Handwritten Notes

One of Letby's handwritten notes is shown to the court. It is the one which includes a draft sympathy message for Child O, Child P and another triplet.
Mr Johnson asks why a sympthy message has included the name of the surviving triplet as well as the names of Child O and Child P.
NJ: "Was that your objective, to kill all three?
LL: "No."
NJ: "Did that excite you?"
LL: "Absolutely not."

"I am writing how I was feeling at that time, and it was their birthday and I mentioned all three of them," Letby says.
The note reads: 'Today is your birthday and you aren't here. And I am so sorry for that.'
"Why were you including [the other triplet]?" Mr Johnson asks.
"I've written three names, I also wrote [colleague]."
The prosecution asks the question again.
"I can't answer that," Letby says.
"Is that because in your mind there was a terminal end in store for [other triplet] if he stayed with you?"
"No," she replies.
"Was that your objective to kill all three?" Mr Johnson asks.
"No."

The 'I AM EVIL I DID THIS' handwritten note by Letby is shown to the court.
Letby is asked about the notes.
NJ: "You had done nothing wrong?"
LL: "No."
NJ: "Why did you think you would not marry and have a family?"
LL: "Because I was in the position that I was in and didn't think it would end."
NJ: "You had a good job working in the patient safety department at the Countess of Chester."
LL: "It wasn't a choice for me."
NJ: "It was still a good job."
LL: "Good as enjoyable?"
NJ: "It was secure, with a secure employer."
LL: "Yes."
NJ: "Pays well?"
LL: "Not as much as nursing."
Letby said there were times when she had good times during the time she was under investigation. Mr Johnson says this includes drinking fizz and days at the races.
Mr Johnson concludes: "You are a murderer."
Letby: "I have not murdered or harmed any child."

End of cross examination

Myers Rises for questions

Benjamin Myers KC rises to ask further questions of Letby.
He says Letby has given evidence for 14 court days over the past few weeks.
Mr Myers asks Letby about the increase in documents since giving her defence statement.
Letby agrees it was an increase in "thousands of pages" since then, and the increase has continued throughout the trial.
Letby agrees the increase in evidence served has come when she and the defence team have been in different parts of the country, with her being in custody.

Mr Myers asks questions in the case of Child E, in relation to Letby's defence statement.
In cross-examination, Letby was said not to have made a mention of Child E vomiting in her defence statement, but said it in evidence. Letby tells the court now Child E had vomited.
Mr Myers says Letby's nursing note from August 4, 2015, showed Letby recorded a 'large vomit'.
Letby says that was not included in the defence statement as she had not included every single detail from all the cases in that statement.
The nursing note also incudes a 'mucky' slightly bile-stained aspirate was recorded.

In Letby's defence statement, she said she had wanted to work in nursing since being a teenager.
Letby is asked about her motive in working at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit: "To provide the best care possible for them and their families."
Letby said she would have looked after "hundreds" of babies during her time at the Countess of Chester Hospital.
BM: "Were you trying to 'get attention' [by attacking babies] in the way it has been put?"
LL: "No."
Letby says the Facebook searches were for parents who were on her mind at the time.

BM: "Can you recall every baby you cared for?"
LL: "No."
BM: "Is there a reason some babies stand out more?"
Letby says there might have been something about some babies that would stand out in her mind, and some babies would be on the unit longer, and she would have got to know some families more than others.
Letby is asked about staffing levels at the unit.
Mr Myers: "Do you know, actually, how every member of staff was affected by staffing pressures?"
LL: "No I don't."
Letby adds she does not know if every member of staff was performing their tasks to the level required throughout.
BM: "Can you say at any given point, what the issue of staffing levels were?"
LL: "No."

Letby adds from a nursing perspective she can comment on that care, but medical care [from a doctor] is a "different realm".
Letby says she can only put a nursing perspective on the issues.
Mr Myers asks about Child F and Child L.
Letby had said, in evidence, insulin was given to Child F unlawfully, but it was not targeted. She said, from the blood results, Child L was poisoned with insulin, but was not targeted.
Letby says for Child L, she accepted the blood results which showed the insulin had come exogenously.
Letby says she does not know how the insulin levels of a blood sample are tested. She says she has never worked in a lab for the purposes of such testing.
Letby says she accepted the results on the basis of the evidence that is presented in the trial.

Letby, in her defence statement, said she was concerned she was blamed for things she was not responsible for, and was unable to explain how some of the babies had collapsed.
The statement added the higher mortality rate had come from the unit taking on more poorly babies.
For Child Q, Letby says Dr John Gibbs was asking who was on duty at that time and who the designated nurse was.
Letby says, in her statement, Dr Jayaram and Dr Brearey had been "set against her for some time" and did not accept "in good faith" their evidence.
Mr Myers asks if Letby had ever accepted the accuracy or honesty Dr Jayaram's recollection of the incident in relation to Child K.
Letby: "No."
Letby adds she did not recall clearly what happened at that event. She denied interfering or harming Child K at that time.

Mr Myers continues to ask Lucy Letby questions.
He says there is "not a lot further" to go through.
He says there were "many times" when the prosecution gave evidence, or parts of evidence, to Letby and the jury.
In the case of Child P, he says Child P was the 'worse for wear', and the prosecution said this was similar to the previous night with Child O, which he says was inaccurate.
Letby is asked why she agreed with an inaccurate summary of evidence by the proseuction.
LL: "I can't answer that, I don't know."
Mr Myers says the prosecution had asserted Lucy Letby had 'fallen out' with Melanie Taylor. Letby denies this was the case at any point.
Text messages are shown between Melanie Taylor and Lucy Letby. The exchange is on June 9, 2015, following the death of Child A, and how hard it was going in to back into the unit following such an event.
Letby messaged: "I hope you are ok, you were brilliant" and signs off the conversation "Great see you then xx" to which Melanie Taylor replied "Xx". Letby denies she fell out with Melanie Taylor.

Letby is asked about the prosecution saying she 'fell over herself' to message Sophie Ellis following the death of Child P. Sophie Ellis had been at the races that day on June 24, 2016.
Sophie Ellis messaged Letby first: "Hey Luce, hope your ok? I heard poor little [Child P] has been sent to Liverpool..."
Letby replied the information was 'too much for a text'.
She added: "Actually you are at the races, sorry I forgot. Don't worry about ringing will txt you tomorrow. X"
Letby tells the court she wanted to leave Sophie Ellis alone as she was at the races.

Letby is asked about the 'social folder' she was handed by the prosecution this morning.
Mr Myers said the photos showed her 'out on the razz with friends'.
Letby had said there were times she enjoyed herself.
Mr Johnson had said: "Yes, you felt like this, because you know you killed and grievously injured these children?"
Letby: "No."
Mr Myers says there was nothing to these events other than going for drinks with friends. Letby agrees.

An example is shown of Letby on holiday in Torquay with her dad in July 2016.
Another example is of Letby having drinks with university friends in July 14, 2016. Letby says they were the girls she had been with when she was studying nursing.
Another example is of a picture of a couple of bottles of Prosecco on July 22, 2016. Letby is asked if she was allowed to drink Prosecco at this time. Letby agrees.
Another photo is on August 16, 2016, on a day out in Port Sunlight with her parents who had come to Chester. Letby messaged one of her nursing colleagues - her "best friend", and one she said she was allowed to speak to, about Port Sunlight being 'perfect for a picnic and a stroll'.
A photo is taken of Letby at her back garden to her Chester home in August 2016.
A Whatsapp message Letby sent in a group of nursing colleagues was: "It's too sad" in reference to Jennifer Jones-Key leaving the unit.
Letby says 'around September time' the instructions for Letby not to contact anyone on the nursing unit other than three colleagues had 'changed'.
A message on September 22, 2016 to one of the three colleagues - 'All ok with E [Eirian]. Feel bit more positive knowing she's definitely behind me...'

Letby is seen smiling in a number of photos.
Mr Myers asks why Letby is smiling in the photos when it was around the time she handwrote notes documenting her problems.
LL: "Because despite what is going on, you have to find some kind of quality of life."
December 31, 2016, Letby writes on Facebook: "❤️ I'm not the same person I was when 2016 began; but I am fortunate to have my own home. I've met some incredible people and I have family and friends who have stood by me regardless - Thank you to those who have kept me smiling. Wishing Every Happiness for us all in 2017"
Letby says she had changed as a person and had 'lost confidence'

BM: "As far as you understood, were you at least allowed a social life?"
LL: "Yes."
Another photo is of Letby at the Kuckoo bar in Chester.
A holiday photo is shown of Letby with her father in June 29, 2018 in Torquay.
Letby denies killing or harming babies for any reason the prosecution had suggested.
BM: "How content were you before, in life?"
LL: "I had a very happy life."

That now completes Lucy Letby's evidence.

The judge tells the jury of the next steps in the trial, which may have further evidence for the defence case. The next listed day for the jury will be next Wednesday (June 14).

