No cerimonial laws existed until sin.
Before sin only moral laws existed.
The sabbath was created for man and blessed by God before sin.
So before sin = moral.
Sin in this world was not present but Satan had already sinned in heaven.
But humans created in God's image did not need any laws that deals with redemption and atonement. We could talk face to face with God before sin. But the sin that Adam committed was unto death. He transgressed the moral law.
Though shalt not covet and thou shalt have no other gods before me.
I didn't say it made them moral I said it seperated them or distinguished them from the other laws. They were different on these grounds.
The penalty of sin is death.
Sin is the transgression of the law.
If we are guilty of death before God we must of transgressed one of the moral laws.
Exo 31:14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
I was stating the differences between the laws.
One law is the moral law that defines sin.
One law was given after sin to point to and deal with sin.
When you mix them all together they lose there purpose and value...
Genesis never calls the Sabbath a law before the fall; it simply says God rested and blessed the seventh day (Gen 2:3).
There is no command to Adam and Eve to keep a Sabbath, no prohibition, no penalty, no covenant sign — the first time Sabbath becomes a command is Exodus 16, and the first time it becomes a sign is Exodus 31:13–17, explicitly tied to Israel’s covenant, not creation.
Your claim that “only moral laws existed before sin” is not in the text;
Scripture never says that.
Your claim that Adam broke “thou shalt not covet” or “no other gods before me” is also not in the text;
Genesis defines the sin as violating one command — “of the tree… thou shalt not eat” (Gen 2:17).
Paul defines sin as transgression of any command God gives (Rom 4:15), not as transgression of a Ten‑Commandment subset.
And your death‑penalty argument collapses because Sabbath violation carries the death penalty (Ex 31:14), which — by your own logic — would make Sabbath a moral law, yet Paul explicitly places Sabbaths in the shadow category (Col 2:16–17).
Scripture never says “written on stone = moral,” never says “inside the ark = moral,” never says “given before sin = moral,” never says “given after sin = ceremonial,” and never says mixing laws “loses their purpose.” The Bible’s own category is simple: the Sinai covenant is one unit (Deut 4:13–14; James 2:10), and Christ fulfills and supersedes that covenant (Heb 8:13; 10:1).
Everything else is a system you’re adding, not a category Scripture teaches. And the system you are using is the classic Adventist‑style moral vs. ceremonial law framework —
a grid Scripture never teaches — where “moral law” is defined as eternal, creation‑based, universal, Ten‑Commandment‑only, and “ceremonial law” is defined as temporary, post‑fall, symbolic, and fulfilled at the cross; every claim he makes (“before sin only moral laws existed,” “Sabbath created before sin = moral,” “death penalty proves moral,” “transgression of moral law = only kind of sin,” “laws inside the ark are different,” “mixing laws loses their purpose”) comes from that system, not from the biblical text. So if you wish to discuss Scripture, leave your system behind. Otherwise I leave you with this warning,
Scripture warns repeatedly and explicitly against imposing world‑systems onto the Word of God because they replace God’s voice with human frameworks;
Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for this exact move (“you nullify the word of God for your tradition,” Matt 15:6),
Paul warns against mixing human philosophy with revelation (“not according to Christ,” Col 2:8), and
Moses commands Israel not to add or subtract from God’s words (Deut 4:2);
Every time a human system is laid over Scripture, it reshapes the text to fit the system, and Scripture calls that corruption, not interpretation.
The danger is simple: once a system becomes the lens, the system becomes the authority — and the text becomes the servant.
That’s why Jesus, Paul, and the prophets all warn that the Word must govern the categories, not the categories govern the Word.
When someone insists on a moral‑vs‑ceremonial grid, or a prophetic‑timeline grid, or a covenant‑division grid, and then forces Scripture to fit it, they are doing exactly what Scripture forbids: adding human structure to divine revelation.
