Imputation of sin

[Joe67]

Was sin imputed to Abraham? Where there is no law sin is not imputed. The law came 400+ years after God promised the inheritance to Abram. Yet sin was in the world by Adam. What does it mean that something is but it is not imputed?

I hope your replies will be concise so that readers may be able to chew on the simplicity of Christ.
Joe

 

[mondar]

Was sin imputed to Abraham? Where there is no law sin is not imputed. The law came 400+ years after God promised the inheritance to Abram. Yet sin was in the world by Adam. What does it mean that something is but it is not imputed?

I hope your replies will be concise so that readers may be able to chew on the simplicity of Christ.
Joe

Sin, as a violation of law, could not be imputed to Abraham because there was no law during the time of Abraham. Nevertheless, the eventual death of Abraham demonstrated that he was a sinner. Abraham sinned in Adam and committed other non-law individual sins.

 

[Eccl12and13]

Was sin imputed to Abraham? Where there is no law sin is not imputed. The law came 400+ years after God promised the inheritance to Abram. Yet sin was in the world by Adam. What does it mean that something is but it is not imputed?

I hope your replies will be concise so that readers may be able to chew on the simplicity of Christ.
Joe

Sin, as a violation of law, could not be imputed to Abraham because there was no law during the time of Abraham. Nevertheless, the eventual death of Abraham demonstrated that he was a sinner. Abraham sinned in Adam and committed other non-law individual sins.

How can anyone say there was no law BEFORE Abraham? The ONLY definition of sin found in the whole bible is:

1John 3
[4] Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

So if Adam SINNED, that means Adam broke a commandment of God. Now let's find the commandment and the breaking of it:

Gen.2
[16] And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
[17] But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Now let's find when the commandment was broken:

Gen. 3
[17] And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it:

To put it simply:

God said, thou shalt not! Adam did the thing God said NOT to do. Adam disobeyed God, thus Adam sinned and here we are today in the mess that we are in beacuse of that very first sin.

 

[Eccl12and13]

Was sin imputed to Abraham? Where there is no law sin is not imputed. The law came 400+ years after God promised the inheritance to Abram. Yet sin was in the world by Adam. What does it mean that something is but it is not imputed?

I hope your replies will be concise so that readers may be able to chew on the simplicity of Christ.
Joe

Although most on this forum will disagree with me, the answers that I give, unlike most will at least make sense.

You are correct, sin was in the world because of Adam.

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:
[19] For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,

Now let's find the commandment to Adam, and the disobedience of Adam.

Gen.2
[16] And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
[17] But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Now let's find when the commandment was broken:

Gen. 3
[17] And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it:

So we have a ''Law' and the breaking of That "Law". So just how long have God's Laws really been in exsitence? Way before Moses! The Law's that God gave to the nation of Isreal were 400+ years after the promise was made, but to say that there WERE NO LAWS BEFORE MOSES, does not make any sense. If that were the case, why did God punish Cain for the murder of Able? Why did God have Noah build the ark? Why did God destroy Sodom, and Gomorrah? All of this was because of the SINS of man. And sin is the breaking of the law.

Now to get to your question:

What does it mean that something is but it is not imputed?
I think you are referring to the following scripture:

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

Well to answer it is simple, and it is from the scriptures. So here it is:

Gal.3
[19] Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

God added a Law to the ones already in place because man continued to break those laws that were already in place. But that law was only to be until Christ came to do away with them.

Heb.10
[1] For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

Now that law, the law that was added, was only a shadow of the real law. The Law that was a shadow was Gods sacrificial law. Because only the shedding of blood could remove sin. But as the verse above states, the law that was a shadow could not make the people perfect. Why?

[4] For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Because the blood of bulls and goats could not remove sin. It was still the Law, but it was not meant to be.

[6] In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.

God never desired to kill animals. But He allowed it bacuse of ANOTHER LAW!

