Were there ten commandments in Eden?

 

According to the understanding of the members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, in the time of Adam and Eve, the law - love - and the fullness of its basic desires, the Ten Commandments, were present in a "positive", "fulfilled", moral maximum form. Their sin was so grave because they had corrupted all ten.

1. They chose Satan as their god. /Genesis 3.

2. They idolized knowledge. /Genesis 3:6/

3. they did not bring honour to God's name, but by their deeds they brought dishonour upon it /Genesis 3:6-13/, and they blamed their sin on God.

4. They have corrupted the peace of Paradise. /Deuteronomy 3:16-19/.

5. they have not honoured their parents - God. /Genesis 3:6/

6. They killed, for by their sin all mankind will die. /Romans 5:12/

7. They committed spiritual and spiritual fornication against the Creator. /Es 16./

8. They stole, because they took that which was not theirs. /Genesis 2:17, cf. 3:6/

9. they bore false witness, passed the blame for their sin on to one another, and laid the responsibility on God. /Genesis 3:12-13/

10. They coveted and took what belonged to God. /Genesis 3:6/

This list, however, shows a very biased approach, since love is the basis not only of the Ten Commandments, but of the whole law. Matthew 22:34-40; Romans 13:9-10; Galatians 5:14/, so the fullness of the desires of love is not found in the ten commandments, but in the whole law / Deuteronomy 4:8; 2 Kings 17:13; 21:8; Galatians 5:3; James 2:10/, or in the requirement of all the commandments of the law. /Deuteronomy 26:18; 29:29; 30:8; Jeremiah 11:8; Mark 12:28/, which God gave to the people of Israel through Moses / Leviticus 27:34; Judges 3:4, Neh 1:7-8; 8:1; Mal 4:4; John 7:19; Heb 9:19/

So if the law of God - love - was present in Eden in its fulfilled form, then by 'breaking the law' /Zs 119:126/ - even by one /Matt 5:19; Jas 2:10/ not only the Ten Commandments were broken, but the other laws as well. Accordingly, to continue the list.

11. /Exodus 25:17; Genesis 3:7/

12. what God had said to them, they departed from. /Deuteronomy 17:11; Leviticus 3:3/

13. they accepted the serpent's offer of gifts. /Exodus 23:8; Genesis 3:6/

14. They defiled themselves and made themselves unclean. / Leviticus 11:43; Genesis 3:12-13/

15. They have not covered one another, but have borne one another's sins. /Leviticus 19:17; Genesis 3:8/

16. Adam lied to God about the reason for his hiding - /2 Deuteronomy 23:1,7; Genesis 3:10/

17. Eve added to God's word / Deuteronomy 4:2, - "touch not" - Genesis 3:3/

18. They did not report blasphemous speech to God. /Deuteronomy 5:1; Genesis 3:4/

19. they made the Garden of Eden unclean /Deuteronomy 5:3; Genesis 3:23-24/

20. they chose death instead of life / Deuteronomy 30:19; Genesis 3:19/

So if the law was centered in one commandment, the commandment of love /Hos 6:6-7/, and this command was maximally fulfilled in Eden before the fall from the perspective of the Ten Commandments, then it was fulfilled from the perspective of all the other laws. Or if one of them was broken from the standpoint of the Ten Commandments, then all of them were broken. "For if any man keep the whole law, and sin against one, he is guilty of the transgression of the whole" (James 2:10).

It follows from this principle that if the Ten Commandments were in force in Eden because any of them were broken, then the other laws must have been in force because any of them were broken. /From the list 1-10-20 above, this is clear!/

There is only one whole law in Scripture

For in Scripture there are not two whole laws, but one whole law /cf. 2 Kings 21:8; Matt 22:40; Gal 5:3,14; James 2:10/, the Mosaic, as well as one Lawgiver and one faith. /Jac 4:12; Eph 4:5/

And if there is one whole law, and the Ten Commandments were present in "fulfilled" form in Eden before the Fall, then all the other 603 laws had to be there in "positive", "fulfilled", moral maximum form. But this is not taught by Adventists. Why not? Because, according to them, the Ten Commandments were not part of the Mosaic Law, and Jesus Christ "made a distinction between the Law of Moses and the Ten Commandments." / Prophecy and Gospel. H. N. Adventist Publication, 1987. p. 92./

However, if we focus carefully on the Sermon on the Mount, we can see that in Matthew 5:21 the Greek word arkhaiois is used, which reads like this in the full sentence:

"You have heard that it was told to the ancients: Do not kill, for he who kills is worthy of judgment."