9-Jun Fri

• Shallow Levée 淺堤 (TW indie pop-rock band), lion studios 115b commonwealth drive, $89
• Esplanade: The Nature of Strings - pipa & harp by gildon choo & charmaine teo - day 1, free
• Esplanade Contemporary Dance: Dance at Dusk - The Human Expression (T.H.E) Dance Company - Day 1, outdoor, free
• SSO: Singapore Symphony Orchestra Magic Hour at Raffles Hotel, raffles hotel lawn, free
• Jazz Loft; UNDERGROUND feat. Tim O'Dwyer & Vuk Krakovic (Gypsy-Klezmer-Balkan-Celtic-Jazz), blu jaz L3 at bali ln, $22
• Maduro: BLUES + SOUL = JAZZ ft. Rick Smith, Richard Jackson & Joshua Wan, jazz bar harding rd (dempsey) $65 drink credits
• Cool Cats: Havana Nights with Dairon - Day 2, jw mariott beach rd, jazz-ish bar $30
• Piano Fest: Tengku Irfan - Recital, victoria concert hall, $20
• Piano Fest: Jonathan Biss - Masterclass, $20
• Piano Talk: Pierre-Laurent Aimard, Victoria Concert Hall, $10
• Klassique Musik: CORINNA Somewhere In Time Meets Winter Sonata, esplanade, $50
• Dance: NUNO by Decandance - day 1, esplanade, $25-$33
• Gastrobeats: Tabula (rock), marina bay open space, free
• Drag Event: Baby Queen Movie Screening - SG first drag movie & drag aftershow, projector golden mile, $39

• DJ, MODAL 1st Anniversary - Tommy Four Seven (techno) & aya, ems, jehm, haw par villa, $45 door available see IG stories
• DJ, CULTURE & Fuego Night 🔥 - Flyness X MOOD (hiphop rnb pop), luxe club marina square, $36
• DJ, JST BCZ - the Drum n Bass Den with Natty Lou, JAC, Suffix Sans, Davros SWTLKR, project x picturehouse (the cathay dhoby), $22
• DJ, Strange Weather - Kelab Malam ft. Dekadenz (JKT) w/ Aditya Permana, Ridwan, Jonathan Kusuma, club iki at ikigai riverwalk, $27
• DJ, COLDPLAY TRIBUTE Flashback Friday by UnfilteredPresents, hard rock cafe orchard, $28
• DJ, Throwback Night @ Edition Rooftop Bar - dj andrew chow, 182 clemenceau ave (dhoby), free reg
• DJ, The Gentle's Bar & Records Soft Opening - DJ Aloy (80s), 47a neil road
• DJ, Club Hell, Reincarnation in Hell ft mistress kiramoon, 113 telok ayer (mrt), gay club $35 soldout
• DJ, Neil Conversion: Beyonce Night, 43 Neil Road, gay bar-club
• DJ, Offtrack: HOLDTight (FRA), beside hong lim park, music gastro bar
• DJ, Potato Head: Seng Wei (disco funk nite), 36 Keong Saik Rd, bar bistro
• DJ, Cherry: Haili, Mindaniel (vn), ayekay, som j, 133 cecil st, ~$30
• DJ, Club Rich: From Taiwan Night - DJ Ashley Baby x MC KTwo, 114 middle road (bugis)
• DJ, MILK: NO Regrets Hardstyle - ft. 3than, rick savage, 530 North Bridge Rd Bugis Point L3, $30
• DJ, Black Horse: 525 Friday ft Joeru with Highness, Gerlexis (hardstyle, oriental edm, open), ming arcade orchard L7, asian style club
• DJ, Drip: GAWLI Sessions ft Y3llo, Jerry Jay, Fakecake, Past 12, Wuu Kee (hiphop, baile funk, pop), 100 Orchard Rd Concorde Hotel, $32
• DJ, Yang Club: The Scene ft Sherpa, reiko, miggy t, mr boo, clarke quay
• DJ, Prism: POSH - Pop Night ft. DJ Limmy, Tajima, Cherish (10s edm), prism club marina square, $27
• DJ, CE LA VI: ANGELOS (GRE, afro house, deep), marina bay sands hotel tower 3, $38
• DJ, Zouk: MAMBO JAMBO Night with ALDRIN & Hong(synthpop, disco, 80s boogie), zouk clarke quay, ~$45
• DJ, Marquee: SHOWTEK (hardstyle, electro house), marina bay sands, ~$55

10-Jun Sat

• SLAM 30th Anniversary Concert, star theatre buona vista, $137
• 魏妙如 Ruth Kueo - Safe Haven: Homecoming concert, lion studios 115B Commonwealth Drive, $74
• Zheng Yi (郑怡) & Zhou Zhi Ping (周治平) - Everlasting Love Ballads 那一年， 那首歌 2, esplanade, $88
• Liyana Fizi (MY singer-songwriter folk bossa) ft Subsonic Eye's Wahidah, projector golden mile tower, $38
• Mathcore to Pop-punk Gig: Brainwashed Vol 3 - Circle Line Kid, Heaven Brought Me Hell, Glassmouth, Aggressive Raisin Cat, Flush, phil's studio parklane shopping ctr L5, $20 doors left
• A Capella: NUS Resonance: Vocal Obsession X: the night we met - Day 1, NUS UCC, preview $20
• Esplanade: Pipa & harp by gildon choo & charmaine teo - last, free
• Esplanade Dance: Dance at Dusk by T.H.E - Day 2, outdoor, free
• Jazz Loft: IRESON Latin Jazz Quartet, blu jaz L3 at bali ln, $22
• Simply Jazz: Mario Serio, Louis Soliano Night, B1 Chijmes, jazz bar
• Frenchie Wine Bar: Jazz Music with Rick Smith & Richard Jackson, 81 tras st (tanjong pagar)
• Maduro: KENCHANA JAZZ with Rachma Quartet ft. Soukma, jazz bar harding rd (dempsey), $65 drink credits
• Cool Cats: Havana Nights with Dairon - Last, jw mariott beach rd, jazz-ish bar $30
• SCO: For Our Dreams: Wang Chenwei’s Composition Showcase (cond. Tsung Yeh), SCO concert hall, $40
• Chinese Orchestra: SCO - For Our Dreams: Wang Chenwei's Composition Showcase 逐梦: 王辰威作品专场音乐会, 7 shenton way, left $40
• Chinese Orchestra: Ding Yi Music Company - 绣艺•留香 Intimate Intricacies (cond. Quek Ling Kiong), SCCC 1 Straits Boulevard, $28
• Piano Fest: Jonathan Biss Recital, victoria concert hall, $20
• Piano Fest: Masterclass by Tengku Irfan, victoria concert hall, $20
• Ballet x Orchestra: Symphony of Dance - SNYO x Singapore Ballet, esplanade, $20
• Ballet: Cheng Youth Ballet Academy - Révérence 2023 - Day 1, NUS UCC, $50
• Talk: Our Voices: Dialogue on Intercultural Music (classical), National Library, free
• Blackbird: Johnny Come Lately (eagles tribute night + surath&rene), gillman barracks music bar
• Hero's Bar: Embers (rock, funk), 69 circular rd boat quay
• Timbre One-North: Strait Up Blues Open Jam, jtc launchpad one-north, $20 per jammer with drink
• Gastrobeats: A-List & Onelove, marina bay open space, free
• Drag: RIOT!, hard rock cafe orchard, $15
• Roller Skate: HiRoller Skate Rink's Disco Night!, Pasir Ris E!Hub

• DJ, Weeby EventCAWFEE MIX!! 4th Anniversary - J-Core, Anime-song x Bass ft 3R2 (TW), rainry, rinairi/VITICZ/yungbentai/Vanille Altzy/10SAI/WINDY, Wild Pearl Studio Micro-club 195 Pearl's Hill Terrace (chinatown), $28
• DJ, Goth Event: The Batcave Project: Batastrophe ft. Kabuki Kaiser, Katronyk, Grave, Jono (darkwave post-punk, industrial, ebm), Hexenskye Studios at York Hill (near furama riverfront), $25
• DJ, TRANCE4M International ft Paul Denton (IRE), rob z, club iki @ ikigai riverwalk clarke quay, $45
• DJ, 🏖 FUEGO NIGHT BEACH FIESTA DJs Kfaith & Skilla (Reggaeton, Afrobeats, Hip Hop, pop), sand bar 53 siloso beach walk Sentosa, $30
• DJ & Live Music: Transcend Ego Dissolving Dance Party by Mantravine ft yetpet, tom shellsuit et al., kult kafe the grandstand 200 turf club road (sixth avenue), $20
• DJ Queer Brunch: SUNNY SIDE UP: thugshop x fomohomo pink pride edition - Your queer boozy brunch party , 66 boat quay, $55
• DJ, 🏖 AQUA AFFAIR (kollywood x bollywood ft DJ Prasen, Melwin, Helsing), one farrer hotel, $30
• DJ, Element Hip-hop Edition 2 - ft. DJ Marie, Badgaldidi, suffix_sams, mr gray, misfits bar 18 ciruclar rd (boat quay), $21
• DJ, Afterlife - Pop Queens Crush (y2k era) ft. 3than, Ling, scruple & dahlia rose), prism club marina square, $35
• DJ, Melodic Beats house/techno rooftop party - ft VIOLESC, Kid Barna & PMIGALIC, Club Di Lusso 2 Hastings Rd (rocholittle india), $20
• DJ, Mukke: berlin meets ibiza in singapore - ft. toasty, ultra vibrance (AU), frau meyer, Koppa (DE) - tech house/baeleric?, projector x picturehouse (the cathay dhoby), $22
• DJ, Parliament Bar's Disco Dream nite, 18 teck lim road (outram)
• DJ, The Gentle's Bar & Records Soft Opening - DJ Itch (Asian Boogie, funk, city pop), 47a neil road
• DJ, JinJu Korean Bar's DJ Night Inaugural - DJ Ilhammi Tan (edm), clarke quay
• DJ, LAST SATURDAYS - the late saturday mystery show ft HBN, Jiang, Haili, dm this IG, $10
• DJ, GrooveTop Garage (UKG, UK Funky, hiphop) ft. Head of Vibes, Kenneth Francis & Joshua P, Neon Pigeon 36 Carpenter St clarke quay, $30
• DJ, Manifest - Dirty Techno Series ft DOBé (DE), MINDANIEL (VN), NINO BLINK + JAMIE REACT (UK), yang club clarke quay, $30
• DJ, Kpop Arcade #14 - SVT (SEVENTEEN) NIGHT ft. kafekcj , Majesty Chen Oxley Tower L20, 138 robinson rd, left $50 doors
• DJ, Vertigo 26: Unker 4 - 80s SynthPop / Hair Rock nite, at MINT Museum City Hall, listening bar
• DJ, Moonstone: Ya5th (hiphop rnb), 103 amoy st
• DJ, Potato Head: Shaun Nocturnals + Mutiah Ashnim, 36 Keong Saik Rd, bar bistro
• DJ, Drip: After The Noon (PH) - also top 40s, edm, hard, hiphop rnb, 100 Orchard Rd Concorde Hotel, $32
• DJ, Club Hell, F*!@ Me in Hell, 113 telok ayer (mrt), gay club $35 soldout
• DJ, HQ: Halal Sol, The Weatherman, TMDDJ (house, techno), hq club 66A boat quay, $30
• DJ, CE LA VI: Glam Bash, marina bay sands hotel
• DJ, Black Horse: Miggy T, Highness, Gerlexis (hardstyle, oriental edm, open), ming arcade orchard L7, asian style club
• * DJ, Magic carpet: Bollywood Saturday, 7500 beach rd, $30-$50
• DJ, MILK: Viva La Vida (reggaeton, latin hits, guaracha) ft. relibre, snickaz, dj naddz, 530 North Bridge Rd Bugis Point L3, $30
• DJ, Capital Zouk: Poparazzi presents Caden & Ghetto feat. MC T-Fresh (pop), capital zouk clarke quay (22+ yo), ~$50
• DJ, Tuff: CHRISTIAN SMITH (tech house), tuff club 138 robinson rd cbd, $35
• DJ, Luxe: Inquisitive & Farah Farz, luxe club marina square, $50
• DJ, Zouk: MAKJ (big room edm), zouk clarke quay, ~$45 with 2 drinks

