Self contradictory statements do little to advance your cause.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Was sin in the world before the law was given?
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
no, We have mischaracterized the purpose of His actions. Our explanation is strange and wrong. We have placed the importance of the physical human experience over the spiritual. We have been tricked.
This universe is a prison to hold the bad guys. Humanity is the method of redemption. We are the bad guys in this narrative. We need salvation. We do not need to bring the world back to creation perfection.
The term is amoral neither moral nor immoral. A rock cannot sin. The herbs of the field is amoral. The universe was amoral. Perfect in God purpose and plan. Perfection does not mean sinless.
Please post a quote where I suggested light, trees, or grass were the opposite of evil. In fact please post a quote where I even mentioned light, trees, or grass. Thank you.
Actually, it was the other way around. Satan was here first and first in charge. THEN God inserted Adam into the arrangement, no doubt to provoke Satan to jealousy......and history proceeds from there.
you suggest that in your "good to the extreme" in Hebrew at the last of creation . You were rejecting my position and stating that "good" pronounced over all creation in addition the "good " in the individual verses emphasized the perfection of creation. You pronounced this perfection as "morally good."
or am I wrong and misunderstand your statements
Yes. For some reason you seem to "misunderstand" just about everything I post.
Satan was placed here first but not totally in charge. God does not need to provoke Satan to jealousy Satan was already jealous of God's glory. Satan is a prisoner ,condemned already awaiting judgement. The instant Satan fell, the universe was created.
I would point out that we are not told that the universe is the prison created for Satan and His demons. One issue would be that the "prison" that demons are currently being held in while awaiting Hell is darkness.
2 Peter 2
King James Version (KJV)
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;
Jude
King James Version (KJV)
6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
Secondly, I would ask for a Scriptural account of Satan being bound outside of Revelation 20.
God bless.
When God created the world we see that Adam had dominion, not Satan.
We are told of Satan's binding in Revelation 20, and that prison is not the world, but he is in fact removed from the world. In regards to Satan's destination, that would be Hell.
That is what God created for Satan and His Angels.
God bless.
Satan is here, Do you you not recall Satan tempting Jesus or persecuting Job , walking to and fro on the earth.
Hell is also the generic term "place of the dead" spiritually
Since Satan is here and your verses say "chains under darkness, and both scriptures are true, then Satan is in a prison awaiting judgement and it is here where we are.....
It is obviously foolish and unbiblical to try and set off John against Paul. Yet 1 John 3:4 rather clearly states that sin is lawlessness. So any interpretation of Romans 5:12-14 that contradicts 1 John 3:4 must be wrong, unless one is going to prove somehow that John is saying that sin isn't lawlessness. I'd be interested to see that done.
So let's look at Romans 5:12-14. First of all, Adam was our covenant (or representative) head. What he has done, we have done, and we share the consequences of his actions. If President Trump declares war on Mexico, all you Americans will be at war with Mexico whether you like it or not, and if you meet a Mexican with a gun, he may well feel perfectly entitled to shoot you even though you did not personally declare war. So, when Adam fell into sin, all his progeny did the same, and because the wages of sin is death, 'this death spread to all men, because all men sinned' in Adam.
Then there is a parenthesis from vs.13-14 as Paul reasons out the implications of the imputation of sin. He is dealing with the argument that if there was no law until Moses, therefore there could be no transgression of the law between the times of Adam and Moses. Paul is reasoning backwards from death to sin and from sin to law:
1. Sin was in the world before the Law was given through Moses.
2. Sin is not imputed where there is no law.
3. Nevertheless there was universal death from the time of Adam until Moses, even among those who had not sinned as Adam had- namely infants. Death came to all of those in Adam, without exception, because Adam sinned.
Therefore
Unless we are going to charge God with unrighteousness, there must have been law from the time of Adam until Moses. The conclusion is inescapable. And indeed it is expressed clearly in 2:13-15. The Gentiles, who never had the Mosaic law, show the Moral Law to be written on their hearts (albeit smudged and defaced by the fall) when they do things that are prescribed by the Law, and by their consciences that disturb them when they break the Law.
'Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God' (Rom. 3:19). Every man who ever lived has been under God's law, and in their hearts they have known something of that law. Therefore sin is lawlessness.
This argument is carried in greater detail in Robert Haldane's famous commentary on Romans, and also in William Hendricksen's commentary.
It is not about light, trees, or grass, which I never mentioned. It is about the timing of the fall of Satan.
I explained the exact, exegetical meaning of "very good" and you, without any knowledge of Hebrew, declared that every Hebrew scholar on the planet is wrong and your fanciful "explanation" is the only one that is correct. Not because it is grammatically, syntactically, or exegetically correct, but because it is the only way you can support your fanciful "interpretation" which goes against the very clear statement of scripture.
God's inspired statement that all of His Creation was still "very good" demands that Satan had not yet fallen.
I didn't say I could not understand Hebrew , I said I could read it. I have clearly shown that your leap in logic is incorrect or perhaps you are just repeating the scholars..
טוֹב good, pleasant, agreeable when combine with exceedingly, much does not equal perfection or sinlessness..
even though מְאֹד is the same extreme when commanded to love the Lord you God with all your heart.
It does not equal perfection nor any implication or it. .