Rom.5
[12] ....and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

If God did not allow us to give the blood of animals as an offering, the only other blood He would accept was our own. God did not want to destroy ALL of man so He allowed the blood of bulls and goats. But only until Christ came.

Heb.10
[9] Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
[10] By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

So now we see, the Law that was added, the sacrificial law, was being replaced with the second Law. So we have a changing of the law.

Heb.7
[12] For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

The law that was changed was the Priesthood Law. Because God said the Priest could only come from the tribe of Levi. But the Lord, our High Priest was not from the tribe of Levi, He was of the tribe of Juda. So the law had to be changed.

[24] But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
[25] Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.
[26] For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;
[27] Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

So now we have a High Priest that does NOT have to 'daily offer up sacrifices'. For when Christ died, His blood that was shed for the forgiveness of sins only had to be done ONCE. Thus ending the requirement of the Law of the Levitical Priesthood.

Col.2
[14] Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

So that set of Laws were no longer needed. They ended when Christ died. They were the ONLY laws nailed to the cross. Which is why Paul made the statement. Your statement!

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

Until the Levitical Laws of the Priesthood, sin was still in the world. But when those laws ended at the cross, sin still exsist. Sin is NOT imputed when there is no Law. Not ALL LAWS. Just the Laws of the Levitical Priesthood.

Sorry for the reply being so long. I just hope you stuck with it to the end.

Now I will let all those that disagree go at it.

 

[Joe67]

Was sin imputed to Abraham? Where there is no law sin is not imputed. The law came 400+ years after God promised the inheritance to Abram. Yet sin was in the world by Adam. What does it mean that something is but it is not imputed?

I hope your replies will be concise so that readers may be able to chew on the simplicity of Christ.
Joe

Sin, as a violation of law, could not be imputed to Abraham because there was no law during the time of Abraham. Nevertheless, the eventual death of Abraham demonstrated that he was a sinner. Abraham sinned in Adam and committed other non-law individual sins.

mondar,

You said there was no law during the time of Abraham and yet he had other non-law individual sins.

Could you please elaborate on this idea of non-law sins?

Thank you in advance.

Joe

 

[Joe67]

Was sin imputed to Abraham? Where there is no law sin is not imputed. The law came 400+ years after God promised the inheritance to Abram. Yet sin was in the world by Adam. What does it mean that something is but it is not imputed?

I hope your replies will be concise so that readers may be able to chew on the simplicity of Christ.
Joe

Sin, as a violation of law, could not be imputed to Abraham because there was no law during the time of Abraham. Nevertheless, the eventual death of Abraham demonstrated that he was a sinner. Abraham sinned in Adam and committed other non-law individual sins.

How can anyone say there was no law BEFORE Abraham?

Eccl12and13,

Thus far we all agree there was a commandment to Adam. God gave Abraham no special law of restraint with consequence. He gave Abraham some special duties, leaving his homeland and going out into the unknown. Later there were other things to do and not to do. No reward of hell or death attached to these communications.

I am glad for your post. Keep laboring and we'll find the mother-lode.

Joe

P.s. I'll work on your second post later.

 

[mondar]

Was sin imputed to Abraham? Where there is no law sin is not imputed. The law came 400+ years after God promised the inheritance to Abram. Yet sin was in the world by Adam. What does it mean that something is but it is not imputed?

I hope your replies will be concise so that readers may be able to chew on the simplicity of Christ.
Joe

Sin, as a violation of law, could not be imputed to Abraham because there was no law during the time of Abraham. Nevertheless, the eventual death of Abraham demonstrated that he was a sinner. Abraham sinned in Adam and committed other non-law individual sins.

mondar,

You said there was no law during the time of Abraham and yet he had other non-law individual sins.

Could you please elaborate on this idea of non-law sins?

Thank you in advance.