This is a tenet of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:13) Interestingly, however, this word is not only found here, but also in verse 33, which reads:

"Again, you have heard that it was said to the ancients(arkhaiois), 'You shall not swear falsely, but you shall fulfill your oaths to the Lord (Jehovah)."

This item is not one of the Ten Commandments. (cf. Leviticus 19:12; Numbers 30:2) This means that Jesus Christ made absolutely no distinction between the Ten Commandments and the other laws, that they were all given to the ancients(arkhaiois).

But these could not have been Adam and Eve, since the law /in its entirety: 2 Kings 17:13; 21:8/ had "the shadow of the good things to come, not the image of things themselves" (Heb 10:1), under which law the Jews offered sin offerings /Heb 8:4/, and these offerings, together with the covenant Sabbath / Num 28:9-10; Lev 24:8; Ex 31:16/ were shadows of the reality of Jesus Christ. /(Col 2:16-17)/

And just as Jehovah God originally did not want these sacrifices /Jud 8:4; 10:8/, He did not want Adam to sin. /Gen 1:28; 1 Tim 2:4/ Since He created him righteous, (Prov 7:29), He could not have given him a uniform-entire system of law, which was /also/ forward-looking to Jesus Christ in its purpose /Gal 3:19,24/ before he sinned, because mankind was not yet in need of the ransom /Gen 1:31/, its sacrificial forerunner, the restraint and detection of sin by the law. /1Timothy 1:9; Romans 3:20 7:7; Hebrews 10:1,8,18/

By the ancients, therefore, Jesus Christ must have meant those who had received on Mount Sinai a uniform-complete system of law through Moses /Kir 21:8; Neh 9:13-14; Mal 4:4, John 1:17a/, which included, e.g. The Ten Commandments of "Thou shalt not kill" and the Sabbath rest (John 7:19,23), as well as circumcision and "Thou shalt not gird up the mouth of the ox that printeth" (John 7:22; Acts 15:5; 1 Cor 9:9) as part of the covenant. /Heb 9:19-20/ The ancients were not Adam and Eve, but Moses and his contemporaries, the Israelites. /Deuteronomy 26:46; Deuteronomy 4:8,44; 2 Kings 17:13,34; 1 Chronicles 16:40; Neh 8:1; Psalm 78:5; John 18:31; 19:7; Rom 3:2; 9:4/

The Adventist view, then, that the essence of the Ten Commandments is love, self-denying, humble living for others, and therefore that they were for all righteous people walking in God's way in the past, holds only as far back as Mt. Sinai, but not beyond. And even then as part of a unified-whole system of law, since the whole law /10+603/ is based on love, self-denying, humble living for others, not just the basis of the Ten Commandments. And the whole system of law was not revealed before Mount Sinai, especially since the law was given 430 years after the confirmation of Abraham's promise to Christ! /Gal 3:17/ And it obviously could not have been in force before it was written.

This is confirmed by Stephen the Martyr, who in his list of historical events from the time of Abraham in Acts chapter 7 says nothing about a supposedly existing, universally known law of love /ten commandments/, but links the giving and receiving of the law to the time and events of Mt. /Acts 7:39,53/ Other biblical references of course support the same /Cf. Deut 33:2; John 7:19; Gal 3:19; Heb 2:2/

Although these biblical evidences clearly support the invalidity of the Ten Commandments before Mt. Sinai, Adventists nevertheless attribute the "renewal" of the law to the neglect of keeping divine law in Egyptian slavery, which the Lord wants to change. The following examples are cited to show the validity of the Ten Commandments:

In Egypt, the midwives feared God and did not sin against the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" (Exodus 1:16-17) Joseph also testifies to his respect for the law when he refused the sexual proposal of Putiphar's wife by respecting the commandment "Thou shalt not commit adultery". / Genesis 39:9/ Job knew the law /ten commandments/ and hated sin. /Job 1:8/ The people of Sodom and Gomorrah and their transgression of the law caused God's punishment to go astray. The validity of the Ten Commandments is clear from these examples. For "God has declared in the Ten Commandments the fundamental law of our moral world." (Dr. Jenő Szigeti: Christ and the Sabbath. Advent Publishers, Bp. 1989, p. 26.) The same is proclaimed by E.G. White (1827, 26 XI-1915, 16 VII), the Adventistprophetess (considered inspired by God): "The precepts of the Ten Commandments are binding on all men; for the instruction and government of all God has given them ... as a sacred inheritance for the whole world." /Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 308/.

