IF THE LAW OF MOSES WAS SET ASIDE , WHY ROM 13:9?

[LoveGodsWord]

Did people sin before the Law of Moses was given?

See the post above yours in post #339 linked. Its written to you seeking a response from you. It was not written to you to be ignored like all my other posts and scriptures that are shared with you in love to a help to you that are in disagreement with you that you are unwilling to discuss with me. I am still waiting for you to respond to my posts and answer my questions before proceeding any further in a discussion with you. It seems you have a bit of catching up to do.

 

[Mark Quayle]

As well as word, speech and matter.

Actually it is the message of the gospel regarding the work on the cross that are the Power of God and the Wisdom of God, accomplished in Jesus, making him the Power of God and the Wisdom of God in action.
(1 Corinthians 1:18-19).

Jesus based final judgment on the acceptance or rejection of his words (John 12:48),
for he spoke only the Father's words, (John 12:49),
thereby making him the Incarnate Word of God (John 1:1, John 1:14),
as well as the Power and Wisdom of God.

Agreed. Well explained. Otherwise some may think it reasonable that The Son of God is only the best angel, or some other mere creature.

 

[Clare73]

Let me ask you this question: Did people sin before the Law of Moses was given?

A simple yes or no is requested.

Romans 5:14 says they did not, that they died because of the imputed sin of Adam (Romans 5:18-19).
Sin was in the world (guilt of Adam's sin).
All died, so all were guilty of sin, even though they did not transgress any law (Romans 5:14).
They were guilty of the imputed sin of Adam (Romans 5:18), remedied by the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ by faith (Romans 1:17, Romans 3:21), as righteousness was imputed to Abraham by faith (Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:2-3).

 

[expos4ever]

It seems you have a bit of catching up to do.

You smother us with long meandering posts that you repeat over and over again. Asking me to address them will take a long time.

My question requires 2 or 3 key strokes, either Y-E-S or N-O.

Again: Did people sin before the Law of Moses was given?

 

[expos4ever]

Romans 5:14 says they did not, that they died because of the imputed sin of Adam (Romans 5:18-19).

I am aware of this tricky bit from Romans 5. Note this:

until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not counted against anyone when there is no law

I am not knowledgeable enough to discuss the distinction drawn here. But don't you think that Paul is certainly saying that sin "existed" in the world before the Law and this is enough to torpedo the argument that "sin is lawlessness" only has meaning in relation to the 10?

And even if this is not so, even if people did not sin before the Law came, I could equally well challenge LGW with this question:

Are non-Jews subject to the Law of Moses?

You may disagree with me, but I think the answer is obviously no. But if non-Jews are not subject to the Law of Moses, then how can lawlessness be in specific relation to the Law of Moses as this would mean that Gentiles are not sinners. See what I mean?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

See the post above yours in post #339 linked. It written to you seeking a response. I am still waiting for you to respond to my posts and answer to my questions before proceeding any further in a discussion with you. It seems you have a bit of catching up to do.

Your response here...

You smother us with long meandering posts that you repeat over and over again. Asking me to address them will take a long time.My question requires 2 or 3 key strokes, either Y-E-S or N-O. Again: Did people sin before the Law of Moses was given?

Again your post is non-responsive to the post you are quoting from. Sorry I am not playing your games anymore if your going to continue ignoring my posts that disagree with your teachings of lawlessness (without law) and ignore my questions being asked of you while you continue to ignore my posts and questions asked of you. A discussion goes two ways and your posts only show me you are not here for one. The posts and scriptures already shared with you are God's Word that disagree with your words that are not Gods. My hope is that you will receive Gods correction through the scriptures shared with you and be blessed. According to Jesus ignoring God's Word does not make it disappear. It will become our judge come judgement day for all the Words of God we accept or reject *see John 12:47-48.

Take Care.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Romans 5:14 says they did not, that they died because of the imputed sin of Adam (Romans 5:18-19).
Sin was in the world (guilt of Adam's sin).
All died, so all were guilty of sin, even though they did not transgress any law (Romans 5:14).
They were guilty of the imputed sin of Adam (Romans 5:18), remedied by the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ by faith (Romans 1:17, Romans 3:21), as righteousness was imputed to Abraham by faith (Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:2-3).

Yet they had conscience. Was there no sin against that, and no disobedience to God's spoken individual or corporate commands, awful perversions and even worship of other supposed deities? Or are you saying that isn't sin?

 

[Leaf473]

It's not just the KJV, they all do.