Joe

We are speaking of Romans 5:13 and 14. During the times of Abraham, "From Adam to Moses" there was no Mosaic Law. In verse 13, the time of Abraham was spoken of as "Until the Law." During this time before the Mosaic Law, the apostle says "sin was in the World." If sin was in the world of Abraham, there must have been another law because "sin is not counted (imputed) when there is no law."

I think Pauls argument, in verse 12 death demonstrates the presence of sin, in verse 13 sin demonstrates the presence of Law.

What is your opinion?

 

[mondar]

Eccl12and13,

Thus far we all agree there was a commandment to Adam. God gave Abraham no special law of restraint with consequence. He gave Abraham some special duties, leaving his homeland and going out into the unknown. Later there were other things to do and not to do. No reward of hell or death attached to these communications.

I am glad for your post. Keep laboring and we'll find the mother-lode.

Joe

P.s. I'll work on your second post later.

Indulge me with semantics, can we call the "communications" to be special revelation? If there is no reward of death, how does verse 12 says that "death came upon all men?"

 

[Bubba]

In Romans 2 we have the Jews who were given the written Law and due to this Law had no excuse for sinful behavior. Later in Romans 2 we are told that those who are not Jews have the law of their conscience and they too are without excuse. Whatever Romans 5:13 means, sin is nonetheless imputed to all who are without Christ and those who are in Christ sin is not imputed. Romans 3:19 states; “Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God.†For the elect in every age the good news is that we are no longer under the Law, but grace.
“Sin shall not be master over [us], for [we] are not under law but under
grace†(Rom 6:14).
Grace,Bubba

 

[Joe67]

Indulge me with semantics, can we call the "communications" to be special revelation? If there is no reward of death, how does verse 12 says that "death came upon all men?"

Mondar also wrote in the preceding post, "I think Paul's argument in verse 12 is that death demonstrates the presence of sin, and in verse 13 that sin demonstrates the presence of law."

These are some thought provoking questions. Presence of law + the presence of sin produces death. That how scientists study that which has not been visualized optically.

Something has to give or we have to have another ingredient to defeat death. Before God gave the first negative commandment to Adam we were without death. Was sin present with us at the time of the first commandment, but in a dormancy/inactive? Was Adam created with a nature that possessed a dormant affinity toward sin? The first command was a permissive, "You may freely eat..." No reward of punitive or gain. The second command was of restraint with only a negative reward. Through which of these "communications" did sin come alive?

Keep talking, as God wills.

Your brother in Jesus,
Joe

 

[Joe67]

In Romans 2 we have the Jews who were given the written Law and due to this Law had no excuse for sinful behavior. Later in Romans 2 we are told that those who are not Jews have the law of their conscience and they too are without excuse. Whatever Romans 5:13 means, sin is nonetheless imputed to all who are without Christ and those who are in Christ sin is not imputed. Romans 3:19 states; “Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God.†For the elect in every age the good news is that we are no longer under the Law, but grace.
“Sin shall not be master over [us], for [we] are not under law but under
grace†(Rom 6:14).
Grace,Bubba

Truly, Bubba, all are without excuse for even the "day unto day utters speech" and there is no place where their voice is not heard. Romans 10. Christ is the true light which lightens every soul who comes into the world. Looking at your post the thought came to me, "Can you be under the law and in Christ?" In every age God had a way provided that each soul brought into the world could be in Christ. Thereby the sin that was in them did not have dominion over them, though it was there as a thorn in their sides and a stick in their eyes; i.e. it was their tormentor. Thanks be to God in Jesus Christ that where sin abounds, grace much more abounds.

Your post is ministering. I will watch for more.

Your servant in Christ Jesus,
Joe

 

[Joe67]

Now to get to your question:

What does it mean that something is but it is not imputed?
I think you are referring to the following scripture:

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

Well to answer it is simple, and it is from the scriptures. So here it is:

Gal.3
[19] Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

God added a Law to the ones already in place because man continued to break those laws that were already in place. But that law was only to be until Christ came to do away with them.

