Why is the power of sin the law?

[daydreamer40]

The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 1Cor15:56

 

[HTacianas]

The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 1Cor15:56

It's way of saying that the law defines sin, much the same as Romans 5:

Rom 5:12
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Rom 5:13
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

Rom 5:14
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

If there was no law, there would be no sin. If there were no sin, sin would have no power.

 

[singpeace]

The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 1Cor15:56

Consider Romans 7:7-9 NLT
Well then, am I suggesting that the law of God is sinful? Of course not! In fact, it was the law that showed me my sin. I would never have known that coveting is wrong if the law had not said, “You must not covet.” 8But sin used this command to arouse all kinds of covetous desires within me! If there were no law, sin would not have that power.

 

[Serving Zion]

The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 1Cor15:56

The Torah (the law of God's righteous judgement) is for the judgement of sin. Torah is not given for those who are righteous according to it, but for those who are guilty by it (1 Timothy 1:8-10). See, Torah does not have any effect without sin (Romans 6:23a).

Therefore Torah is the very power that sin has. In the absence of Torah, sin would have no power to condemn a person.

 

[daydreamer40]

It's way of saying that the law defines sin, much the same as Romans 5:

Rom 5:12
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Rom 5:13
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

Rom 5:14
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

If there was no law, there would be no sin. If there were no sin, sin would have no power.

I agree with this, but Paul states when the law was given sin increased(Rom5:20) So I wonder if it does not go further than sin having its power because law exists. According to Paul the given law resulted in an increase of sin . As singpeace mentioned, when Paul(or Saul) followed the law, all manner of covetous desires were aroused in him, the sin increased

 

[Eloy Craft]

People have always been moral. Before the law there was no definitive expression of Law that a whole people would uphold as authoritative. Before the Law then people could debate, question and deny this or that as sin or the weight of sin. In this state of things the power of sin is weak. No one is certain about what sin is worse than another or if this is a sin or that. With the Law came a definitive expression of sinful acts and it was expressed with authority. No more hem hawing around sin anymore. Trespasses increased for that reason and that many acts were no longer misunderstood maybe's about being sin. Then there is the gotta do it now that I know it's a sin syndrome. Some act not even on radar all of a sudden is intriguing because it is understood to be sin. What do we think? There must be something about it unknown therefore it must be explored. Maybe it wasn't tempting before but now it is because it wasn't known that it was a sin.

 

[Dave G.]

Sin had no meaning without the law, you could do something and not know it was sin. So ya sin increased because now the law defined that something as sin. I doubt people were doing anything different than before the law, just what they were doing was now defined as sin, if it was indeed sin ( peeling a ginger root probably was not sin before or after the law, prepping a big meal on the sabbath probably was sin after the law but not known as sin before ).

 

[expos4ever]

I agree with this, but Paul states when the law was given sin increased(Rom5:20) So I wonder if it does not go further than sin having its power because law exists. According to Paul the given law resulted in an increase of sin . As singpeace mentioned, when Paul(or Saul) followed the law, all manner of covetous desires were aroused in him, the sin increased

I think you are on to something. Taking the texts as they are actually written forces the startling conclusion that the Law actually empowers sin - gives it strength and more power over us.

That the law has this dark purpose seems counterintuitive- why would God give the Law if it effectively makes things worse for the Jew?

Paul has an answer to this: sin needs to grow to full flower of expression in Israel before it (sin) can then be focused on the one fauthful Israelite - Jesus - and dealt with at the cross.

 

[dqhall]

The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 1Cor15:56

There is a 'law of Moses' requiring the execution of one who works on the seventh day (Exodus 31:15).
One of the ten commandments is, "Thou shall not kill." To obey one law, one must disobey the other law. When the punishment is worse than the crime, is there sin?

There was a law requiring Jewish males to attend three festivals in Jerusalem. For those living further from Jerusalem, it was a major expense to attend the seven day festivals and a sin not to attend (Deuteronomy 16). Is it a sin to not be able to feed your children in order to attend religious festivals and pay religious dues?

There were laws in the books of Moses about ritual uncleanness that are a sin when compared to modern sanitary knowledge and practice. They were a sin back then; for not knowing what is right is a sin.

 

[Eloy Craft]

that the Law actually empowers sin - gives it strength and more power over us.

Not that it gives any power to sin but exposes the power sin has over human life. The Law reveals that power because man was unaware of it. Becoming aware of it and coming to know it is humanly impossible to overcome leads to the realization man needs a Savior.

 

[expos4ever]

Not that it gives any power to sin but exposes the power sin has over human life. The Law reveals that power because man was unaware of it. Becoming aware of it and coming to know it is humanly impossible to overcome leads to the realization man needs a Savior.

Like my statement, this is just a claim - you have not shown that the only role of the Law is to expose sin. I am claiming, but have yet to make my case, that while the Law does what you believe, it actually energizes and amplifies our innate tendency to sin.

I hope to present arguments in the coming days.