New International Version
Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness.

New Living Translation
Everyone who sins is breaking God’s law, for all sin is contrary to the law of God.

English Standard Version
Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.

Berean Study Bible
Everyone who practices sin practices lawlessness as well. Indeed, sin is lawlessness.

Berean Literal Bible
Everyone committing sin also commits lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

King James Bible
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

New King James Version
Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.

New American Standard Bible
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

NASB 1995
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

NASB 1977
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

Amplified Bible
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness [ignoring God’s law by action or neglect or by tolerating wrongdoing—being unrestrained by His commands and His will].

Christian Standard Bible
Everyone who commits sin practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
Everyone who commits sin also breaks the law; sin is the breaking of law.

American Standard Version
Every one that doeth sin doeth also lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
But whoever commits sin commits evil, for sin is entirely evil.

Contemporary English Version
Everyone who sins breaks God's law, because sin is the same as breaking God's law.

Douay-Rheims Bible
Whosoever committeth sin commmitteth also iniquity; and sin is iniquity.

Good News Translation
Whoever sins is guilty of breaking God's law, because sin is a breaking of the law.

International Standard Version
Everyone who keeps living in sin also practices disobedience. In fact, sin is disobedience.

Literal Standard Version
Everyone who is doing sin, he also does lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness,

New American Bible
Everyone who commits sin commits lawlessness, for sin is lawlessness.

NET Bible
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; indeed, sin is lawlessness.

New Revised Standard Version
Everyone who commits sin is guilty of lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.

New Heart English Bible
Everyone who sins also commits lawlessness. Sin is lawlessness.

Weymouth New Testament
Every one who is guilty of sin is also guilty of violating Law; for sin is the violation of Law.

World English Bible
Everyone who sins also commits lawlessness. Sin is lawlessness.

Young's Literal Translation
Every one who is doing the sin, the lawlessness also he doth do, and the sin is the lawlessness,


lawlessness
ἀνομίαν (anomian)
Noun - Accusative Feminine Singular
Strong's 458: Lawlessness, iniquity, disobedience, sin. From anomos; illegality, i.e. Violation of law or wickedness.

Thank you for that, and since we were talking about the Greek text, I'd like to add one more:
Πᾶς ὁ ποιῶν τὴν ἁμαρτίαν καὶ τὴν ἀνομίαν ποιεῖ, καὶ ἡ ἁμαρτία ἐστὶν ἡ ἀνομία.

1 John 3:4 Interlinear: Every one who is doing the sin, the lawlessness also he doth do, and the sin is the lawlessness,

Hello again SabbathBlessings,

I see that you edited your post after I responded to it so I will make an additional response.

The idea I was putting forward was that the word "law" (meaning it's Greek equivalent) does not occur in that section. The King James makes it sound like it does. The King James is not the only Bible that does this, you are correct! But the King James is by far the most influential.

It is not true that all translations use "law" there. If we go through the examples in your post, I believe the first example we come to where "law" is not used is the English standard version.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Hello again SabbathBlessings,

I see that you edited your post after I responded to it so I will make an additional response.

The idea I was putting forward was that the word "law" (meaning it's Greek equivalent) does not occur in that section. The King James makes it sound like it does. The King James is not the only Bible that does this, you are correct! But the King James is by far the most influential.

It is not true that all translations use "law" there. If we go through the examples in your post, I believe the first example we come to where "law" is not used is the English standard version.

From 1 John 3:4

lawlessness
ἀνομίαν (anomian)
Noun - Accusative Feminine Singular
Strong's 458: Lawlessness, iniquity, disobedience, sin. From anomos; illegality, i.e. Violation of law or wickedness.


Lawlessness (without law) equals sin. The law is what points out our sins. Romans 3:20, Romans 7:7

 

[expos4ever]

Lawlessness (without law) equals sin. The law is what points out our sins. Romans 3:20, Romans 7:7

Let's look at Romans 3:20 in context. Early in the chapter, Paul writes this:

Then what advantage does the Jew have? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2 Great in every respect. First, that they were entrusted with the actual words of God.

I think we will all agree that this is a reference to the giving of the Law (including the 10). More importantly, it is a hint of what is to come - the entire chapter is, among other things, retelling the history of Israel up to and including Jesus.

Now for the key stuff:

because by the works of the Law none of mankind will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes knowledge of sin. 21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 but it is the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ

No writer with his head screwed on would use "but now" wording if they are not telling us something has changed.