But it is reasonable to ask when God gave the Ten Commandments, perhaps in Eden? That he could not have given it in the sinless world of Eden is proved by the following:

The idea of the Ten Commandments being in force from eternity /or from Eden/ is completely contradicted by the fact that the Ten Commandments mention the term servant three times. Since there was no question before the Fall that there would ever be servants or handmaidens who would need the 7th day's rest, or who could be desired by their master, or who could be brought out of the house of service, God could not have given Adam a commandment not to desire his neighbour's servant or handmaid.

Adam had the option to remain faithful to God's requirements, and in this case there is no way that the idea and practice of servitude could be established among mankind. Thus, the Ten Commandments are also unquestionably far from the Edenic pure position because of their tenets concerning the servant. Adam could not have been given such a command, nor could he have been given a Ten Commandments with such a requirement. This clearly proves the thesis that in Eden there was no one-whole law /ten commandments and all the other commandments/.

Incidentally, this is also proven by the fact that the Ten Commandments were given to those who were brought out of slavery in Egypt, and neither Adam and Eve nor "the whole world" were there as Hebrew slaves. /2 Deuteronomy 20:2/ Besides, Adam disobeyed only one "no" prohibition (Genesis 2:17), not eleven as in the Ten Commandments.

If E.G. White claims that the ten commandments are binding on all men - including Christians - then he is clearly imposing the yoke of bondage on those whom Jesus Christ has redeemed. /Gal 5:1/ For the Ten Commandments were the ten principles of the covenant of the law /Deuteronomy 4:13; 9:9/, which covenant of the law, including of course the other commandments, Exodus 34:27; Deuteronomy 29:21; 2 Kings 23:21; 2 Chronicles 34:30; Jeremiah 11:3,6,8, was a covenant of bondage /law/ /Gal 4:21-31/. Christians, on the other hand, will be judged by the "law of liberty" (Jas 2:12), and must look to and abide in that /Jak 1:25/, not the Ten Commandments.

If God's intention in giving the Ten Commandments was universal, binding on all men - as a basic moral law - then in giving it at Mt Sinai he would not have imposed a within-gates criterion /discriminating clause/ /2 Deut 20:10/. For if it is directly universal, it cannot be explicitly limited to within-gates /because they are also outside the gates/. And if it was restricted, it could not be universal and binding on all, but only on the Jews who received it! /cf Deut 16:11; 31:12; Jer 22:2; Zech 8:16-17/

As an illustration, if a fishing lake owner wants to make his intention to post a NO FISHING sign general and binding for all anglers in the whole lake area - as a final decision - he will not impose a criterion /discriminatory item/ only within the visibility limit of the guard booth when he publicly announces it, because if it wants to be general, it cannot be explicitly imposed on those within the visibility limit /which they are also outside/. And if it does limit it, it cannot be general and binding on everyone, but only on those within the horizon to whom it is given!

In the same way, since the Ten Commandments were only for those within the gates, God could not /then and there, or at any time before that/ give it to govern all ... as a holy inheritance for the whole world, but only for those within the gates to govern and as a holy inheritance. /cf. Deuteronomy 4:32-40; Romans 2:17-18/

And if we were to bring back to Eden the validity of the Ten Commandments, let us note that there they were only "within the gates" and would never have been outside of them but for the sins of Adam and Eve. So in a sinless Eden, such a definition of "within the gates" would have been utterly meaningless on God's part. That the Ten Commandments do contain such a clause is evident from the fact that it is already addressed to the fallen human /Jewish community chosen by God/ /Zsolt 147:19-20/, but only to them for a certain period of time /Gal 3:23-28/.