 

[daydreamer40]

that while the Law does what you believe, it actually energizes and amplifies our innate tendency to sin.

.

I think Paul would have agreed:
But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of coveting. Rom7:8

 

[expos4ever]

Does the Law merely reveal sin to the Jew, or does it do more than that? Consider this from Romans 7:

For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

What is Paul actually saying as contrasted with what our tradition wants him to say? He tells us that sinful passions were aroused by the Law - not revealed, but aroused.

One thing we need to watch for in exegesis is when people start to bend the meanings of words beyond all reason to make a text say something they want it to say. Yes, the semantic boundaries of words are somewhat elastic; however, it is too much of a stretch to try to make this text say that the Law simply reveals sin. It certainly does reveal sin - but that is clearly not what Paul is saying here.

 

[expos4ever]

Following on from my previous post, here is the next chunk from Romans 7:

7 What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about [f]coveting if the Law had not said, “You shall not covet.” 8 But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. 9 I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died.

First, I will, of course, concede that Paul begins by saying what most Christians will agree to - the Law reveals sin. I would not deny this. But this is not all that Paul is saying here. First, he characterizes sin as something that takes advantage of an opportunity to achieve a result. This does not sit well with the notion that sin is simply "the evil that the law reveals". No; as elsewhere in Paul, the term "sin" is used here to refer to a power, an agency, that attacks the human person. And, as we have seen from the previous post, that power is energized by the Law.

Paul then says that sin "became alive". I suppose if you really wanted to stretched things one could treat this as a metaphor for revealing sin - sin "became alive" in the sense that I was made aware of my sin. But, in context, and as we will see from what Paul goes on to say, the most likely intended meaning is that Paul is telling us that when the Law was delivered, this awakened an ominous power dwelling within him.

Again: the law does not only reveal sin, it has this dark effect of energizing dark forces within us. To suggest otherwise is, frankly, to not take Paul seriously - to not respect his actual word choice and to flatten out what he is actually saying into the simple view that the Law reveals sin.

 

[daydreamer40]

Following on from my previous post, here is the next chunk from Romans 7:

7 What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about [f]coveting if the Law had not said, “You shall not covet.” 8 But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. 9 I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died.

First, I will, of course, concede that Paul begins by saying what most Christians will agree to - the Law reveals sin. I would not deny this. But this is not all that Paul is saying here. First, he characterizes sin as something that takes advantage of an opportunity to achieve a result. This does not sit well with the notion that sin is simply "the evil that the law reveals". No; as elsewhere in Paul, the term "sin" is used here to refer to a power, an agency, that attacks the human person. And, as we have seen from the previous post, that power is energized by the Law.

Paul then says that sin "became alive". I suppose if you really wanted to stretched things one could treat this as a metaphor for revealing sin - sin "became alive" in the sense that I was made aware of my sin. But, in context, and as we will see from what Paul goes on to say, the most likely intended meaning is that Paul is telling us that when the Law was delivered, this awakened an ominous power dwelling within him.

Again: the law does not only reveal sin, it has this dark effect of energizing dark forces within us. To suggest otherwise is, frankly, to not take Paul seriously - to not respect his actual word choice and to flatten out what he is actually saying into the simple view that the Law reveals sin.

I like what you have written, and fully agree with it. We could ask, what is it about human nature that brings sinfull passions to multiply when one becomes aware of the law? And what is it about the law that produces this? Man has a natural tendancy to rebel doesn't he? And you hear the expression: The forbidden fruit often tastes the best. I read an interesting article on this subject, and will post it here:

You see, it is the penalty of sin that makes you so fearful of sin, and your fear of sin produces great allurement in you to sin. If I said to you, “If you think of a pink rabbit, God will condemn you to hell,” what is the first thing you will think of if you believe me? You would try desperately never to think of such a creature, wouldn’t you? You would become agitated at the thought of a pink rabbit. You would be, animated, overwrought, disturbed, nervous, and panic stricken at the thought of the creature. You would end up in a frenzied state concerning it, I imagine. Now the more these emotions overcome you concerning the creature, the more the thought of the creature will overwhelm you; it will become irresistible. You see, however, as you know there is no penalty of condemnation in place if you think of a pink rabbit, you will not get worked up about it, will you? Paul states Romans 7:5-6:


For when we were in the realm of the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code. (NIV)



Paul tells us the law arouses sinful passions in us when we live under it. For he goes on to say we die to the law − we have been released from the law (of righteousness) as Christians and serve in the new way of the Spirit, not the old way of the written code (the law). Why does he say the law arouses sinful passions for those living under it?

