Test 5: God's Response to Sin
The Central Questions
When humanity sinned in Eden, did God abolish the law to eliminate sin's definition, or did He maintain the law and provide a sacrifice to pay its penalty? What does the immediate promise of a "seed" in Genesis 3:15 indicate about the law's continuity? If Christ came to pay sin's penalty, doesn't that logically require the law to remain in force? These questions strike at the heart of redemption's legal framework and determine whether the moral law, including the Sabbath, continues or ceased.
The Critical Moment: God's Options After Sin
When Adam and Eve transgressed in Eden, God faced a juridical decision with universal consequences. Theoretically, He had several options:
God's Theoretical Options
- Abolish the law - If no law exists, no transgression exists (Romans 4:15)
- Modify the law - Lower the standard to match humanity's fallen capability
- Ignore the violation - Exercise executive clemency, pardoning without payment
- Maintain the law and exact its penalty - Uphold justice by requiring death
- Maintain the law and provide a substitute - Uphold both justice and mercy
The biblical record reveals God chose the fifth option. This choice has profound implications for the law's perpetuity. If God was willing to sacrifice His own Son rather than change or abolish the law, this demonstrates the law's immutable character.
The Immediate Response: Genesis 3:15
God's first response to sin appears in Genesis 3:15, traditionally called the protoevangelium (first gospel): "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." This promise, given before any judgment was pronounced on Adam and Eve, reveals God's juridical framework.
The Legal Significance of the Seed Promise
The promise of a "seed" who would be wounded ("bruise his heel") while defeating Satan ("bruise thy head") indicates substitutionary suffering. The seed would experience injury in the process of victory. This immediately raises the legal question: why would the seed need to suffer if the law could simply be abolished? The promise of redemptive suffering only makes sense if the law remains in force and requires satisfaction.
Galatians 3:19 explicitly connects this promised seed to the law: "Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made." Paul identifies Christ as this seed. The ceremonial law was "added" to explain how the promised seed would address sin, but the moral law that was transgressed remained constant.
The Institution of Sacrifice
Immediately after sin, we see the institution of sacrifice. Genesis 3:21 records: "Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them." These skins required the death of animals - the first death in Scripture. This wasn't merely practical clothing but profound symbolism: innocent blood covered the guilty.
Genesis 4:4 shows Abel offering "the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering." Hebrews 11:4 adds crucial commentary: "By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous."
The Sacrificial System's Legal Logic
The sacrificial system makes sense only if the law remains in force. Sacrifice acknowledges that:
- The law has been broken
- The penalty (death) is required
- A substitute can bear the penalty
- The law itself remains unchanged
If the law were abolished, sacrifice becomes meaningless. You cannot pay a penalty for breaking a non-existent law.
The Legal Principle: Satisfaction vs. Abolition
Romans 6:23 establishes the juridical framework: "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." The word "wages" (opsMnion) means earned payment - what is justly deserved. If sin earns death as wages, and Christ died to pay those wages, then the law requiring payment must still be in force.
Consider the legal logic: If a debt is owed and someone pays it, the debt law isn't abolished - it's satisfied. If a crime carries a penalty and someone bears that penalty, the criminal law isn't eliminated - it's fulfilled. Christ's death doesn't demonstrate the law's weakness or temporality but its unchangeable authority.
Christ's Testimony About His Mission
Jesus explicitly addressed whether He came to abolish the law: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matthew 5:17-18).
The Greek word "destroy" (kataluM) means to dissolve, abolish, or overthrow. Christ emphatically denies this as His mission. Instead, He came to "fulfil" (plroM) - to fill up, complete, or satisfy. This is legal language of satisfying requirements, not eliminating them.
The Necessity of Law for Christ's Sacrifice
Paul's legal argument in Galatians 2:21 is decisive: "I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain." Now consider the inverse: if the law could be abolished, then Christ died in vain. Why? Because abolishing the law would eliminate sin (no law, no transgression) without requiring sacrifice.