Now that law, the law that was added, was only a shadow of the real law. The Law that was a shadow was Gods sacrificial law. Because only the shedding of blood could remove sin. But as the verse above states, the law that was a shadow could not make the people perfect. Why?

So now we see, the Law that was added, the sacrificial law, was being replaced with the second Law. So we have a changing of the law.
Col.2
[14] Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

So that set of Laws were no longer needed. They ended when Christ died. They were the ONLY laws nailed to the cross. Which is why Paul made the statement. Your statement!

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

Until the Levitical Laws of the Priesthood, sin was still in the world. But when those laws ended at the cross, sin still exsist. Sin is NOT imputed when there is no Law. Not ALL LAWS. Just the Laws of the Levitical Priesthood.

Sorry for the reply being so long. I just hope you stuck with it to the end.

Now I will let all those that disagree go at it.

I am back working on a reply to your post. I needed to eliminate some content so I could focus on a few things. If you think I left out a vital please respond.

You stated, "God added a law because we were breaking the laws already in place." Could you give a little more insight into the laws that were already in place. Were they universal on all people at the time of the 12 tribes deliverance from Egypt? Were these laws only orally transmitted? or are you speaking about the 12 tribes breaking of the 10 commandments at Sinai?

You stated the following thoughts I have made bold. The law that was added was a shadow of the real one. The added law was the sacrificial law. The sacrificial law was finally replaced by a second law. Sin is not imputed when the laws of the Levitical priesthood are nailed to the cross/done away. What happens to the laws that were already in place at the beginning before the sacrificial law was added? What is the second law that replaced the sacrificial law?

If I have misstated your thoughts, please forbear, and let me know. Do to my computer skill limitations I have not responded to all your questions and positions. Continue to ask and/or proclaim in the areas of your interest. I will watch for your reply.

Your brother in Christ Jesus,
Joe

 

[Eccl12and13]

I am back working on a reply to your post. I needed to eliminate some content so I could focus on a few things. If you think I left out a vital please respond.

You stated, "God added a law because we were breaking the laws already in place." Could you give a little more insight into the laws that were already in place. Were they universal on all people at the time of the 12 tribes deliverance from Egypt? Were these laws only orally transmitted? or are you speaking about the 12 tribes breaking of the 10 commandments at Sinai?

You stated the following thoughts I have made bold. The law that was added was a shadow of the real one. The added law was the sacrificial law. The sacrificial law was finally replaced by a second law. Sin is not imputed when the laws of the Levitical priesthood are nailed to the cross/done away. What happens to the laws that were already in place at the beginning before the sacrificial law was added? What is the second law that replaced the sacrificial law?

If I have misstated your thoughts, please forbear, and let me know. Do to my computer skill limitations I have not responded to all your questions and positions. Continue to ask and/or proclaim in the areas of your interest. I will watch for your reply.

Your brother in Christ Jesus,
Joe

I'll try to be as brief as possible, but at times it is hard.

First:
For some reason, most think that the ONLY Laws were those that we have a record of that were given to the nation of Israel. But with just a little logic and a lot of scriptures we can know for a fact that God had a plan and laws, BEFORE there was an earth. Here are just a few examples from scripture:

Here is an example of God's plan before the world began:

1Peter1
[18] Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;
[19] But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
[20] Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

We were redeemed with the blood of Jesus, and this redemption was planned before the earth began.

Rev.13
[8] And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Again, we see the plan for salvation before the world was created.

Now an example of sin before the world began:

2Peter2
[4] For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

So we see that angels SINNED. But when? Let's go to the scriptures:

Rev.12
[7] And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
[8] And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.

Now the ONLY definition of sin given to us in the holy scriptures is this:

1John3
[4] Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

So YES! Gods laws exsisted even before there was an earth or man. Do we know they were in place before the nation of Israel? Of course we do! And we know this based on sound scripture. Gods laws were in effect the first time He said: THOU SHALT NOT! Adam did what he was told not to, thus he sinned. And what was the penalty for sin? Death! And what was the ONLY thing to remove the death penalty of sin? The shedding of blood!