Those who believe the 10 continue to serve in this role of informing us of sin, of course, will not talk about the "but now" wording - the evidence is here in these threads (they refuse to directly address this issue and instead dance creatively).

Instead, I suggest, they plop down a reference to 3:20 and hope you will not investigate......

 

[Leaf473]

From 1 John 3:4

lawlessness
ἀνομίαν (anomian)
Noun - Accusative Feminine Singular
Strong's 458: Lawlessness, iniquity, disobedience, sin. From anomos; illegality, i.e. Violation of law or wickedness.


Lawlessness (without law) equals sin. The law is what points out our sins. Romans 3:20, Romans 7:7

Does the entire law point out our sin, or just the ten commandments? Or some other group of laws?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Does the entire law point out our sin, or just the ten commandments? Or some other group of laws?

This has been answered previously. . .

IF THE LAW OF MOSES WAS SET ASIDE , WHY ROM 13:9?

 

[Leaf473]

This has been answered previously. . .

IF THE LAW OF MOSES WAS SET ASIDE , WHY ROM 13:9?

Thanks!

The law we will be judged on is the Ten Commandments.

That sounds like just the ten commandments. Unless, that was intended to be understood as part of the law that we will be judged on is the ten commandments.

 

[expos4ever]

I want to talk about the dangers of not including context. In post 350 I made the case that context changes how we read Romans 3:20. Or at least it should change how we read it.

Look at this from Romans 2:

13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the Law who will be justified.

This sure sounds like it supports the idea that the Law of Moses (which is clearly what Paul is referring to here) will be standard by which we are judged.

But look at verse 14:

14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law instinctively perform the requirements of the Law, these, though not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience testifying and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,

Paul knows the Gentiles are not even subject to the Law - a fact that often gets swept under the rug in these debates.

More to the point, Paul's analysis is that the (justified) Gentile fulfills the law in an instinctive "written on the heart" sense. But, as should be clear despite vigorous denials, to say the Law is "written on the heart" cannot simply mean that we still "consult the list", or that we have simply copy-pasted the 10 into our brains.

 

[Clare73]

Let me ask you this question: Did people sin before the Law of Moses was given?

A simple yes or no is requested.

Don't cha' just love the way the basis of an argument is irrelevant to the discussion?

 

[Clare73]

The only conceivable motivation for not answering a clear, meaningful question is that you know you cannot answer it without undermining your entire position on what "lawlessness" means.

Seems a non-Biblical use of "lawlessness" is the problem.

 

[Clare73]

Yet they had conscience. Was there no sin against that, and no disobedience to God's spoken individual or corporate commands, awful perversions and even worship of other supposed deities? Or are you saying that isn't sin?

There are two issues in your question; i.e., Romans 2:14-16 and Romans 5:12-14:
1) the bases/principles of judgment for all men at the Final Judgment (Romans 2:16), where conscience is one of the principles of judgment (Romans 2:14-15); and
2) the basis of death for all those between Adam and Moses only, when there was no law to sin against
(Romans 5:12-14), while it is the law that carries the curse of death for disobedience (Galatians 3:10).

The issue here is the second in Romans 5:12-14:
Sin is carefully defined in Romans 5:14 as transgression of specific commands of God, as the law of the Garden and the law of Moses only, the governing principle being "where there is no (specific) law/command (from God), there is no sin" against the Law and, therefore, no death for sin.

Yet all died between Adam and Moses when there was no specific law (command) of God in force.
Of what sin were they guilty?
Their deaths prove they were held guilty of Adam's sin, the only sin against the law that was in the world at that time.

How were they guilty? . . .by the law of imputation--of (both) sin and righteousness (Romans 5:18-19).
Adam's guilt is imputed by unbelief to all those born of Adam (Romans 5:18), and
Christ's righteousness is imputed by faith to all those born of Christ (Romans 1:17, Romans 3:21-22),
just as Abraham's righteous was also imputed by faith to him (Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:2-3).

 

[Clare73]

I want to talk about the dangers of not including context. In post 350 I made the case that context changes how we read Romans 3:20. Or at least it should change how we read it.

Look at this from Romans 2:

13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are righteous before God, but
the doers of the Law who will be justified.

Emphasis on "doers."

Keeping in mind that in the context here, Paul is demonstrating that no one will be justified by the law because no one keeps it to God's standard, therefore, the law condemns all and justifies none. (Romans 3:10)

This sure sounds like it supports the idea that the Law of Moses (which is clearly what Paul is referring to here) will be standard by which we are judged.