Well, you see, the same emotions that would overcome you at the thought of a pink rabbit, if you believed such thoughts could condemn you, would also overcome you where sin is concerned if you live under the law. The penalty for sin is in place if you live under the law, isn’t it? Your sin, therefore can condemn you to hell. You would be extremely agitated at the thought of sin. You would be animated, overwrought, disturbed, nervous, and panic stricken at the thought of sin. Now the more these emotions concerning sin overcome you, the more sin will overwhelm you, and the more your ability to resist sin will weaken. Why is this? Because those emotions bring you to an excited state, friend. They are all bar panic-stricken definitions of the word excite. And the definition of panic-stricken is “frenzy,” and the definition of frenzy is “wild excitement.” The emotions that result from your fear of the penalty for sin bring you to a very excited (or aroused) state where sin is concerned. If you live under the law, therefore, your fear of breaking it (sin) results in sinful passions being aroused in you. That is why Paul tells us the law arouses sinful passions in us if we live under it.

 

[Soyeong]

The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 1Cor15:56

In Romans 7:12-25, Paul said that God's Law is holy, righteous, and good, that it is the good that he he wanted to do, that it is the god he delighted in obeying, and the good that he served it with his mind, but contrasted that with a law of sin, which held him captive, which caused him not to do the good that he wanted to do, and which he served with his flesh. In Romans 7:7, Paul said that God's Law is not sinful, but that it was given to reveal what sin is, and when our sin is revealed that should lead us to repent and cause sin to decrease. However, Paul also spoke about a law of sin that stirred us sinful passions to bear fruit unto death, which is sinful and causes sin to increase. There is nothing about God's Law that is the power of sin, but just the opposite, so neither 1 Corinthians 15:56, Romans 5:20, nor Romans 6:14 fit with Paul's description of God's holy, righteous, and good Law, but rather they they perfectly fit with Paul's description of the law of sin.

 

[daydreamer40]

In Romans 7:12-25, Paul said that God's Law is holy, righteous, and good, that it is the good that he he wanted to do, that it is the god he delighted in obeying, and the good that he served it with his mind, but contrasted that with a law of sin, which held him captive, which caused him not to do the good that he wanted to do, and which he served with his flesh. In Romans 7:7, Paul said that God's Law is not sinful, but that it was given to reveal what sin is, and when our sin is revealed that should lead us to repent and cause sin to decrease. However, Paul also spoke about a law of sin that stirred us sinful passions to bear fruit unto death, which is sinful and causes sin to increase. There is nothing about God's Law that is the power of sin, but just the opposite, so neither 1 Corinthians 15:56, Romans 5:20, nor Romans 6:14 fit with Paul's description of God's holy, righteous, and good Law, but rather they they perfectly fit with Paul's description of the law of sin.

For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death Rom7:5
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. verse7&8
For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me verse11

Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good verse12

Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. verse13

 

[Soyeong]

For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death Rom7:5
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. verse7&8
For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me verse11

Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good vedrse12

Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. verse13

Throughout those verses Paul was contrasting God's Law with the law of sin. It wouldn't make any sense to interpret 7:5 and 7:22 as both referring to God's Law as though Paul was saying that he delighted in stirring up sin. In 7:23, Paul said that the law of sin held him captive, and 7:6 describes us as being released from a law that held us captive, and again it wouldn't make sense for Paul to speak about being released from the Law of God that he delighted in obeying. So verses 7:5-6 are speaking about a law that is sinful that causes sin to increase, but he contrasted that in 7:7 by speaking about the Law of God, which is not sinful, but was given to reveal what sin is and to cause sin to decrease. In 7:12-13, Paul said that God's Law is good and that he did not blame what was good for bringing death to him, so neither should you. In 7:13-20, Paul spoke about how he wanted to do good, but that there was a law of sin that was working within him to cause him not to do the good that he wanted to do, so in 7:8 apart from the law of sin, sin lies dead.

 

[daydreamer40]

Throughout those verses Paul was contrasting God's Law with the law of sin. It would make any sense to interpret 7:5 and 7:22 as both referring to God's Law as though Paul saying that he delighted in stirring up sin. In 7:23, Paul said that the law of sin held him captive, and 7:6 describes us as being released from a law that held us captive, and again wouldn't make sense for Paul to speak about being released from the Law of God that he delighted in obeying. So verses 7:5-6 are speaking about a law that is sinful that causes sin to increase, but he contrasted that in 7:7 by speaking about the Law of God, which is not sinful, but was given to reveal what sin is. In 7:12-13, Paul said that God's Law is good and that he did not blame what was good for bringing death to him, so neither should you. In 7:13-20, Paul spoke about how he wanted to do good, but that there was a law of sin that was working within him to cause him not to do the good that he wanted to do, so in 7:8 apart from the law of sin, sin lies dead.

I'm only repeating what Paul wrote. Sin took occasion of the commandment: Thou shalt not covet to arouse all manner of concupiscence in him. It is very plainly written. So is verse 13:
Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. verse13

 

[Soyeong]

I'm only repeating what Paul wrote. Sin took occasion of the commandment: Thou shalt not covet to arouse all manner of concupiscence in him. It is very plainly written. So is verse 13:
Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. verse13

I didn't disagree with what Paul wrote, but rather I spoke in regard to how what he wrote should be interpreted. Paul said in 7:12-13 that God's Law is good and that he didn't blame what was good, yet that is precisely what you are trying to use his words to blame.