Now were these laws orally given? They had to be. Though it is not written, Abel somehow knew that he was a sinner and that the ONLY acceptable sacrifice that could be given to remove sin was the shedding of blood.

Gen.4
[4] And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:

Did God's laws stop at Able? We find through scriptures they did not:

Josh. 24 [2] And Joshua said unto all the people, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the flood in old time, even Terah, the father of Abraham, and the father of Nachor: and they served other gods. IDOLATRY BEFORE MOSES!
Exod. 20 [3] Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

Gen.4[8] And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him. MURDER BEFORE MOSES!
Exod. 20 [13] Thou shalt not kill.

Gen.12[18] And Pharaoh called Abram, and said, What is this that thou hast done unto me? why didst thou not tell me that she was thy wife?
[19] Why saidst thou, She is my sister? so I might have taken her to me to wife: now therefore behold thy wife, take her, and go thy way. LYING BEFORE MOSES!
Gen. 39 7] And it came to pass after these things, that his master's wife cast her eyes upon Joseph; and she said, Lie with me.
[8] But he refused, and said unto his master's wife, Behold, my master wotteth not what is with me in the house, and he hath committed all that he hath to my hand;
[9] There is none greater in this house than I; neither hath he kept back any thing from me but thee, because thou art his wife: how then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God? ADULTERY BEFORE MOSES!
NOTICE: Even the Egyptians knew that ADULTERY was a sin.
Exod. 20 [16] Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Exod. 20 [14] Thou shalt not commit adultery.

So to answer the first part of your question, God's laws were universal on all people from day one.

Murder is murder, adultery is adultery, lying is lying. The bottom line: Sin is Sin!

Now on to the second part:
What happens to the laws that were already in place at the beginning before the sacrificial law was added? What is the second law that replaced the sacrificial law?

The law that were already in place stayed. It was because of the breaking of these laws that God added the sacrificial laws. He gave us an example after the first sin:

Gen.3[21] Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

Now God could have easily left them with figs or showed them how to make grass skirts, as we have seen on many native people before. But what did God clothe them with? Coats of skin. And with those coats of skin came the shedding of blood. And we know they stayed because man had to continue to sacrifice animals in order for their sins to be forgiven. The ONLY thing about this law that changed when the nation of Israel came on the scene was WHO would perform the sacrifices. This law became known as the Law of the Levitical Priesthood:

Num.8
[14] Thus shalt thou separate the Levites from among the children of Israel: and the Levites shall be mine.

So RIGHT THERE it became a LAW. Just as when God told Adam, THOU SHALT NOT, so it was with the tribe of Levi. Now let's see what they were seperated to do:

[19] And I have given the Levites as a gift to Aaron and to his sons from among the children of Israel, to do the service of the children of Israel in the tabernacle of the congregation, and to make an atonement for the children of Israel:

So only the Levites were to perform the sacrifices unto God, to make ATONEMENT for SINS!

Now to find when the Law was changed and ended:

Heb.7[12] For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

And why was there a need for a change in the Law? Because Christ, our High Priest, was not from the tribe Levi. He was from the tribe of Juda. Let's read it:

[13] For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.
[14] For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

So the Law was changed so that Jesus could become our High Priest. Please note: The only part of the law that was REMOVED, was the daily and yearly sacrifices. And what was put in its place was the single sacrifice of our Lord:

[27] Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

And when was the law that was added to end?

Col.2[14] Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

And how was this confirmed?

Mark 15[38] And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.

No more veil, no more sacrifices. It was even told to us in the OT:

Dan.9[26] And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:
[27] And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,

So even in the OT, it was foretold what would end with the death of Christ.