And all condemned, apart from faith in and trust on the person and atoning work (blood, Romans 3:25) of Jesus Christ for the remission of one's sin and right standing with God's justice; i.e., "not guilty," declared righteous with the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ (Romans 1:17, Romans 3:21-22).

But look at verse 14:

14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law instinctively perform the requirements of the Law, these, though not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience testifying and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,

Paul knows the Gentiles are not even subject to the Law - a fact that often gets swept under the rug in these debates.

More to the point, Paul's analysis is that the (justified) Gentile fulfills the law in an instinctive "written on the heart" sense. But, as should be clear despite vigorous denials, to say the Law is "written on the heart" cannot simply mean that we still "consult the list", or that we have simply copy-pasted the 10 into our brains.

 

[Clare73]

Yet they had conscience. Was there no sin against that, and no disobedience to God's spoken individual or corporate commands, awful perversions and even worship of other supposed deities? Or are you saying that isn't sin?

There are two issues in your question; i.e., Romans 2:14-16 and Romans 5:12-14:
1) the bases/principles of judgment for all men at the Final Judgment (Romans 2:16), where conscience is one of the principles of judgment (Romans 2:14-15); and
2) the basis of death for all those between Adam and Moses only, when there was no law to sin against
(Romans 5:12-14), while it is the law that carries the curse of death for disobedience (Galatians 3:10).

The issue here is the second in Romans 5:12-14:
Sin is carefully defined in Romans 5:14 as transgression of specific commands of God, as the law of the Garden and the law of Moses only, the governing principle being "where there is no (specific) law/command (from God), there is no sin" against the Law and, therefore, no death for sin.

Yet all died between Adam and Moses when there was no specific law (command) of God in force.
Of what sin were they guilty?
Their deaths prove they were held guilty of Adam's sin, the only sin against the law that was in the world at that time.

How were they guilty? . . .by the law of imputation--of (both) sin and righteousness (Romans 5:18-19).
Adam's guilt is imputed by unbelief to all those born of Adam (Romans 5:18), and
Christ's righteousness is imputed by faith to all those born of Christ (Romans 1:17, Romans 3:21-22),
just as Abraham's righteous was also imputed by faith to him (Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:2-3).

In the above, I neglected to specifically point out Romans 5:13: "for before the law was given,
sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law."

The only sin that had been taken into account until Moses was the sin of Adam, the guilt of which is imputed to all those born of Adam (Romans 5:18), just as the righteousness of Jesus Christ is imputed by faith to all those born of Jesus Christ (Romans 1:17, Romans 3:21-22), as it was imputed by faith to Abraham (Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:2-3).

 

[Mark Quayle]

There are two issues in your question; i.e., Romans 2:14-16 and Romans 5:12-14:
1) the bases/principles of judgment for all men at the Final Judgment (Romans 2:16), where conscience is one of the principles of judgment (Romans 2:14-15); and
2) the basis of death for all those between Adam and Moses only, when there was no law to sin against
(Romans 5:12-14), while it is the law that carries the curse of death for disobedience (Galatians 3:10).

The issue here is the second in Romans 5:12-14:
Sin is carefully defined in Romans 5:14 as transgression of specific commands of God, as the law of the Garden and the law of Moses only, the governing principle being "where there is no (specific) law/command (from God), there is no sin" against the Law and, therefore, no death for sin.

Yet all died between Adam and Moses when there was no specific law (command) of God in force.
Of what sin were they guilty?
Their deaths prove they were held guilty of Adam's sin, the only sin against the law that was in the world at that time.

How were they guilty? . . .by the law of imputation--of (both) sin and righteousness (Romans 5:18-19).
Adam's guilt is imputed by unbelief to all those born of Adam (Romans 5:18), and
Christ's righteousness is imputed by faith to all those born of Christ (Romans 1:17, Romans 3:21-22),
just as Abraham's righteous was also imputed by faith to him (Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:2-3).

I'll have to think about this some more. I feel almost like it is a difference of nomenclature, not of the nature of those between Adam and Moses, compared with that of those after Moses. I must be missing something you are saying.

A raw reading of what you are saying might imply that all those drowned in the flood were only guilty (by imputation) of Adam's sin and did nothing else wrong. I can hardly think you mean quite that. In my book, they did everything wrong, just as do all the lost, by being, according to their unregenerated wills, at enmity with God.