The purpose of creation is redemption and not only is that good , it is very good. to the uttermost
The implied teaching of "perfection of creation " as a goal of mankind is a foundation of Mormon, Islam and Jehovah Witnesses. Heaven on earth
That is correct, but it is a bit syllogistic to correlate the fact that Satan is in this physical Universe and that Satan was cast out of Heaven to "The Universe is therefore Satan's Prison."
That Satan is walking to and fro implies freedom.
The implication is that God's punishment of his sin was to put him in charge of the Universe.
Again, where is the Scripture that supports this, or that Satan was bound.
In the Old Testament Sheol was used to refer to numerous things, the place of the dead being one. But just like those who insist that because it was translated grave, and made that an exclusive application, it neglects that which we can surmise when we give full attention to all of the teachings concerning it's use.
We have one reference to Tartarus where we are told demons are being held. These demons are bound. We see bound demons released in Revelation. These demons are bound.
But Satan is not bound, he is, as you point out, walking to and fro. Now if we have a passage that states Satan is bound, I would like to see it.
Again, Adam is said to have dominance in the world at Creation, and while Satan may be called the "god of this world," that simply refers to his hold over the unbelieving population, and should not be taken to mean he is either actually a god or that this nullifies the Sovereignty of God Himself. God is the God of this world, and while He gives space in regards to dominion, the day is coming when He will take sovereign control over this world. When He does so, the first thing we see is that Satan is at that time...bound.
Satan is not in view. Again, we both acknowledge that Satan is walking to and fro.
He is not bound.
And I agree with the other member in regards to that which God proclaims good. Had evil been present at that time, it would have nullified a view that it was good. It has nothing to do with morality, and the distinction is not a good argument, in my view. It is a pretty simple statement I think we can take at face value. We distinguish the fallen world with that created by God.
God bless.
Evil was present but had not entered the physical world which happened when man sinned. A physical and spiritual being. Satan was spiritual only
you think he is free because walks to and fro. however he is bound under darkness as the verse says. He was an "angel that left his first estate" also. Because both these verses are true not contradictions ,which is impossible with scripture., we have to accept both and change our thoughts to accept what scripture says, You seem to choose one verse and deny others.
Satan had no dominance of the physical, He is a spiritual only being . as demons are today. They enter the physical or ,influence. to affect the physical. . Remember Satan entering the serpent.
Adam's dominance , in Eden only, was not moral perfection but innocence, as our infancy.
The only reason this world exist is to redeem sinners
Tartarus is the innermost, thus most kept ,part of a famous prison. used to illustrate the type of security by which they are held.
The implication of the previous posts by our friend is that "good" is sinless. although true ,creation could not sin Sin is spiritual, Creation could be affected by sin, as we know through the curse. To accept the perfect physical creation as our goal is Humanism, placing the physical over the spititual.
As a "prison, mankind is the method whereby pardon from sin is offered
I agree with your assessment in part, but not completely.
First, I agree that any interpretation of Romans 5:12-14 that contradicts 1 John 3:4 must be wrong. I add that it works the other way around too. But neither are opposing passages (which was my objection to rejecting the passage in favor of “the Apostle’s ideas” in the other thread).
I believe that F.F. Bruce correctly interprets this issue (and with Stott, I think this interpretation is natural to the passage itself).
Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. Romans 5:12-14
Sin came into the world through Adam (through his transgression of God’s command) and death through sin. Death spread to all men because all sinned. Sin was in the world before the law was given (the Mosaic Law) but sin is not counted where there is no law (sin was not accounted as a violation of the Law, or commandment, where there was none). Still, death reigned from Adam (who broke God’s commandment) to Moses (to the giving of the Law), even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam (whose sinning was not a violation of God’s commandment, a transgression). Sin is a violation of God's law, of his revealed nature, but here Paul is speaking of divine commands.
There is no mention of infants here. Paul has already established that what can be known about God is plain to the ungodly because God has shown it to them. His eternal power and divine nature has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. God’s wrath is revealed against all unrigteousness of men who suppress this truth (Romans 1:18-20). And then in Romans 2 Paul emphasizes this point in terms of those who are not “under the Law.”
Adam’s sin was a transgression of God’s command. Those who sin under the law are transgressors. But there are those between Adam and Moses who did not sin in terms of violating God’s specific command (they did sin, but this sin was not a transgression of the law). I believe that the point that Paul is making is that sin existed apart from transgression in that we are sinners. This sin, or sinfulness, was introduced through Adam. Adam was a type of the one to come (Christ). Just as Adam’s disobedience made us all sinners (not just inherited sin, but made us sinners in nature) so by Christ’s obedience many will be made righteous.
Firstly, unless you have a different commentary by Bruce than I have (Tyndale N.T. series) I do not see that Bruce really addresses this question.
Secondly, how do you define the difference between hamartia, 'sin' and parabasis, 'transgression'? Paul says that the law 'was added because of transgressions' (Gal. 3:19), so there must have been transgressions before the law of Moses, suggesting that there was indeed law before Moses, which was the substance of my post.
Thirdly, having agreed with me that any interpretation of Rom. 5:12-14 that contradicts 1 John 3:4 (and indeed, vice versa), you have completely ignored the latter text.
Once again, I apologize that this post is a bit hit-and-run, but I have a busy day today.