 

[Drew]

How can anyone say there was no law BEFORE Abraham? The ONLY definition of sin found in the whole bible is:

1John 3
[4] Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

We know that Paul believes that those between Abraham and delivery of the Torah were not under law:

13for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

We know Paul believes "the wages of sin is death".

Therefore, we know that Paul believes that people die from sin even in the absence of law of any kind. In Romans 5:14, Paul is saying that "sin as the cause of death" was indeed at work in those, who unlike Adam, were not contravening any law whatsoever.

The 1 John 3 does not require us to see "sin" as only transgression of the law - the writer does not say "Sin is transgression of the law, and only transgression of the law". So, if we are going to take Paul seriously we need to accept the real existence of sin, even in the absence of law.

 

[Drew]

[Well to answer it is simple, and it is from the scriptures. So here it is:

Gal.3
[19] Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

God added a Law to the ones already in place because man continued to break those laws that were already in place. But that law was only to be until Christ came to do away with them.

There was no "law already in place" - we know that Paul recognizes the existence of a set of persons who sinned and died, even if the absence of any law:

14Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned (AB)in the likeness of the offense of Adam,....

We know Paul believes the wages of sin is death. So from the above, we know Paul believes that people between Adam and Moses "sinned unto death". When Paul says that these people did not sin "in the likeness of the offense of Adam", we know by context that he must be referring to Adam's condition of being under some law. In the case of Adam, the law was the command not to eat. Paul is saying those from Adam to Moses sinned, but not in the same way Adam did - that is, by breaking a law.

This case is further strengthened by this context - determining statement:

sin is not imputed when there is no law

The fact is clear: Paul is saying that even though sin is not "counted" in the absence of law, it still is at work in the world, bringing death, even to those who are under no law at all.

And just in case you were going to argue that the Galatians statement "the law was added...." implies that it must have been added to an existing law, note how I can say "add a teaspoon of salt" to a mixture that contains no salt whatsoever.

 

[Drew]

So we have a ''Law' and the breaking of That "Law". So just how long have God's Laws really been in exsitence? Way before Moses! The Law's that God gave to the nation of Isreal were 400+ years after the promise was made, but to say that there WERE NO LAWS BEFORE MOSES, does not make any sense. If that were the case, why did God punish Cain for the murder of Able? Why did God have Noah build the ark? Why did God destroy Sodom, and Gomorrah? All of this was because of the SINS of man. And sin is the breaking of the law.

We know that Paul does not hold this view of the nature of sin. Consider what Paul writes in Romans 8:3, perhaps his most compact statement of atonement theology:

For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, ...

What is the target of condemnation at the Cross? Jesus? Not really. It is sin - sin is condemned.

Now if sin is the "judicial" determination that a law has been broken, how does it make sense that such judicial determinations are condemned? It doesn't make sense. Paul sees sin as the kind thing that can be judicially condemned. So, for Paul at least, sin must be a kind of personalized entity - the kind of thing that it is indeed sensible to render condemnatory judgement against.

 

[Eccl12and13]

How can anyone say there was no law BEFORE Abraham? The ONLY definition of sin found in the whole bible is:

1John 3
[4] Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

We know that Paul believes that those between Abraham and delivery of the Torah were not under law:

13for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

We know Paul believes "the wages of sin is death".

Therefore, we know that Paul believes that people die from sin even in the absence of law of any kind. In Romans 5:14, Paul is saying that "sin as the cause of death" was indeed at work in those, who unlike Adam, were not contravening any law whatsoever.

The 1 John 3 does not require us to see "sin" as only transgression of the law - the writer does not say "Sin is transgression of the law, and only transgression of the law". So, if we are going to take Paul seriously we need to accept the real existence of sin, even in the absence of law.

Until someone finds another defintion of SIN in the bible other that the one given to us by the Holy Spirit, which is this; [4] Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.1John3 Sin can only mean (1) thing and (1) thing ONLY; the breaking of Gods Laws. And how was that first sin commited? By doing something that God said not to do:

Rom.5
[19] For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

And when did Gods Laws for man start? The moment He said, THOU SHALT NOT! From that point on, everything that applied to the law was in force. Death and the shedding of blood.
Adam died as a result, and the only way he could be forgiven was with the shedding of blood.