11-Jun Sun

• SPECTACLE! - Estelle Fly, Alfred Sun, BINI, BGYO, XOXO, YES MY LOVE - AOR Global showcase Best of S-Pop & P-Pop, esplanade, $35
• Christy Smith - Tribute to FESTAC'77 & Fela Kuti (jazzy afrobeat) - Mosiac Music Series, esplanade, $38
• Tong Yao 桐瑶 - Best of Teresa Teng 邓丽君 Tribute Concert, esplanade, $48
• William Youn Piano Recital - Echoes of Silence (schubert, ravel), SCO 7 shenton way sco conference hall, $25
• Esplanade: Flamenco Meets Jazz Music - amanda lee x dancer Tania Goh, free
• Esplanade: Beautiful Sundays: Sparkswind Ensemble Relaxed Concert, free reg limited
• Esplanade Contemporary Dance: T.H.E Dance Company - Last, outdoor, free
• Piano Fest: Pierre-Laurent Aimard Recital, victoria concert hall, $20
• A Capella: NUS Resonance: Vocal Obsession X: the night we met - Day 1, NUS UCC, preview $20
• Blu Jaz: New Stream Brass Band (new orleans style), blu jaz at bali ln, $22 soldout
• Talk: SCCC's TV Festival 生命传承 - 华彩电视节 ft Bryan Wong, Chen Liping, Marcus Chin, Low Wee Liang, Cheong Yan Peng, Gao Mei Gui, Ayden Sng, 1 Straits Boulevard, free reg
• Standup Comedy: Aravind SA's We Need to Talk, Alliance Française Theatre (newton), $65
• Ballet: Cheng Youth Ballet Academy - Révérence 2023 - Last, NUS UCC, $50
• Dance: Authentic Flamenco - Paula Rodríguez (last), Kewalram Chanrai Arts Centre (Robertson Quay), $65
• Blackbird: Cat Mountain Kings - blues and rock, also jack and rai, raw earth , gillman barracks music bar
• DJ, Foxtail at The Back Room - ft DJ Mari, Haili, Tasha, 36 club street, cocktail bar free reg
• * DJ, 🏖️ Pool Party Drip V8: ft. DJ shai, k faith, Knrck, 1 altitude coast outpost hotel sentosa, $15

12-Jun Mon

• Cui Xia 萃霞 aka Felinda Wong - 40 Years of Golden Hits, esplanade, ~$15
• Esplanade: After Tea Date with Ywenna Quinn (shanghai vocal jazz), free
• Esplanade Live Visual Art x Classical: Birds of Fantasy - Artist Jacky Mak x David Loke, Charmaine Teo, Dingchao Huang - Day 1, free
• Scary Psychedelic Night at The Fluxus House - Sakiko Performance Art x Cruise Chen, 23 teo hong road (outram/keong saik), also an exhibition till june 30, free

13-Jun Tue

• Esplanade Live Visual Art x Classical: Birds of Fantasy - Artist Jacky Mak x David Loke, Charmaine Teo, Dingchao Huang - Last, free
• SIMPLY JAZZ: Ireson (Latin Jazz sextet), chijmes b1 Jazz Bar
• The Purple Symphony Annual Concert 2023 Day 1, 7 shenton way sco conference hall, $20
• Improv Storytelling: What's Your Story SLAM: Summer, projector golden mile tower, $40

14-Jun Wed

• Lee Seung Gi, resorts world sentosa, $168
• Nobuyuki Tsujii Returns to Singapore (pianist), Esplanade, $48
• Chinese Theatre: Cao Yu's Sunrise by Jin Xing Theatre Shanghai & Mars Drama - Day 1, esplanade, $88
• Esplanade Theatre/Visual/Ambient: Transit 步: The Performance, free
• Cool Cats Jazz: The Blues: with Skunk Jive, jw mariott beach rd (esplanade), jazz-ish bar $30
• Candlelight: Best of Hans Zimmer by vocalise string quartet, the arts house (city hall), left $52
• Blackbird: Rockweller (hard rock), gillman barracks live music bar
• Standup comedy: Jinx Yeo at Mo's Grill & Bar West Coast, opposite haw par villa MRT, $22
• Punk History TouDialogue: POST PUNK with Shaiful Risan, 345 geyland rd Pavilion Square, $15-$25 with drink
• DJ, Prism: Ladies First with tarot Cards and Kandi Beads, prism pan pacific, femme free with timing - men $30
• DJ, Offtrack: Nightcap with DJ ITCH (asian boogie, funk, citypop), beside hong lim park, music gastro bar
• DJ, Potato Head: DJ Yenn (hiphop rnb nite), 36 Keong Saik Rd, bar bistro

15-Jun Thu

• The Purple Symphony Annual Concert 2023- Last, 7 shenton way sco conference hall, $20
• Esplanade Rap x Chinese Classical x Text?: Axel Brizzy, Calista Liaw, Jeremy Wong, Wovensound, Khalif Rawi - The Art of War 2.0 - Day 1, free
• Chinese Theatre: Sunrise - Day 2, esplanade, $88
• Cool Cats Jazz: Alina Ramirez plays Latin Jazz, jw mariott beach rd (esplanade), jazz-ish bar $30
• Candlelight: Vivaldi's Four Seasons - by Vocalise string quartet, the arts house city hall, $35
• DJ, CLUB RICH: DJ Dash, Lionnexus & a mystery DJ - EURO RETURN 2, 114 middle road (bugis)
• DJ, Offtrack: Daryl Knows, beside hong lim park, music gastro bar

16-Jun Fri

• SUGA of BTS Agust D - Day 1, indoor stadium, $168 soldout
• 伍佰 WU BAI AND CHINA BLUE ROCK STAR 2023 巡迴演唱会 - Day 1, resorts world sentosa, $78
• Metal/Core/HC Gig: That Incredble Gig in JUNE ft. TARIOT, Aggressive Raisin Cat, Destiny, Overthrown, Tailgates, Shy Guys, centre 42 waterloo st (bras basah), $16
• Esplanade: Cheats (PH), outdoor, free
• Esplanade: Shirly Temple (indie-rock, 60s psych pop), outdoor, free
• Esplanade Rap x Chinese Chamber Classical x Text?: Axel Brizzy, Calista Liaw, Jeremy Wong, Wovensound, Khalif Rawi - The Art of War 2.0 - Last, free
• Chamber: More Than Music Trio - Notes of Passion (dvorak, strauss, sibelius, tartini) - day 1, esplanade, $20-$30
• Jazz Loft: Sean Hong Wei Quartet (tenor sax lead). blu jaz L3 at bali ln, $22
• Cool Cats: Nikki Muller, also on 18 Jun, jw mariott beach rd (esplanade), jazz-ish bar $40
• Mandopop Chinese Opera: Who Says It First 戏谁先说 by Nam Hwa Opera - Day 1, 1 straits boulevard, preview, $28
• Chinese Theatre: Sunrise by Jin Xing Theatre Shanghai - Last, esplanade, $88
• Candlelight: A Tribute to ABBA - VOX string quartet, the arts house city hall, $35
• Drag Event: Baby Queen Movie Screening - SG drag movie & drag aftershow, projector golden mile, $39
• Gegarfest: Gerhana Skacinta (ska/rocksteady/reggae), Ryzall Noh, Caliph Buskers, singapore expo, free
• Gastrobeats: Shirlyn + The UnXpected (rock), marina bay open space, free

