Your assertion is not supported by your citations.The law that was added because of sin cannot be the same law that defines sin when broken. 1 John 3:4 Romans 7:7 Mat 5:19-30
Your assertion is not supported by your citations.The law that was added because of sin cannot be the same law that defines sin when broken. 1 John 3:4 Romans 7:7 Mat 5:19-30
You tell me how the law that defines sin when broken can be the same law that was added because of breaking the law that defines sin. When you do that, you will see the citation in fact support my assertions. Claiming something is false and proving it is not the same.Your assertion is not supported by your citations.
Why Cain knew it was a "sin" to kill Abel. Where there is no law, there is no transgression Romans 4:15 what law is thou shalt not murder come from?
That is a logical fallacy, and goes directly against what Scripture ACTUALLY teaches.God's nature is eternal and sin is what is contrary to God's nature, so sin is therefore also eternal.
pretty sure you cited the wrong verse:
Romans 4:13For the promise that he would be the heir of the world [was] not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
ironically so, seeing how this so plainly tells us that the promise of eternal life is by faith, not by law - and explicitly declares that there is a righteousness which has nothing to do with the Law at all, but is by faith.
so righteousness does not demand being under law; in fact because the purpose of the Law is to make sin more sinful, the Law is not for the righteous but the unrighteous - what it says, it says to those it condemns.
But Romans 5:13 says "of a certainty" sin was in the world before the law - not that there is no sin without law - but that sin isn't charged to anyone when there is no law. hence our perfect salvation from sun through the death of Christ, by which we who believe also died, therefore are set free from the law.
whatever is not of faith, is sin.
murder is not of faith - it is unbelief.
Cain does not need to be under Moses in order to know that sin is sinful; he only needs to believe in the goodness of God.
I am not under obligation to support your assertion.You tell me how the law that defines sin when broken can be the same law that was added because of breaking the law that defines sin.
No amount of finagling will make irrelevant passages relevant.When you do that, you will see the citation in fact support my assertions.
Irrelevant.Claiming something is false and proving it is not the same.
No law no sin
Why do you think that it is a logical fallacy and that it goes directly against what Scripture teaches? God's righteousness is eternal (Psalms 119:142), therefore all of God's righteous laws are also eternal (Psalms 119:160), which means that the way to sin by doing what is unrighteous is also eternal. It would be contradictory if God's nature were eternal while the way to act in accordance with His nature were not.That is a logical fallacy, and goes directly against what Scripture ACTUALLY teaches.
Do you believe there will be sin in heaven when time is no more?Why do you think that it is a logical fallacy and that it goes directly against what Scripture teaches? God's righteousness is eternal (Psalms 119:142), therefore all of God's righteous laws are also eternal (Psalms 119:160), which means that the way to sin by doing what is unrighteous is also eternal. It would be contradictory if God's nature were eternal while the way to act in accordance with His nature were not.
God's nature is eternal, so the way to act in a way that is contrary to God's nature will exists for as long as God's nature remains eternal. For example, it has always been and will always be a sin to commit adultery. It's hard to speak about what life would be like if time were no more or whether it would be possible to commit adultery if there were no time, but it wouldn't change the fact that it will always be a sin to commit adultery.Do you believe there will be sin in heaven when time is no more?
Can you answer yes or no?God's nature is eternal, so the way to act in a way that is contrary to God's nature will exists for as long as God's nature remains eternal. For example, it has always been and will always be a sin to commit adultery. It's hard to speak about what life would be like if time were no more or whether it would be possible to commit adultery if there were no time, but it wouldn't change the fact that it will always be a sin to commit adultery.
There will be no more sorrow or tears or death because sin is no more. You besmirch God'sWhy do you think that it is a logical fallacy and that it goes directly against what Scripture teaches? God's righteousness is eternal (Psalms 119:142), therefore all of God's righteous laws are also eternal (Psalms 119:160), which means that the way to sin by doing what is unrighteous is also eternal. It would be contradictory if God's nature were eternal while the way to act in accordance with His nature were not.
God's nature is eternal, so the way to act in a way that is contrary to God's nature will exists for as long as God's nature remains eternal. For example, it has always been and will always be a sin to commit adultery. It's hard to speak about what life would be like if time were no more or whether it would be possible to commit adultery if there were no time, but it wouldn't change the fact that it will always be a sin to commit adultery.
God told him not to do it. It doesn't matter if Cain knew it to be wrong or not.whatever is not of faith, is sin.
murder is not of faith - it is unbelief.
Cain does not need to be under Moses in order to know that sin is sinful; he only needs to believe in the goodness of God.
Yes, there will be sin in heaven in the sense that that what is contrary God's eternal nature will still define what it is, but not in the sense that people will continue to practice sin.Can you answer yes or no?
As an aside, there is no marriage in heaven. Adultery may always be a sin, but there are no conditions in glory that allow for marriage...so adultery isn't possible.
People will not continue to practice adultery, but it is not that does not mean that it will no longer be a sin to commit adultery. It would be meaningless for God to be good if there were no longer anything that defines what is and is not good, this fact in no way besmirches God's holy name, and you can deny this, but not intelligibly. .There will be no more sorrow or tears or death because sin is no more. You besmirch God's
holy name to tie sin to His eternality, just like those who say good cannot exist without evil.
Well scripture does not delete scripture, so they have to reconcile.that is incorrect, as already pointed out.
Romans 5:13for sin indeed was in the world before the law was giveni think much of your further error stems from having this wrong.
Soyeong, there will be NO sin in Heaven simply because GOD himself will be with his people and the commandments will be in their flesh and heart, refer the prophecy of Jeremiah and also the book of revelations. There will be no more sin.Yes, there will be sin in heaven in the sense that that what is contrary God's eternal nature will still define what it is, but not in the sense that people will continue to practice sin.
Wouldn't that be hell that serves this purpose?Yes, there will be sin in heaven in the sense that that what is contrary God's eternal nature will still define what it is, but not in the sense that people will continue to practice sin.
Yes, there will be sin in heaven in the sense that that what is contrary God's eternal nature will still define what it is, but not in the sense that people will continue to practice sin.