The Logical Necessity of Law Continuation
The book of Hebrews makes this crystal clear. Hebrews 9:22 states: "Without shedding of blood is no remission." Why? Because "the wages of sin is death." If the law requiring death for sin could be changed, blood wouldn't be necessary. Christ's sacrifice simultaneously validates the law's ongoing authority and provides the remedy for breaking it.
The Pattern Throughout Scripture
The consistent biblical pattern shows God maintaining His law while providing redemption:
God's Consistent Pattern
- After Eden's sin: Law maintained, sacrifice instituted, seed promised
- After the Flood: Law reaffirmed (Genesis 9:5-6), sacrifice offered (Genesis 8:20)
- Abraham's covenant: Law acknowledged (Genesis 26:5), justification by faith provided
- Sinai covenant: Moral law codified in stone, ceremonial law added to point to coming Sacrifice
- New Covenant: Law written on hearts (Hebrews 8:10), not abolished
Never once does Scripture show God eliminating moral law to address sin. Instead, He consistently provides a way to satisfy the law's demands while maintaining its authority.
The Legal Impossibility of Law Abolition
If God could abolish the moral law, several legal impossibilities arise:
Impossibilities of Law Abolition
- The Death of Christ Becomes Unnecessary: If law can be abolished to eliminate sin, why sacrifice His Son?
- Justice Becomes Arbitrary: If law can be changed when violated, justice has no meaning
- God's Character Becomes Mutable: Since moral law reflects God's character, changing law implies changing God
- Sin Loses Definition: Without law, sin cannot exist (1 John 3:4)
- The Sanctuary Service Becomes Meaningless: Christ's high priestly ministry would have no purpose
The New Covenant Confirmation
The New Covenant explicitly maintains the law while changing its location. Hebrews 8:10 quotes Jeremiah 31:33: "For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts."
Notice carefully: God doesn't say "I will abolish my laws" or "I will replace my laws with new ones." He says "I will put my laws" - the same laws, new location. The problem addressed isn't the law's content but humanity's inability to keep it due to sin's power. The solution is internal transformation, not law abolition.
The Continuing Standard of Judgment
James 2:10-12 establishes that the moral law remains the standard of judgment: "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all... So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty."
James explicitly references the Ten Commandments (adultery, murder) and says Christians will be "judged by the law of liberty." If the law were abolished at the cross, it couldn't judge anyone after the cross. The continuing judgment standard proves the law's continuity.
The Sabbath in This Framework
If God's response to sin was to maintain the moral law while providing a sacrifice, and if the Sabbath is part of that moral law (written by God's finger on stone, placed in the ark), then the Sabbath continues. Christ's sacrifice doesn't abolish the Sabbath any more than it abolishes "Thou shalt not kill" or "Thou shalt not steal."
The ceremonial sabbaths, part of the sacrificial system, found their fulfillment in Christ (Colossians 2:16-17). But the weekly Sabbath, established at creation before sin, written in stone by God's finger, remains part of the moral law that Christ died to satisfy, not destroy.
Conclusion
God's response to sin definitively establishes the moral law's perpetuity. When humanity transgressed, God didn't abolish the law to eliminate sin's definition. Instead, He promised a seed who would suffer to address sin's penalty, instituted sacrifice to illustrate the redemption principle, and ultimately sent His Son to satisfy the law's demands perfectly.
The legal logic is inescapable: Christ's death proves the law's unchangeable authority. One cannot pay a penalty that doesn't exist. One cannot satisfy requirements that have been abolished. The cross simultaneously demonstrates the law's immutability (it couldn't be changed to save us) and God's love (He paid the penalty Himself rather than abandon us to it).
The promise of the seed in Genesis 3:15, immediately after sin, shows God's plan was never to abolish law but to provide redemption from breaking it. The New Covenant writes the same law on hearts rather than abolishing it. Therefore, the moral law - including the Sabbath established at creation and written by God's finger at Sinai - continues as the unchangeable standard of God's government.