• DJ, NORTH EAST SOCIAL CLUB x Thugshop: Soul Mass Transit System (UK garage, bassline) ft mza, lemak, helios, tuff club 138 robinson rd cbd, $37
• DJ, HOUSEWRK Presents: SWEDISH HOUSE MAFIA tribute, projector x picturehouse (the cathay), $22 (SHM10 code discount)
• DJ, CIEL X Therapy Room : Open Decks DJ ft. Jas, Daya, Vincent, Mari, BenBen, edition rooftop bar dhoby ghaut (82 clemenceau ave), $22
• DJ, Thugshop XXL Series feat. PIG&DAN (techno, progressive), MDLR 62 cecil street (telok ayer), $40
• DJ, Bailar - Agitar ft piratheeb, kelibre, dj snickaz, djsan, naddz (hiphop reggaeton latinhouse), hard rock cafe orchard, ~$20 not clear
• DJ, AfroDesi Night at Majesty Chen, Oxley Tower L20, 138 robinson rd, $25
• DJ, Phuture Zouk: TRANSFIX invites TRANCE4M by Last One Standing - DJ Tony Hang, Daniel Ang and Joshen, zouk clarke quay
• DJ, Blu Jaz: Back to the 90s with DJ Jag x Big, blu jaz at bali ln, $11
• DJ, Offtrack: Anwar, beside hong lim park, music gastro bar
• DJ, Potato Head: The Beat Usagi + Nino Blink (disco/funk), 36 Keong Saik Rd, bar bistro
• DJ, Yang Club: Kaylova, reiko & kidd royale ft mc hund, clarke quay
• DJ, HQ: GONNO (jp house, techno, ambient). headquarters club 66A boat quay, $37
• DJ, Marquee: Revolution - DJ Zippy's 'Future Rave' night, marina bay sands $20
• DJ, CE LA VI: FLOYD LAVINE (ZA afro house), kenneth f, marina bay sands hotel, $38

17-Jun Sat

• CLANG: 克朗! CHINESE Indie Music Fest - ft 麋先生 MIXER, 9m88, 旺福 WONFU, 守夜人 NIGHT KEEPERS, 海豚刑警 IRUKA PORISU, 甜约翰 Sweet John, 温室杂草 Easy Weeds, pasir panjang power stn, $120
• 伍佰 WU BAI AND CHINA BLUE ROCK STAR 2023 巡迴演唱会 - Last Day, resorts world sentosa, $78
• SUGA of BTS Agust D - Day 2, indoor stadium, $168 soldout
• Dewi Persik - Dangdut Mania ft Rina Nose and Nabila Maharani (INA), Rosalina Musa (SG), star theatre buona vista, $88
• Indie Rock Gig: TURN IT UP Vol II Rabak Records - 8forty5 EP Launch, KYYRA, Nosedive, feelslikeyou, freshpoutine, see link, $20 or doors
• Indie Rock Gig: Pink Cloud Summer - Bellied Star, MRTNS, FADER, Line Drive, Late Culture, see link, $25 soldout
• Esplanade: Door Plant (THA dream-pop/indie-surf band), outdoor, free
• Esplanade: Oh, Flamingo! (PH indie rock), outdoor, free
• Esplanade: ChambeElectronic: In The Living Room ft. Miao Kaiwen, Frances Lee, Chow Jun Yan, free
• Chamber: More Than Music Trio - Notes of Passion (dvorak, strauss, sibelius, tartini) - last, esplanade, $20-$30
• Carnatic Violin Ensemble: Indian Performing Arts Convention 2023: Strings of Gold ft Embar S. Kannan - with Apsaras Arts Dance Co., esplanade, $22 to $35
• SSO Organ: Tom Scott's The Composer and the Mouse + The Carnival of the Animals (family friendly), victoria concert hall, $20
• Jazz Loft: Amanda Lee Swingtet, blu jaz L3 at bali ln, $22
• Mandopop Chinese Opera: Who Says It First 戏谁先说 by Nam Hwa Opera (SCCC Cultural Extravanganza)Last, 1 straits boulevard, $28
• Standup Comedy: Fakkah Fuzz (M18), esplanade, $55
• Kids Ballet: Live Your Story by JE Dance Academy, NUS UCC, $28
• Beatbox Battle: Escension Beatbox Battle by 555 Beatbox, 42 waterloo st (bras basah), $15
• Our Tampines Hub: Let's Rock (retro hits from 60s-70s), tampines, free reg
• Anime Event: MUSIC PROJECT & IDOL Only Event by iFest SG - Day 1, peninsula excelsior hotel ballroom, tics $30
• Soundbath: Mantravine's Soundbath, altered states at kallang riverside park
• Drag/Ballroom: Pink Kiki Ball 2.0 by vogue in progress, with dj bobby pingpongpanda, c2ac, MDLR 62 cecil street (telok ayer), $37 soldout, door available
• Drag Event: Yours Queerly's Queerly Affair 2023, 102 pasir panjang rd, $25
• Prohibited Projects: Distro Day Out - punk/subculture hangout , the substation alley 45 armenian street
• Gegarfest: Khai Bahar, jay jay, nana karia, singapore expo, free

• DJ, DJ Jovynn for Cross Border by Party Lab x Diamondcosg, prism club marina square, $30
• DJ, 🏖 Party Social's Pool Party - Caribbean Vibes ft DaBishop OnDMix, DJ Cheri, Afro Junior (dancehall, reggaeton, afrobeats hiphop), grand park city hall, ~$20
• DJ, Bussy Temple: Father's Womb (Queer NB Positive Rave) - Dance Divine (DE), Sayang (UK-MY), Halalbutch, Soyf§g, Howrøng, 72-13 Mohamed Sultan Road (robertson quay), $27
• DJ, Stickies x What You Know Dance Battle - Block Party (hiphoppy), Stickies 11 Keng Cheow St (clarke quay), $25 doodm
• DJ, 4xF Uncharted - ft. Vaibs, pure love, Daya, Cosmo Carbon, Labraatz, Kayh (housey), stratos rooftop bar at national design centre (bugis), $27
• DJ, CULTURE Presents Back 2 Two Thousands, luxe club marina square, $32
• DJ, Dance Kartel - Gloo, The Kongsee 10 Gemmill Ln, $20
• DJ, Manifest - Jungle Beats Afrohouse + Tribal Tech - ft Cyril Labaude, Stephen Day, Joshua P, Mandala Club 31 Bukit Pasoh, $30
• DJ, EATMEPOPTART: Electric Feel - If You Leave ft. weelikeme, fantastic dinosaur (80s s disco, pop, funk, new wave), projector x picturehouse (the cathay dhoby), $20
• DJ, Yang Club: Asian Nation ft Noizefaktor (my), sherpa, reiko, mc hund, clarke quay
• DJ, Majesty Chen: Even Up Booze & Schmooze Mixer, Oxley Tower L20, 138 robinson rd, $49
• DJ, KPO: PET SHOP BOYS Tribute Night - admirably with DJ Kenneth Siew, beside orchard central (somerset)
• DJ, Offtrack: Archie (ID), bongomann & daryl knows, beside hong lim park, music gastro bar
• DJ, Tuff: Thugshop x Art Beyond Presents - BERLIN SESSIONS with MATCHY (melodic techno & house), 138 robinson rd cbd, $37
• DJ, HQ: VOISKI (techno, leans ambient), headquarters club 66A boat quay, $37
• DJ, Capital Zouk: Total Recall with Caden & Rattle (90s - 00s), capital zouk clarke quay (22+), $75
• DJ, Zouk: Charged with Hong & Ghetto (bass night), zouk clarke quay, ~$45 with 2 drinks
• DJ, Marquee: Slushii (bass, dubstep/trap), marina bay sands,

18-Jun Sun

• SUGA of BTS Agust D - Last, indoor stadium, $168 soldout
• ITCHYWORMS (PH rock), timbre one-north, $50
• Jesslyn 陈佩贤 x YU JIA TSENG 曾昱嘉 - Heartfelt Concert 走心音乐会4, esplanade, $88
• Esplanade: monda(e) - instrumental rock/post, outdoor, free
• Esplanade: INTERMISSION - post-punk, outdoor, free
• Esplanade AI Theatre: AI x Improv Theatre, esplanade, free
• Carnatic Fusion Jazz/pop: Niranjan Pandian & NP Collective for IPAC - Samavaya - A Euphonic Co-existence, esplanade, $22-$35
• Classical Harp x Audio-Visual: The Four Seasons Reimagined By The Harp Quarterly x Avik Chari x Lynette Quek, national library drama center, $18-$28
• Candlelight: A Tribute to Joe Hisaishi - Candlelight Orchestra, victoria concert hall, left $84
• Live Reggae/Rocksteady/DJ: Sunday Live Reggae with Reggae Remedy ft Izaar, DJ Rumshot, Thirty Six Brewlab 36 Club Street (boat quay)
• Gegarfest: Insomniacks, Rahila, singapore expo

• Chinese Opera: One Opera Singapore 戏曲一家亲 - Cantonese, Hainan Qiong, Hubei Huangmei, Hokkkien, & Teochew Opera (SCCC Cultural Extravaganza), SCCC auditorium, $10 soldout
• Ballet: DuCon Singapore Gala ft Kimin Kim and May Nagahisa of Mariinsky Theatre, SOTA dhoby ghaut,$60
• Avant Dance: PheNoumenon by T.H.E Dance Company (last), esplanade, $28-$40
• Soundbath: Haw Par Chill-Lah: Hypno Sense & Sound Bathing, haw par villa, $60 (also on 17/sat)
• Anime Event: MUSIC PROJECT & IDOL Only Event by iFest SG - Last Day, peninsula excelsior hotel ballroom, tics $30
• DJ, KAMPONG BOOGIE x Potato Head: Straight outta Kampong (hip hoppy, mixed genres, rnb funky), 36 Keong Saik Rd, bar bistro tickets at door

