Sorry, but just to butt into this conversation. What about the following?
Sorry, but just to butt into this conversation. What about the following?
Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without the law: and as many as have sinned under the law shall be judged by the law;
Rom 2:14 (for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves;
Rom 2:15 in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them);
And:
Rom 5:13 for until the law sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. But without Law, sin was not legally imputed to anyone's account.
However:
Rom 5:18 So then as through one trespass the judgment came unto all men to condemnation; even so through one act of righteousness the free gift came unto all men to justification of life.
Thus, when the Law came in, sin was brought to light but sin already had life. (Rom. 5:13 above)
Just some thoughts - sorry again, to have butted in.
Your not butting in and no problem at all, awelight - I really appreciate your input to my question .
Anyway, I'll attempt to respond to the points you've raised and see if my responses can hold water:
"Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without the law: and as many as have sinned under the law shall be judged by the law;"
I think we may have different concepts of law in mind. I'll cover that difference in my reply to Rom 2:14 following
"Rom 2:14 (for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves;
Rom 2:15 in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them);"
What I think Rom 2:14 implies, is that there are multiple sets of laws, each set inherent to different groups of people -- Jews, Gentiles, and one that applies to everyone. What that demonstrates ( to me), is that the law the Jews were under, and the law gentiles were under, were/are tied together beneath a parent law, that parent law being the apex of law itself. It is actually law in concept. I'll call it the law of law -- I think the Bible may refer to it as the law of sin and death. Anyway, the law of law is the one I had referred to in my post but I should have made that distinction clear then.
Anyway, I think that Rom 2:14 & 15 substantiates the existence of a law of law when it says "work of the law written in their hearts". For the work of law to exist, a law has to exist - one cannot exist independent of the other. Yet, the verse tells us they had no law. But, if the gentiles did the things of the law by nature, then in their nature must there also have been a law, or what would have driven them to desire the works of law? So, the law of law must have been that which had been "written" into their hearts, since, in the case of the gentiles, there was no other law. As for the Jews, the law of law was manifested in their hearts, demonstrated by their desire to achieve the works of the law.
[Rom 9:31-32 KJV]
31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
32 Wherefore? Because [they sought it] not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
"
Rom 5:13 for until the law sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. But without Law, sin was not legally imputed to anyone's account."
Actually Rom 5:13 is the crux of my point-- that without law sin could not be imputed; without sin imputed there could be
no judgement; without judgement, there could be no penalty.
And I should clarify this too - that I believe Rom 5:13 is referring to the time before Adam and Eve ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Sin was not possible for them until eating which brought law - the law of law. At that moment, they were placed under it along with everyone who would ever be born. Because of it, we all, by our nature, pursue the work of the law . That, I believe, is why God is justified in finding guilt in everyone ever born who has not been placed under the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus.
"Rom 5:18 So then as through one trespass the judgment came unto all men to condemnation; even so through one act of righteousness the free gift came unto all men to justification of life.
Thus, when the Law came in, sin was brought to light but
sin already had life. (Rom. 5:13 above)"
I don't think it did have life - at least not as far as Adam and Eve (and the rest of us) were concerned - it couldn't have been imputed to anyone without the presence of law. How can sin be imputed if no law was broken? For sure sin was present, but, without law, sin couldn't be imputed. Until Adam and Eve ate, they, and we, were free of it. Rom 5:13 says that sin was present in the world but it doesn't say that it had been or could be imputed - the verses says only that it was present. That is why God warned them not to eat or even touch the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
[1Co 15:56 KJV] 56 The sting of death [is] sin; and
the strength of sin [is] the law.
Having read this, you'll probably want to call 9-1-1 on me - if so, I'll understand.
I know I didn't cover everything and I'm not sure I actually understand it all myself, and what I did cover is probably lacking
and doesn't make a lot of sense, but I thought I'd give it a shot anyway. Also as I reread, I'll probably need to revise it somewhat.
If I can clarify anything, of if you find errors, please let me know.
Thanks for reading.