What sense does the following statement make:

"we know that Paul believes that people die from sin even in the absence of law of any kind."

How can people die from sin in the absence of ANY LAW, when the ONLY definition we have for sin is the breaking of the law?

How can you sin without any law? Come on people. Use what God gave you, COMMON SENSE!

Are we to go with scriptures or what? The BIBLE say it was because of Adams sin that death came:

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:

So how are you going to let some MAN tell you otherwise?

There are many that are going down a very dangerous path. There are people believing what you say. Their blood WILL be on your hands!!

Matt.5
[19] Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

 

[Drew]

Until someone finds another defintion of SIN in the bible other that the one given to us by the Holy Spirit, which is this; [4] Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.1John3 Sin can only mean (1) thing and (1) thing ONLY; the breaking of Gods Laws.

No. This is not a legitimate argument. Writers of scripture are not required to provide a fully comprehensive, exhaustive definition of their concepts. We know sin cannot simply be lawbreaking from texts like this one:

As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me

How can sin, a thing that only has existence if a law is broken (according to Eccle12and13), be the driving force for doing evil? That would be like saying "the determination that I have broken the speed limit causes me to drive even faster."

 

[Eccl12and13]

Until someone finds another defintion of SIN in the bible other that the one given to us by the Holy Spirit, which is this; [4] Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.1John3 Sin can only mean (1) thing and (1) thing ONLY; the breaking of Gods Laws.

No. This is not a legitimate argument. Writers of scripture are not required to provide a fully comprehensive, exhaustive definition of their concepts. We know sin cannot simply be lawbreaking from texts like this one:

As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me

How can sin, a thing that only has existence if a law is broken (according to Eccle12and13), be the driving force for doing evil? That would be like saying "the determination that I have broken the speed limit causes me to drive even faster."

If you could, could you let me know the book and chapter for the verse you are quoting. The bible is a pretty big book. With that said I think the verse I think you are talking about is,

Rom.7
[20] Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Sin, as Jesus tell us starts in the mind. Come on Drew, this is an easy one. Everyone knows that. Those actions that goes on in our heads is where sin starts.

Matt.9
[4] And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?
Mark 7
[21] For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,

It was the same from the beginning:

Gen.4
[7] If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

The sin had not been commited yet, but it was waiting to be done. And it started in Cains head.

Now Drew I have answered your attempt at a reply with common sense and scriptures. Now if you could please do the same:

How can people die from sin in the absence of ANY LAW, when the ONLY definition we have for sin is the breaking of the law? How can you sin without any law?

Also Drew, when you said, "Writers of scripture are not required to provide a fully comprehensive, exhaustive definition of their concepts."

Drew....you act like the writers of the scriptures had a CHOICE in what they wrote. It was not them, but the Holy Spirit speaking to them:

2 Peter 1
[21] For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

So Drew, if you think something is or is not required, you can take that up with the one that gave the message to the writers in the first place. Now do you really want to do that Drew?

 

[Ret]

Until someone finds another defintion of SIN in the bible other that the one given to us by the Holy Spirit, which is this; [4] Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.1John3 Sin can only mean (1) thing and (1) thing ONLY; the breaking of Gods Laws. And how was that first sin commited? By doing something that God said not to do:

Rom.5
[19] For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

Romans 6:12-14
12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts, 13 and do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves to God as those alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace. NASU

SIN has dominion, it 'reigns' in the mortal body
SIN is a KING....this KING is the MASTER of unrighteousness.

This dominion of sin, was slain at calvary, so that it does not 'reign' in the kingdom of 'grace'!

When we talk about sin, we are talking about the kingdom of unrighteousness.

When we talk about grace, we are talking about the kingdom of righteousness.