19-Jun Mon

• Esplanade: Meet the East and West: Hindustani classical sitar and Western guitar - ft Guru Susanta Chowdhury & Isuru, free
• Avant Dance: Wild Flower by Jin Xing Dance Theatre Shanghai - Day 1, esplanade, $58
• Candlelight: A Tribute to Jay Chou - by Celeste Syn 冼佩瑾, chijmes city hall, $35

20-Jun Tue

• Esplanade: Meet the East and West: Hindustani classical sitar and Western guitar - ft Guru Susanta Chowdhury & Isuru, free
• Classical Art Song: The 11th Singapore Lieder Festival - Arnold Schoenberg's Pierrot Lunaire , esplanade, $15-$22
• Candlelight: A Tribute to Coldplay - pianist Sueli Tang, chijmes hall city hall, $48
• Avant Dance: Wild Flower by Jin Xing Dance Theatre Shanghai - Last, esplanade, $58

21-Jun Wed

• AI Theatre: AI x Improv Theatre, Esplanade, free
• Cool Cats Jazz: The Jazz Saxophone: with Sean Hong Wei, jw mariott beach rd (esplanade), jazz-ish bar $30
• Candlelight: Magical Movie Soundtracks - by pianist Gabriel Hoe, chijmes city hall, $35
• DJ, Potato Head: Prav of .wavy (hiphop rnb), 36 Keong Saik Rd, bar bistro

22-Jun Thu

• Kruelty (JP hardcore), Krusty (MY), Deceased & KillonSight, phil's studio at parklane shopping centre dhoby L5, $35 now
• Esplanade Multidisciplinary Poetry, music, theatre: Between Ground and Sky, exploring Shirley Geok-lin Lim & Tan Tiag Yi , free
• Jazz Loft: HORNS ARE UNIQUE (HAU) ft Benoit Trouwaert, Andreas Marinello, Rick Smith, blu jaz L3 at bali ln, $22
• Cool Cats Jazz: Beautiful Bossanova with Natasha Oong, jw mariott beach rd (esplanade), jazz-ish bar $30
• SIAO CHAR BORS COMEDY: The Big Gay Variety Show, projector golden mile tower, $28
• Voices of Singapore Men's Audition, capitol theatre
• BEERFEST ASIA, Open Carpark beside Kallang Leisure Park
• DJ, Offtrack: Nez Senja, beside hong lim park, music gastro bar
• DJ, Tipsy Penguin turns 5! Tipsy Slumber Party ft. DJ Mad Jester & Emo Nemo + Bolster Fight Championship, NTUC Income Building Tampines Central

Ongoing maybe not music

• Till 25 June Gastrobeats and iLight Singapore, free
• Exhibition: Naruto TV 20th Anniversary Exhibition, marina square, $25, everyday
• Theatre till 18 Jul: Wild Rice's Hotel, funan city hall, $70 for 2 connected shows, every other day
• Theatre till 18 jun: Pangdemonium's Doubt - A Parable, esplanade, ~$60, everyday
• Avant Dance 15-18 Jun: PheNoumenon by T.H.E Dance Company, esplanade, $28-$40
• Ballet Kid-friendly 15-18 jun: Singapore Ballet - Peter & Blue's Birthday Party, school of the arts dhoby ghaut, $35
• Theatre 15-18 Jun: Wild Rice's Singapore Youth Theatre - A Double Bill: Every Student is A Good Student/ In My Head, funan, ~$30 soldout
• Dance till 11 Jun: Authentic Flamenco - Paula Rodríguez, Kewalram Chanrai Arts Centre (Robertson Quay/Fort Canning), everyday, $65
• Indian Arts Workshops 18-24 jun: Indian Performing Arts Convention 2023 Workshops - FB, and IG
• Kid Friendly 9-25 jun: Esplanade: Discovering the Harp! with Laura Peh, only on fri-weekends, free
• Exhibit 13-18 jun: Esplanade: Transit 步: The Installation, free
• * exhibit till 18 jun “Conundrum Chamber”, by three artists: BODHI, Jayalakshmi, and Yang Han Wen

“The word τα στοιχεια [ta stoikheia], the elements ... meant (a) the letters of the alphabet… (b) the elements of which a thing was composed, as the fire, air, earth, and water of which the world was thought to be constituted; (c) the elements of the universe, the larger cosmos, including the sun, moon, planets, and stars; and (d) the spirits, angels, and demons which were believed to ensoul the heavenly bodies, traverse all space, and inhabit every nook and cranny of earth, particularly tombs, desert places, and demented persons. These spirits were said to be organized like human governments. In Rom. [Romans] 8:38 Paul calls them ‘principalities’ and ‘powers.’ And vss. [verses] 9 and 10 of our present chapter indicate that he has them in mind in vs. [verse] 3. …  
Paul … includes in ‘the elements of the universe’ all sub-Christian ideas and observances, both Jewish and Gentile. He regards these ‘elements’ as slave drivers who frighten men with curses for not propitiating them by observance of special days and seasons, food taboos, dietary fads, and circumcision. In Christ he declared his independence of Fate, Fortune, Luck, and Chance, and from astrology, the counterfeit religion and bastard sister of astronomy, whose practitioners exploited the superstition that the stars controlled men’s lives from birth to death.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 521 & 522)  
“The elements of the world] A mere Jewish phrase, יסודי עולם הזה yasudey ‘olam hazzeh, ‘the principles of this world;’ that is, the rudiments or principles of the Jewish religion. The apostle intimates that the law was not the science of salvation; it was only the elements or alphabet of it.” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 387)  

“The four words, το πληρωμα του χρονου [to pleroma tou khronou], the fullness of the time, express a whole philosophy of history. The Hebrew prophets and Jewish apocalyptists believed that their God was the creator of the universe and arbiter of the destinies of all men and nations. Nothing could happen that was not his doing, either directly or indirectly through angels and men. He had a time for everything, and everything happened exactly on time. … The completion of this present age would be marked by a blood-red revolution, in which all good men and good works would be ground under the heel of the tyrant, while the wicked reigned supreme. Then suddenly God would intervene with the lightning of judgment to snatch the world from the mouth of the bottomless pit and restore it to Paradise, whence it had fallen with the sin of Adam. Sorrow and sighing would flee away, and the Messiah would reign with the perfection of a theocratic king.  
At this juncture, says Paul, when the appointed period of history was ‘full,’ god sent his Son γενομενον εκ γυναικος, γενομενον υπο νομον [genomenon ek gunaikos, genomenon upο nomon], ‘born of woman, bοrn under law.’ … Jesus was not only born under law, but was subject to it all his life. ...The ‘yoke’ of the Torah demanded that he observe the customs of his forefathers, such as wearing phylactery and prayer fringes, ceremonial washing of hands before eating, giving thanks at mealtime, praying at stated times, bringing tithes and sacrifices, and obeying the Ten Commandments.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 522 & 523)  
Not to mention circumcision, kashrut, and the prohibition of associating with gentiles.  
“Sent forth refers to God’s sending of his Son from his pre-existent state in heaven (I Cor. [Corinthians] 8:6; Phil. [Philippians] 2:6-8; Col. [Colossians] 1:15-17). Yet this Son was born of woman. There is nothing in these words, or elsewhere in Paul’s letters, to prove or disprove that he knew the story of the miraculous conception. His point here is that the Christ, although he was the pre-existent Son of God, did not come into this world with a body composed of celestial substance, but was woman-born like all other human beings. … It was very different from the conception of royal sonship in Ps. 2, where the king is called God’s ‘Son; because he has been chosen to be the Messiah. In Paul, Jesus is God’s Son by nature, and his Christhood follows by virtue of this sonship. This belief was the fundamental cause of the split between the Jews and the Christians. The lowly birth, the obscurity of Nazareth, and the fact that Jesus was a common laborer, constituted a grievous scandal in the eyes of all who were expecting their Deliverer to come riding on a chariot of clouds wielding the lightning of judgment. Paul’s gospel contradicts every form of hyperspirituality that fixes a gulf between God and his material world. On the other hand, his conception of the coming of Jesus was poles removed from the pagan stories of the births of heroes, savior-gods, and kings, whose legends were freighted with illicit relationships and lawless conduct like the lives of the devotees who had created them in their own image.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 523-524)  
“Nothing is said explicitly about the Son’s preexistence, which is at most implied … born of a woman: … The phrase is derived from the OT [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible] (Job 14:1 …). So born, Jesus submitted to the law by being circumcised and thus became capable of falling under its curse. But lest the Galatians draw a wrong conclusion, Paul [and The Interpreters’ Bible] does not mention Jesus’ circumcision. Instead of genomenon, ‘born,’ some patristic writers read gennomenon, and understood this ptc. [participle] as referring to Mary’s virginal conception; but this is anachronistic interpretation.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 787)  

“This is Paul’s proclamation of emancipation.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 528)  

…………………………………………  
Worry of Shah’OoL to Galatians
[verses 8–20]  

“The Jews never ceased to ridicule idols and denounce idolaters… They demoted the old gods to the rank of demons and made a list of detractive names for them: angels, shepherds, princes; kings, emperors, benefactors, heroes; demons, personifications, idols, nonentities. Some were living, some dead; some were good, but were not God. Most of them were bad, and their idols were but images of ‘things of nought.’ …  
Paul did not deny the existence of these beings whose ignorant worshipers called them gods, but he declared that they did not partake of the nature of God (I Cor. 8:4-6). God permitted them to plague mankind to punish sin, especially the sin of participating in the sacraments of the Gentile cults (I Cor. 10:19-22; 11:28-31). But Christ had conquered them and no Christian needed to fear them.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 529)  