The coming in of the law

The apostle Paul confirms the same thing when he wrote this:

"But the law came in that sin might increase." (Romans 5:20; cf. 7:7-11)

Now, if the Ten Commandments did not come in /at Mount Sinai/, but only the Mosaic Law /without the Ten Commandments/, how could sin be increased by it? For if the Ten Commandments had always been in force /and never came in, but were only renewed/, then its commandment "Thou shalt not covet" could not have been surpassed in difficulty by any article of the Mosaic Law. So the coming in of the Mosaic law could not have increased sin, because the most difficult law was already in force.

Since the most difficult commandment was "Thou shalt not covet", only this could have caused the vast increase in sin, for no one could have observed it perfectly [because of the tendency of corrupt human nature to envy. - Cf. "Or do you think that the Scripture says without reason, 'The spirit that dwells in us lusts after envy'?" And if the commandment "Thou shalt not covet" came to pass /in the context of the entire Mosaic Law/, then again, the Ten Commandments could not have been in effect before the giving of the Law of Mt. Sinai! /Cf. Gal 3:17,19/

An author who affirmed the universal validity of the law put it this way:

"The law of God was not written until the days of Moses, but from Adam to Moses the law was in existence, which God engraved on the conscience of man to cause him to abstain from sin." /Spicer W. A.: Our Age and the Fate of the World. p. 184.

A. W. Pink, in his "The Law and the Sacred", makes a similar statement, where he writes:

"The moral law given to Israel by Moses was but a transcription, a reservation, of the divine law which man received at creation in the form of the moral nature." /p.15/.

Adam and Eve therefore had a moral law written on their hearts in addition to the instructions God gave them according to the record. And all their descendants obviously had this law of conscience, because God gave them the ability to discern right from wrong, the emotional motivators.

But let us not think that behind this we must understand only the ten commandments, but also other things. For example, the feeling of homosexuality as unnatural, which was later cast off, for example, by the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, and thus completely degenerated. Although not included in the Ten Commandments, it is obviously one of the basic laws written on the heart /cf. Romans 2:15/ which gives a basis for committing sin, i.e. calling this kind of violation of the law a sin.

Sin is only where there is law, and where there is sin, there is law. /Romans 7:7-8; 3:20/ On the basis of these biblical propositions, it is understandable that people could be sinners even before the giving of the law on Mount Sinai, when there was no written law, but there was a moral equivalent of the written law, the natural law written in the heart.

This moral rule was violated by Cain and Lamech /Genesis 4:7,23/; this was broken by the generation of the flood /Genesis 6:5/; Noah's youngest son /Genesis 9:24/; the builders of the tower of Babel, which was an undertaking carried out in an ungodly spirit /Genesis 11:4/; etc... Those whom God condemned in those days without written law, the Bible does not call them lawbreakers /James 2:11/, but godless ones /2Pet 2:5-7; cf. Deuteronomy 9:4-5/, because they did not walk with God, they did not keep their hearts uncorrupted to please God, as e.g. Noah. / Genesis 6:9; Psalm 7:11/

On the other hand, he calls those who walked with God godly, e.g. Job /Job 1:8/; the midwives /Exodus 1:17/; Jacob's rod /Genesis 42:18/. Even Abraham himself, who kept the divine instructions and laws / which were obviously in accordance with the laws given to Noah and the commands and instructions given to him separately - Genesis 18:19; 26:5; 9:4-6/, not general respect for the law, but fear of God, or he attributed its absence to some of the superiors of his time. /Genesis 20:11/

Therefore, to say that because there were righteous, God-fearing people and criminals even before the giving of the law on Mount Sinai, therefore the validity of the Ten Commandments was also evident at that time, this falls under the weight of the biblical evidence listed so far.

