This is the first of two lessons that examine the relationship between sin and divine law. In the two lessons, we are going to look at several verses in Romans. In this lesson we consider the following verses...

• Rom 4:15 "Where there is no law there is no transgression".
• Rom 5:13 "Sin is not imputed where there is no law".
• Rom 7:8 "Apart from the law sin is dead".

In these verses and their context, Paul is stating a principle that is easy to understand. However, this apparently simple and easily understood principle is often misunderstood. Some people take the view that anything against which there is no law should be regarded as lawful, and anything that is lawful should be regarded as right. In this lesson we shall see that this is not true.

The Sin of Adam

In order to sin, one must be in disregard of, or in disobedience to, a law that God has put in force. John says, "sin is lawlessness" and he uses these words in the sense of a transgression of God's law (1Jn 3:4). Take, for example, the first sin committed by mankind. If God had not made an exception about trees for food, and said of one tree, "You shall not eat", then Adam and Eve would not have sinned by eating from that tree (Gen 2:16-17, 3:2-3,11). So we see a plain principle at work here...

• Principle 1. You cannot violate or break a law that is not in force.

Sin was imputed to Adam because there was a law in force to prohibit what he did, and that made it a sin.

Sin Unlike Adam's

Now we begin to examine whether all sin is according to the above principle, or whether it is possible to sin in a different way to Adam. Having noted the nature of Adam's sin, we might hastily conclude that all sin is similar, and unless God makes a specific law about a matter, as he did in Adam's case, then there can be no sin in regard to that matter. However, in the verses with which we begain this lesson, Paul does not say such a thing, nor does he agree with that view.

• Before Paul says, "Sin is not imputed where there is no law" he prefaces it by saying, "Sin was in the world" (Rom 5:13). Paul does not say that there was no sin. He rather says that there was sin.
   
  
• After Paul says,"Sin is not imputed where there is no law", he then qualifies the statement by saying, "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam's transgression" (Rom 5:13). Even people who had not violated a law or commandment like Adam, still had sin, and so death reigned over them (Rom 5:12-14).
   
  (That may seem a bit contradictory right now, but it will become clearer as our lesson progresses.)

Inherent Wrong

To explain why a person is regarded as sinning, even though not in the similitude of Adam's sin, we must now introduce a second principle, namely that some things are inherently wrong.

This second principle was not evident in Adam's transgression. Eating fruit from a tree is not inherently wrong. It can only be wrong if a law is in force that prohibits it. However, not all acts are like that. There are things which are wrong in themselves. They don't need a law against them to make them wrong. We see then, this second principle...

• Principle 2. Whilst there are many good things against which there is no law (Gal 5:22-23), not all things against which there is no law are good things.

Paul himself says that though a plethora of things are lawful, they are not all good (1Co 6:12, 1Co 10:23).

Illustrating inherent wrongs

Perhaps we can illustrate this principle with examples from civil law...

• Wasting water. In some communities there are strict laws against wasting water, whilst in other communities there are no such laws. Obviously this does not mean that it is wrong to waste water in some communities and right to waste water in others, does it?. Wasting water is never right, whether or not there is legislation in force concerning it.
• Smoking in public. There used to be few if any laws about smoking in public places. Now there are increasingly strict laws. However it was never a good thing to smoke in a public place, was it?
• Tax loopholes. Tax avoidance schemes are sometimes touted as being "within the law" or "legal" when really they are just the exploitation of a technical loophole in the law which the tax man never intended, and which he will close off as soon as he gets wind of it. One can hardly consider it "right" to dodge tax in this manner.

Paul understood that sin was inherent in the lives of people who were without law, even though their sin was not imputed. Paul says that "God overlooked the times of this ignorance" (Acts 17:30). Ignorance does not make bad things good. God overlooked some people's wrongdoing and did not impute the wrong to them. Nevertheless, God still saw those people as doing the wrong thing.

Why Sin is Imputed

Having looked at how sin can be inherent, even without a commandment, we now come to look at whether, in any circumstances, God imputes such sin. We know that where there is a law in force, as in Adam's case, God imputes sin to those who break that law. We also know that even where there is no law God may regard an act as sin even though he does not impute the sin. We now ask whether God imputes sin in some cases to those who commit acts that are inherently wrong, even when they have received no formal commandment regarding those acts?.

This brings us to notice a third principle...

• Principle 3. Even though lacking a formal law, people can often perceive a right thing to be right and a wrong thing to be wrong, and thus become "a law to themselves" (Rom 2:12-16).

Paul pointed out early in his letter to the Romans, that people are often ignorant of God's law because they "suppress the truth" (Rom 1:18). God revealed himself to them and "they knew God" but they followed their own speculations and passions. They were "without law" because they supressed the law they had been given, and so they were also "without excuse" (Rom 1:19-32).

Paul acknowledges that even people who did not know or have the law in a formal ordinance, were able nevertheless to recognise their own inherent wrongdoing. They therefore had their sin imputed to them because they became "a law to themselves" (Rom 2:12-16). When people "know the ordinance of God" (Rom 1:32), whether or not they have a formal law, they should obey that ordinance. If instead they prefer to live in their own darkness, God imputes their sin to them.

Paul's Own Case

Before we close, it is instructive to look at how God dealt with Paul himself. God is fair. He neither imputes sin where it would be unjust to do so, nor does he overlook sin where that would be unjust. Paul says, "God will judge the secrets of men" according to their lights. Paul was acutely aware of this justice in his own experience. He says, "I thought to myself that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth" (Acts 26:9-11). "I was formerly a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an insolent man, but I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbelief" (1Tm 1:12-13).

Now notice the following points...

• Paul was acting according to his lights, yet what he was doing was wrong. He thought it was right, and he did not understand that it was wrong, however that did not make the wrong right. Sin was inherent in what Paul was doing.
• God did not overlook Paul's sin but imputed sin to Paul. Ananias said to Paul, "Arise and be baptized and wash away your sins..." (Acts 22:16). Although Paul says, "I thought to myself that I ought..." (Acts 26:9), he was really without excuse because he should have recognised the wrong in what he was doing.
• God was merciful to Paul, taking into account his ignorance and unbelief. However God's mercy in Paul's case consisted not of overlooking his sin, but of imputing it to him, confronting him with it, and making him turn his life around (1Tm 1:12-13).

Home | Bible Topics | The Hub | List | Next