“Days like the Sabbath and Yom hakkippurim [“Day of Atonement”] are meant; months like the ‘new moon’; seasons like Passover and Pentecost; years like the sabbatical years… Paul can see no reason for a Gentile Christian to observe these.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)  

…………………………………………  

Two the covenants
[verses 21-26]  

“It is well known how fond the Jews were of allegorizing; every thing in the law was with them an allegory: their Talmud [ancient commentary] is full of these; and one of their most sober and best educated writers Philo, abounds with them…  
It is very likely, therefore, that the allegory produced here; St. Paul had borrowed from the Jewish writings; and he brings it in to convict the Judaizing Galatians on their own principles: and neither he, nor we, have any thing farther to do with this allegory, than as it applies to the subject for which it is quoted; nor does it give any license to those men of vain and superficial minds, who endeavour to find out allegories in every portion of the Sacred Writings; and by what they term spiritualizing, which is more properly carnalizing, have brought the testimonies of God into disgrace. May the spirit of silence be poured out upon all such corrupters of the word of God!” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 390)  
“Allegorical interpretation rests upon the belief that every word, figure of speech, and grammatical form in scripture has a special ‘spiritual’ significance besides its literal meaning. The theory is that the God who dictated it meant more than rests on the surface and that while he said one thing, he also meant something else in addition to the literal sense… The Greeks had long since applied the method to explain away the immoral things which the gods said and did in Homer… Then Greek-speaking Jews, like Philo Judaeus, employed it apologetically to read Greek philosophy into the O.T. [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible], proclaiming that Moses had said all these good things long before and better than Homer and Plato.  
The wonder is that Paul has so little allegory. His restraint is explained partly by his training as a Pharisee. The rabbis were suspicious of any interpretation of scripture that tended to make Jews lax in their observance of the law. Jews with Gnostic leanings, and those who considered some of their ancestral customs outmoded, could resort to allegory to justify their philosophy and conduct, while maintaining that they were the spiritual superiors of the conservatives who held to the letter of the law … His argument, however, is never strengthened by allegorical symbolism and typology, for these are convincing only to those who by imagination can find them so. Rather, as in Rom. 9-11, he introduces unnecessary complications such as the moral difficulties involved in predestination. His gospel does not rest on the quicksands of allegory, a specious method of interpreting scripture. Its interpretations are of interest to the historian not as correct representations of what the writers and first readers of the Bible had in mind, but only as source materials for understanding the life and thought of the allegorists themselves.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 540)  

“… why does Paul mention Arabia…? Possibly because Mt. Sinai is in Arabia[?], which is Ishmaelite territory; he thus associates the Sinai pact with the eponymous patriarch of Arab tribes … Paul thus suggests that the law itself stems from a situation extrinsic to the promised land and to the real descendants of Abraham. Paul’s Jewish former co-religionists would not have been happy with this allegory.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)  

“The Jerusalem which now is was a most unholy “Holy city”, full of injustice, violence and murder, and subject to the cruel and wicked rulers imposed by a Gentile empire. But over against this Jerusalem of slavery lay an ideal celestial city, unseen at present, but destined soon to supersede it. Paul called it the Jerusalem above. Sarah, the free-woman, was the ancestress of its citizens, who were the people of faith and of freedom in Christ…  
Paul speaks of Jerusalem above, because this new city of freedom already exists in heaven where Christ is, where dwell the souls of those who have died in Christ. But it also exists on earth as the church, the body of Christ, whose members are colonists from heaven sent to prepare men for the full establishment of God’s kingdom at Christ’s second coming (Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:1-3).  
The biblical root of this conception of an ideal future and heavenly Jerusalem is Isa. [Isaiah] 54. Other descriptions appear in Ezek. [Ezekiel] 40-48; Zech. [Zechariah] 2:1-13; Hag. [Haggai] 2:6-9; Tob. [Tobias] 13:9-18 Ecclus. [Ecclesiasticus] 36; Pss. Sol. [Psalms of Solomon] 17:33. Historically the expectation assumed three forms. According to the earliest hope, God would build the new Jerusalem in Palestine and make it the capital of his theocratic world government. The plan of this glorious city was graven upon the palms of his hands (Isa. 49:16). From this idea it was but a step, especially for those influenced by Greek ideas, to think of this ideal Jerusalem as already existing in heaven. According to the Apocalypse of Baruch, God had shown it to Adam in Paradise before he sinned; to Abraham on the night mentioned in Gen. 15:12-21; and to Moses on Sinai, when he gave him the heavenly pattern for an earthly tabernacle (II Baruch 4:1-6; cf. [compare with] Heb. [Hebrews]12:22). The third conception combined these two ideas. The Jerusalem which was ‘above’ would come down to earth to be established in Palestine in place of the city that ‘now is’ (cf. Rev. [Revelation] 3:12, 21:2; II Esdras 7:26; 13:36; 10:54).  
So the new Jerusalem belonged to both worlds and to both ages, to heaven and earth, to the present and the future. Its constitution was the new covenant, and its citizens were the men of faith in Christ, a new kind of freemen who traced their spiritual ancestry through the line of Isaac and his mother Sarah as heirs of God’s promise to Abraham. As for Ishmael and his tribe, they were the men of law, predestined to be slaves forever. Needless to say, the Judaizers found Paul’s allegorical exclusion of themselves utterly unacceptable. They believed that the Torah was God’s blueprint for all creation, and that it would be observed forever in the new Jerusalem. That, they said, was why God was going to purge the old city – to establish an order of life in which perfect obedience to his law would be possible.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 541-542)  
“…it was a maxim among the rabbins [rabbis], that, ‘Whatsoever was in the earth, the same was also found in heaven; for there is no matter, howsoever small, in this world, that has not something similar to it in the spiritual world.’ On this maxim, the Jews imagine that every earthly thing has its representative in heaven: and especially whatever concerns Jerusalem, the law, and its ordinances. Rab. ["Master", Rabbi] Kimchi, speaking of Melchisedec, king of Salem, says, זו ירושלים של מעלה Zu Yerushalem shel me’alah – ‘This is the Jerusalem that is from above.’…  
There is a spiritual Jerusalem, of which this is the type; and this Jerusalem, in which the souls of all the righteous are, is free from all bondage and sin: or by this, probably the kingdom of the Messiah was intended; and this certainly answers best to the apostle’s meaning, as the subsequent verse shows.” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 391)  

“A telling item in the counterpropaganda of the legalists was the argument that even among the Christians only a radical fringe consisting mainly of foreign Jews, of whom Paul was one, were proposing to abandon the law of Moses. …  
In one respect his quotation of Isa. 54:1 does not fit Paul’s allegory. It was Sarah, the mother of freemen, who possessed the husband, and Hagar, the slave, who was the deserted woman. As usual with Paul’s illustrations (cf. Rom. 7:1-4; 11:17-24), the details cannot be pressed without making them go lame …  
The Isaian figure to describe the plight of Jerusalem during the Babylonian exile grew out of a common experience in Hebrew family life. Childlessness, particularly the failure to bear sons, was great grief and disgrace. Such was the sorrow of Jerusalem; but the prophet bade her look forward with courage to the time when all her scattered children would come back to her (Isa. 54:3). God was her ‘husband,’ and he would treat his faithful remnant with everlasting lovingkindness, making them more numerous than the former population and giving them a heritage of great peace and prosperity (Isa. 54:13-17).” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 542)  
“The prophet’s words are addressed to deserted Zion, bidding it rejoice at the return of the exiles.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)  

“The Judaizers claimed that Abraham had obeyed the law of Moses by anticipation, and that God’s promise was his reward. Consequently the descendants of Isaac were children of promise only if they followed Abraham’s example in obeying the law. Paul turned it the other way about: the promise must be taken on faith, not as credit for obedience.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 542)  

“In Gen 21:10 Sarah, seeing Ishmael ‘playing’ with Isaac and viewing him as the potential rival to Isaac’s inheritance, drives him and his mother out. Nothing in Gen is said of Ishmael’s ‘persecution’ of Isaac, but Paul may be interpreting the ‘playing’ as did a Palestinian haggadic explanation of Gen 21:9 (see Josephus, ANT. [Antiquities] 1.12.3§215 …” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)  
“A rabbinical tradition of the second century A.S. interprets the Hebrew participle מצחק [MeeTsHahQ, “play”] (LXX [Septuagient, the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible] παιζοντα [paizonta] in Gen. 21:9 to mean that Ishmael’s ‘playing’ became so rough that Isaac’s life was in danger. This son of a slave is said to have shot arrows at Isaac to kill him, and Paul’s statement shows that some such tradition was current in his day. He applied it to the Judaizers who were trying to force the Christians to observe the whole law of Moses, and to the unbelieving Jews who were excommunicating the Christians and their families and getting them into trouble with the civil authorities (1:5; 4:17; 5:10; I Thess. [Thessalonians] 2:14-16).” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 543)  