The 'general order of natural law' lasted from Adam to Moses /Rom 5:13/; with whom God began to deal for the sake of His people /Ps 103:7/, and with whom a new order of the era of humanity was connected, the 'law-giving order' /Rom 9:4/, which was valid only for those inside the gates /Exodus 20:10/, not for the Gentiles /Romans 2:14-15/. The law therefore became a partition /Ephesians 2:14; Matthew 21:33; Leviticus 20:26/, as e.g. Dr. Hertz's commentary on the Haftara of Deuteronomy also states:

"The law was a hedge around the people." /68. page/

We can read about the same in the H.N. Adventist Church publication entitled "Life according to Parables":

"A protective fence for protection (Isaiah 5:1-2; Matthew 21:33. The vineyard symbolized God's chosen people, Israel. God entrusted his revelation to this people. The provisions of his law - the eternal principles of truth, justice and purity - surrounded them like a stone wall... Following these principles would have saved them from the corruption of sinful habits." / 1991. X-XII. p. 41/

In this way, if the law was a hedge-protective fence-stone wall-rebounding wall, then the ten commandments were also in the law, in the "law of love" that other peoples did not have /Psalm 147:19-20/, and therefore could not be an eternally valid basic moral law for humanity, nor for Adam and Eve! In line with this, God did not punish the Gentiles for breaking the law during one thousand five hundred years, but only the Jews / Exodus 20:5-7; Neh 10:31; 13:16-21; Hebrews 12:6; Acts 14:16/, or those who came under the Mosaic Law covenant as proselytes /Isa 56:6/.

Summary

Were there ten commandments in Eden? It wasn't because:

1. Love is the basis not only of the Ten Commandments, but of the entire Mosaic Law, and if it was there in Eden in its fulfilled form, then the other 600 laws had to be there as well, which is impossible.

2. According to Jesus Christ, the ancients /archaiois received the law, which applied equally to both /the ten commandments and the other 600/, and these could not have been Adam and Eve, only the Jews.

3. Adam was created righteous, and the law is for lawbreakers /1Tim 1:9/, so the sinless Adam could not receive a law that curbs sin.

4. In the law there was a "shadow of the good things to come /pointing forward to Christ", and since there was no need for a savior in Eden, there was no need for a shadow law either. /Hebrews 10:1/

5. The giving of the law is connected to Mount Sinai and applies only to those within the gates.

6. There were no servants in Eden, the Ten Commandments are related to servants.

7. Adam and Eve were not servants in Egypt, the Ten Commandments are related to servants.

8. Only the coming of the Ten Commandments /law/ could increase sins, and not the Mosaic Law without the Ten Commandments, therefore the Ten Commandments could not have been in force before the coming of the Mosaic Law.

9. From Adam to Moses, the 'law of nature' was written in the hearts of people, those who walked with God kept it, those who were ungodly, corrupted it and were condemned for it. /Another category includes guilt due to inherited sin and the violation of God's verbal law./

10. The law was a hedge-protective fence-stone wall between the Jews and the Gentiles, a partition /cf. Ephesians 2:14/ which only the Jews within the gates possessed. Thus, the Ten Commandments, as the seed-heart of the entire law, could not be an eternally valid moral principle for humanity, nor for Adam and Eve.

TWO POSSIBILITIES OF SALVATION

There are two ways to salvation: either you believe in Jesus Christ and keep his law, then you will be saved -

(Romans 13:8-10; Galatians 5:14; 6:2; or you keep the Law of Moses 10+603 without error, and then you will be saved by keeping the Law without error - Galatians 3:12 Now the law is not by faith, but he who does them will live by them.

That your faith is evidenced by keeping the law (10 commandments), because the consequence of obedience is the flawless keeping of the law by the power of the Spirit, equals salvation by keeping the law!

- Romans 4:4 To him that worketh, his wages are not counted for mercy, but according to the debt due.

But if you measure your faith by the observance of the law, if you do not keep it without fault, you will be cursed by the law and damned - Gal 3:10; Cursed is everyone who does not keep all that is written in the book of the law to do them.

That the law was intended to give God's people a way to live in relationship with God, is only true in that it was a master that guided them to Christ, but it put everyone under a curse

- Romans 3:19 so that the whole world would come under the judgment of God (Galatians 3:24-25), and this curse is only removed in Christ (Galatians 3:13)

There are no exceptions to the rule of the law - either it is perfectly obeyed or it is completely broken. So either you keep the law without fault and are saved by keeping the law, or you do not keep it and are damned.

There is no such thing as believing in the blood of Jesus Christ and keeping the law without fault, because if you keep it, you no longer need Jesus' sacrifice.

So it's one or the other!