“The quotation is from Gen. 21:10 … The speaker of these words is Sarah, who is filled with rage against Hagar and Ishmael. Abraham is represented as greatly grieved, but God is said to have sanctioned the demand of the cruel and jealous wife….  
This story was one of the effects and one of the causes of the perpetual feud between the Israelites and the tribes that descended from Ishmael. The Hebrews were so sure that God wanted them to have Palestine that they found no moral difficulty in saying that it was God himself who had overruled Abraham’s conscience (Gen. 17:18-21). They affirmed that Ishmael’s character and destiny had been predetermined (Gen. 16:12). Consequently, even his circumcision at the age of thirteen could not make him a member of God’s chosen people. However great this innocent victim of a family feud might become by virtue of the halfhearted blessing conceded by an uneasy conscience (Gen. 17:20-21), he and his descendants were barred forever from the higher blessing. Theirs was to submit to the religious imperialism of the most favored nation or die. Moreover, all Abraham’s other sons except Isaac were barred from the promise and sent away ‘unto the east country’ (Gen. 25:5-6). And yet while all this was said to be the Lord’s doing, it was in the same breath declared to be the doing of the human actors in this drama of the nations. Sarah herself was said to have suggested that Abraham become a father by her Egyptian slave girl. Then, too, it was explained that Hagar’s flight from the cruelty of her mistress was voluntary, making her, rather than the callous compliance of Abraham, responsible for her plight ‘in the wilderness, by the fountain in the way to Shur’ (Gen. 16:7).  
Paul’s use of Abraham’s expulsion of Hagar and her child has its parallel in the equally heartless treatment of Esau which he employs in Rom. 9-11 in his longer discussion of the divine process of selection. Here too it was assumed that the hatred generated by centuries of war for the possession of Palestine lay in the heart of God. “I hate Esau,” said Malachi (1:3), making God the speaker; and Rom. 9:6-13 presses it to the utmost limit of predestination. But the love of God in Christ Jesus made Paul’s heart better than his inherited doctrine … When the history of the struggle for the possession of “the Holy land” is allegorized to justify a doctrine of “election” which foredooms countless souls to an eternity of torment in a future hell, it becomes as morally atrocious as it is irreconcilable with Paul’s gospel.  
Nevertheless Paul’s allegory gives the historian an insight into Paul’s mind as he wrestled with the insoluble problem of God’s sovereignty and human freedom.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 543-544)  
“Paul bids the Galatians rid themselves of the Judaizers – and, ironically enough, obey the Torah itself.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)   An Amateur's Journey Through the Bible

“The word τα στοιχεια [ta stoikheia], the elements ... meant (a) the letters of the alphabet… (b) the elements of which a thing was composed, as the fire, air, earth, and water of which the world was thought to be constituted; (c) the elements of the universe, the larger cosmos, including the sun, moon, planets, and stars; and (d) the spirits, angels, and demons which were believed to ensoul the heavenly bodies, traverse all space, and inhabit every nook and cranny of earth, particularly tombs, desert places, and demented persons. These spirits were said to be organized like human governments. In Rom. [Romans] 8:38 Paul calls them ‘principalities’ and ‘powers.’ And vss. [verses] 9 and 10 of our present chapter indicate that he has them in mind in vs. [verse] 3. …  
Paul … includes in ‘the elements of the universe’ all sub-Christian ideas and observances, both Jewish and Gentile. He regards these ‘elements’ as slave drivers who frighten men with curses for not propitiating them by observance of special days and seasons, food taboos, dietary fads, and circumcision. In Christ he declared his independence of Fate, Fortune, Luck, and Chance, and from astrology, the counterfeit religion and bastard sister of astronomy, whose practitioners exploited the superstition that the stars controlled men’s lives from birth to death.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 521 & 522)  
“The elements of the world] A mere Jewish phrase, יסודי עולם הזה yasudey ‘olam hazzeh, ‘the principles of this world;’ that is, the rudiments or principles of the Jewish religion. The apostle intimates that the law was not the science of salvation; it was only the elements or alphabet of it.” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 387)  

“The four words, το πληρωμα του χρονου [to pleroma tou khronou], the fullness of the time, express a whole philosophy of history. The Hebrew prophets and Jewish apocalyptists believed that their God was the creator of the universe and arbiter of the destinies of all men and nations. Nothing could happen that was not his doing, either directly or indirectly through angels and men. He had a time for everything, and everything happened exactly on time. … The completion of this present age would be marked by a blood-red revolution, in which all good men and good works would be ground under the heel of the tyrant, while the wicked reigned supreme. Then suddenly God would intervene with the lightning of judgment to snatch the world from the mouth of the bottomless pit and restore it to Paradise, whence it had fallen with the sin of Adam. Sorrow and sighing would flee away, and the Messiah would reign with the perfection of a theocratic king.  
At this juncture, says Paul, when the appointed period of history was ‘full,’ god sent his Son γενομενον εκ γυναικος, γενομενον υπο νομον [genomenon ek gunaikos, genomenon upο nomon], ‘born of woman, bοrn under law.’ … Jesus was not only born under law, but was subject to it all his life. ...The ‘yoke’ of the Torah demanded that he observe the customs of his forefathers, such as wearing phylactery and prayer fringes, ceremonial washing of hands before eating, giving thanks at mealtime, praying at stated times, bringing tithes and sacrifices, and obeying the Ten Commandments.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 522 & 523)  
Not to mention circumcision, kashrut, and the prohibition of associating with gentiles.  
“Sent forth refers to God’s sending of his Son from his pre-existent state in heaven (I Cor. [Corinthians] 8:6; Phil. [Philippians] 2:6-8; Col. [Colossians] 1:15-17). Yet this Son was born of woman. There is nothing in these words, or elsewhere in Paul’s letters, to prove or disprove that he knew the story of the miraculous conception. His point here is that the Christ, although he was the pre-existent Son of God, did not come into this world with a body composed of celestial substance, but was woman-born like all other human beings. … It was very different from the conception of royal sonship in Ps. 2, where the king is called God’s ‘Son; because he has been chosen to be the Messiah. In Paul, Jesus is God’s Son by nature, and his Christhood follows by virtue of this sonship. This belief was the fundamental cause of the split between the Jews and the Christians. The lowly birth, the obscurity of Nazareth, and the fact that Jesus was a common laborer, constituted a grievous scandal in the eyes of all who were expecting their Deliverer to come riding on a chariot of clouds wielding the lightning of judgment. Paul’s gospel contradicts every form of hyperspirituality that fixes a gulf between God and his material world. On the other hand, his conception of the coming of Jesus was poles removed from the pagan stories of the births of heroes, savior-gods, and kings, whose legends were freighted with illicit relationships and lawless conduct like the lives of the devotees who had created them in their own image.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 523-524)  
“Nothing is said explicitly about the Son’s preexistence, which is at most implied … born of a woman: … The phrase is derived from the OT [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible] (Job 14:1 …). So born, Jesus submitted to the law by being circumcised and thus became capable of falling under its curse. But lest the Galatians draw a wrong conclusion, Paul [and The Interpreters’ Bible] does not mention Jesus’ circumcision. Instead of genomenon, ‘born,’ some patristic writers read gennomenon, and understood this ptc. [participle] as referring to Mary’s virginal conception; but this is anachronistic interpretation.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 787)  

“This is Paul’s proclamation of emancipation.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 528)  

…………………………………………  
Worry of Shah’OoL to Galatians
[verses 8–20]  

“The Jews never ceased to ridicule idols and denounce idolaters… They demoted the old gods to the rank of demons and made a list of detractive names for them: angels, shepherds, princes; kings, emperors, benefactors, heroes; demons, personifications, idols, nonentities. Some were living, some dead; some were good, but were not God. Most of them were bad, and their idols were but images of ‘things of nought.’ …  
Paul did not deny the existence of these beings whose ignorant worshipers called them gods, but he declared that they did not partake of the nature of God (I Cor. 8:4-6). God permitted them to plague mankind to punish sin, especially the sin of participating in the sacraments of the Gentile cults (I Cor. 10:19-22; 11:28-31). But Christ had conquered them and no Christian needed to fear them.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 529)  

“Days like the Sabbath and Yom hakkippurim [“Day of Atonement”] are meant; months like the ‘new moon’; seasons like Passover and Pentecost; years like the sabbatical years… Paul can see no reason for a Gentile Christian to observe these.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)  

…………………………………………  

Two the covenants
[verses 21-26]  

“It is well known how fond the Jews were of allegorizing; every thing in the law was with them an allegory: their Talmud [ancient commentary] is full of these; and one of their most sober and best educated writers Philo, abounds with them…  
It is very likely, therefore, that the allegory produced here; St. Paul had borrowed from the Jewish writings; and he brings it in to convict the Judaizing Galatians on their own principles: and neither he, nor we, have any thing farther to do with this allegory, than as it applies to the subject for which it is quoted; nor does it give any license to those men of vain and superficial minds, who endeavour to find out allegories in every portion of the Sacred Writings; and by what they term spiritualizing, which is more properly carnalizing, have brought the testimonies of God into disgrace. May the spirit of silence be poured out upon all such corrupters of the word of God!” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 390)  
“Allegorical interpretation rests upon the belief that every word, figure of speech, and grammatical form in scripture has a special ‘spiritual’ significance besides its literal meaning. The theory is that the God who dictated it meant more than rests on the surface and that while he said one thing, he also meant something else in addition to the literal sense… The Greeks had long since applied the method to explain away the immoral things which the gods said and did in Homer… Then Greek-speaking Jews, like Philo Judaeus, employed it apologetically to read Greek philosophy into the O.T. [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible], proclaiming that Moses had said all these good things long before and better than Homer and Plato.  
The wonder is that Paul has so little allegory. His restraint is explained partly by his training as a Pharisee. The rabbis were suspicious of any interpretation of scripture that tended to make Jews lax in their observance of the law. Jews with Gnostic leanings, and those who considered some of their ancestral customs outmoded, could resort to allegory to justify their philosophy and conduct, while maintaining that they were the spiritual superiors of the conservatives who held to the letter of the law … His argument, however, is never strengthened by allegorical symbolism and typology, for these are convincing only to those who by imagination can find them so. Rather, as in Rom. 9-11, he introduces unnecessary complications such as the moral difficulties involved in predestination. His gospel does not rest on the quicksands of allegory, a specious method of interpreting scripture. Its interpretations are of interest to the historian not as correct representations of what the writers and first readers of the Bible had in mind, but only as source materials for understanding the life and thought of the allegorists themselves.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 540)  

“… why does Paul mention Arabia…? Possibly because Mt. Sinai is in Arabia[?], which is Ishmaelite territory; he thus associates the Sinai pact with the eponymous patriarch of Arab tribes … Paul thus suggests that the law itself stems from a situation extrinsic to the promised land and to the real descendants of Abraham. Paul’s Jewish former co-religionists would not have been happy with this allegory.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)  

“The Jerusalem which now is was a most unholy “Holy city”, full of injustice, violence and murder, and subject to the cruel and wicked rulers imposed by a Gentile empire. But over against this Jerusalem of slavery lay an ideal celestial city, unseen at present, but destined soon to supersede it. Paul called it the Jerusalem above. Sarah, the free-woman, was the ancestress of its citizens, who were the people of faith and of freedom in Christ…  
Paul speaks of Jerusalem above, because this new city of freedom already exists in heaven where Christ is, where dwell the souls of those who have died in Christ. But it also exists on earth as the church, the body of Christ, whose members are colonists from heaven sent to prepare men for the full establishment of God’s kingdom at Christ’s second coming (Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:1-3).  
The biblical root of this conception of an ideal future and heavenly Jerusalem is Isa. [Isaiah] 54. Other descriptions appear in Ezek. [Ezekiel] 40-48; Zech. [Zechariah] 2:1-13; Hag. [Haggai] 2:6-9; Tob. [Tobias] 13:9-18 Ecclus. [Ecclesiasticus] 36; Pss. Sol. [Psalms of Solomon] 17:33. Historically the expectation assumed three forms. According to the earliest hope, God would build the new Jerusalem in Palestine and make it the capital of his theocratic world government. The plan of this glorious city was graven upon the palms of his hands (Isa. 49:16). From this idea it was but a step, especially for those influenced by Greek ideas, to think of this ideal Jerusalem as already existing in heaven. According to the Apocalypse of Baruch, God had shown it to Adam in Paradise before he sinned; to Abraham on the night mentioned in Gen. 15:12-21; and to Moses on Sinai, when he gave him the heavenly pattern for an earthly tabernacle (II Baruch 4:1-6; cf. [compare with] Heb. [Hebrews]12:22). The third conception combined these two ideas. The Jerusalem which was ‘above’ would come down to earth to be established in Palestine in place of the city that ‘now is’ (cf. Rev. [Revelation] 3:12, 21:2; II Esdras 7:26; 13:36; 10:54).  
So the new Jerusalem belonged to both worlds and to both ages, to heaven and earth, to the present and the future. Its constitution was the new covenant, and its citizens were the men of faith in Christ, a new kind of freemen who traced their spiritual ancestry through the line of Isaac and his mother Sarah as heirs of God’s promise to Abraham. As for Ishmael and his tribe, they were the men of law, predestined to be slaves forever. Needless to say, the Judaizers found Paul’s allegorical exclusion of themselves utterly unacceptable. They believed that the Torah was God’s blueprint for all creation, and that it would be observed forever in the new Jerusalem. That, they said, was why God was going to purge the old city – to establish an order of life in which perfect obedience to his law would be possible.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 541-542)  
“…it was a maxim among the rabbins [rabbis], that, ‘Whatsoever was in the earth, the same was also found in heaven; for there is no matter, howsoever small, in this world, that has not something similar to it in the spiritual world.’ On this maxim, the Jews imagine that every earthly thing has its representative in heaven: and especially whatever concerns Jerusalem, the law, and its ordinances. Rab. ["Master", Rabbi] Kimchi, speaking of Melchisedec, king of Salem, says, זו ירושלים של מעלה Zu Yerushalem shel me’alah – ‘This is the Jerusalem that is from above.’…  
There is a spiritual Jerusalem, of which this is the type; and this Jerusalem, in which the souls of all the righteous are, is free from all bondage and sin: or by this, probably the kingdom of the Messiah was intended; and this certainly answers best to the apostle’s meaning, as the subsequent verse shows.” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 391)  

“A telling item in the counterpropaganda of the legalists was the argument that even among the Christians only a radical fringe consisting mainly of foreign Jews, of whom Paul was one, were proposing to abandon the law of Moses. …  
In one respect his quotation of Isa. 54:1 does not fit Paul’s allegory. It was Sarah, the mother of freemen, who possessed the husband, and Hagar, the slave, who was the deserted woman. As usual with Paul’s illustrations (cf. Rom. 7:1-4; 11:17-24), the details cannot be pressed without making them go lame …  
The Isaian figure to describe the plight of Jerusalem during the Babylonian exile grew out of a common experience in Hebrew family life. Childlessness, particularly the failure to bear sons, was great grief and disgrace. Such was the sorrow of Jerusalem; but the prophet bade her look forward with courage to the time when all her scattered children would come back to her (Isa. 54:3). God was her ‘husband,’ and he would treat his faithful remnant with everlasting lovingkindness, making them more numerous than the former population and giving them a heritage of great peace and prosperity (Isa. 54:13-17).” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 542)  
“The prophet’s words are addressed to deserted Zion, bidding it rejoice at the return of the exiles.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)  

“The Judaizers claimed that Abraham had obeyed the law of Moses by anticipation, and that God’s promise was his reward. Consequently the descendants of Isaac were children of promise only if they followed Abraham’s example in obeying the law. Paul turned it the other way about: the promise must be taken on faith, not as credit for obedience.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 542)  

“In Gen 21:10 Sarah, seeing Ishmael ‘playing’ with Isaac and viewing him as the potential rival to Isaac’s inheritance, drives him and his mother out. Nothing in Gen is said of Ishmael’s ‘persecution’ of Isaac, but Paul may be interpreting the ‘playing’ as did a Palestinian haggadic explanation of Gen 21:9 (see Josephus, ANT. [Antiquities] 1.12.3§215 …” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)  
“A rabbinical tradition of the second century A.S. interprets the Hebrew participle מצחק [MeeTsHahQ, “play”] (LXX [Septuagient, the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible] παιζοντα [paizonta] in Gen. 21:9 to mean that Ishmael’s ‘playing’ became so rough that Isaac’s life was in danger. This son of a slave is said to have shot arrows at Isaac to kill him, and Paul’s statement shows that some such tradition was current in his day. He applied it to the Judaizers who were trying to force the Christians to observe the whole law of Moses, and to the unbelieving Jews who were excommunicating the Christians and their families and getting them into trouble with the civil authorities (1:5; 4:17; 5:10; I Thess. [Thessalonians] 2:14-16).” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 543)  

“The quotation is from Gen. 21:10 … The speaker of these words is Sarah, who is filled with rage against Hagar and Ishmael. Abraham is represented as greatly grieved, but God is said to have sanctioned the demand of the cruel and jealous wife….  
This story was one of the effects and one of the causes of the perpetual feud between the Israelites and the tribes that descended from Ishmael. The Hebrews were so sure that God wanted them to have Palestine that they found no moral difficulty in saying that it was God himself who had overruled Abraham’s conscience (Gen. 17:18-21). They affirmed that Ishmael’s character and destiny had been predetermined (Gen. 16:12). Consequently, even his circumcision at the age of thirteen could not make him a member of God’s chosen people. However great this innocent victim of a family feud might become by virtue of the halfhearted blessing conceded by an uneasy conscience (Gen. 17:20-21), he and his descendants were barred forever from the higher blessing. Theirs was to submit to the religious imperialism of the most favored nation or die. Moreover, all Abraham’s other sons except Isaac were barred from the promise and sent away ‘unto the east country’ (Gen. 25:5-6). And yet while all this was said to be the Lord’s doing, it was in the same breath declared to be the doing of the human actors in this drama of the nations. Sarah herself was said to have suggested that Abraham become a father by her Egyptian slave girl. Then, too, it was explained that Hagar’s flight from the cruelty of her mistress was voluntary, making her, rather than the callous compliance of Abraham, responsible for her plight ‘in the wilderness, by the fountain in the way to Shur’ (Gen. 16:7).  
Paul’s use of Abraham’s expulsion of Hagar and her child has its parallel in the equally heartless treatment of Esau which he employs in Rom. 9-11 in his longer discussion of the divine process of selection. Here too it was assumed that the hatred generated by centuries of war for the possession of Palestine lay in the heart of God. “I hate Esau,” said Malachi (1:3), making God the speaker; and Rom. 9:6-13 presses it to the utmost limit of predestination. But the love of God in Christ Jesus made Paul’s heart better than his inherited doctrine … When the history of the struggle for the possession of “the Holy land” is allegorized to justify a doctrine of “election” which foredooms countless souls to an eternity of torment in a future hell, it becomes as morally atrocious as it is irreconcilable with Paul’s gospel.  
Nevertheless Paul’s allegory gives the historian an insight into Paul’s mind as he wrestled with the insoluble problem of God’s sovereignty and human freedom.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 543-544)  
“Paul bids the Galatians rid themselves of the Judaizers – and, ironically enough, obey the Torah itself.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)   An Amateur's Journey Through the Bible