Failed execution of female murderer

[Moonwood]

Yet, you have totally abandoned justice. What post did you advocate for justice in carrying out the execution of the TN prisoner sentenced to death identified in the OP?

You do gosh darn theoretical about it! Nothing to say about the practical aspect of carrying out justice in the case of the OP. Just lip service to the general idea then distract with ideas besides the point.



God loves justice. Ever hear him say that in your Bible? He doesn’t say he loves all these other ideas you keep talking about. Odd huh?

I don't think I've abandoned justice. I think we've disagreed from the beginning about what justice entails.

You seem to define justice exclusively as carrying out a prescribed punishment.

I agree that punishment can be part of justice.

What I disagree with is the idea that justice is exhausted by punishment.

Earlier, you agreed that repentance, transformation, suffering, and the state of the soul matter. If they matter, then they cannot be irrelevant to a Christian discussion of justice.

You keep asking whether I advocate executing Christina Pike. But that's not the question I've been focused on.

My question has been whether Christians should view a person solely through the lens of punishment, or whether they should also care about repentance, redemption, and salvation.
Christ consistently did the latter.

And regarding your statement that God loves justice but doesn't say He loves these other things, Scripture repeatedly emphasizes God's mercy, compassion, and desire for the salvation of sinners.

"I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live." (Ezekiel 33:11)

"God desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." (1 Timothy 2:4)

"Mercy rejoiceth against judgment." (James 2:13)

God certainly loves justice. But the Bible does not portray Him as loving justice instead of mercy, repentance, and salvation.

In fact, Christ is the fullest revelation of God's heart, and Christ repeatedly directs His attention toward the redemption of sinners.

That's why I keep bringing up the adulterous woman, the thief on the cross, and even Christ's prayer for His executioners.

You ask me where I've advocated justice.

I've repeatedly acknowledged guilt, punishment, and the legitimacy of civil authority.

The question I've been asking is where you've made room for the things you yourself agreed matter: repentance, transformation, suffering, and the state of the soul.

If those things matter to God, then they cannot be "beside the point" for Christians.
That's the issue I've been raising from the beginning.

 

[Wrangler]

I don't think I've abandoned justice. I think we've disagreed from the beginning about what justice entails.

Agh huh. This thread is entitled, "Failed execution of female murderer," not "We shouldn't execute convicted murderers just because that is what the sentence was pursuant to law."

You seem to define justice exclusively as carrying out a prescribed punishment.

And you seem to define mercy in this case as jettisoning the proscribed punishment under the law AS IF it is a calling from a God who does not love justice.

You keep asking whether I advocate executing Christina Pike. But that's not the question I've been focused on.

Hence, your avoiding THE only issue at stake in this thread, carrying out justice for Christa Pike.

God certainly loves justice. But the Bible does not portray Him as loving justice instead of mercy, repentance, and salvation.

This thread is not entitled, "We should give murderer chance to repent for mercy sake."

You ask me where I've advocated justice.

I've repeatedly acknowledged guilt, punishment, and the legitimacy of civil authority.

Only in theory. No post of yours says Christa Pike getting justice means she should to be executed. Just say that, then we can move on.

The question I've been asking is where you've made room for the things you yourself agreed matter: repentance, transformation, suffering, and the state of the soul.

And that is the diversion of irrelevant considerations. I'm not on trial here. Time's up. Pay day is here for Christa Pike.

It is not up to me to make room for her repentance or the state of her soul. The system gave her 30 years to repent, transform, etc. You ignore this. Regarding suffering, where is your compassion for the murdered victim and her family who cries out for justice? No where!

If those things matter to God, then they cannot be "beside the point" for Christians.
That's the issue I've been raising from the beginning.

Justice matters to God and is the burden Christians have in this case at this time. The issues you've been raising from the beginning are besides the point. It's like you want to re-litigate the case and debate with the judge what the sentence should be, relentlessly avoiding the burden we Christians have as members of society have in this case, Justice. Your position is the civil authority in this case holds the sword in vain.

 

[Wrangler]

Then why did you cite the Law of Moses death penalty in Genesis???

Do you not get that what @Ronald Nolette quoted pre-dates the time of Moses? From 7 Major Covenants in the Bible | Explained Simply & Biblically

1. Edenic Covenant​

2. Adamic Covenant​

3. Noahic Covenant​

4. Abrahamic Covenant​

5. Mosaic Covenant​

6. Davidic Covenant​

7. New Covenant​

 

[Moonwood]

Agh huh. This thread is entitled, "Failed execution of female murderer," not "We shouldn't execute convicted murderers just because that is what the sentence was pursuant to law."



And you seem to define mercy in this case as jettisoning the proscribed punishment under the law AS IF it is a calling from a God who does not love justice.


Hence, your avoiding THE only issue at stake in this thread, carrying out justice for Christa Pike.

View attachment 91689



This thread is not entitled, "We should give murderer chance to repent for mercy sake."



Only in theory. No post of yours says Christa Pike getting justice means she should to be executed. Just say that, then we can move on.



And that is the diversion of irrelevant considerations. I'm not on trial here. Time's up. Pay day is here for Christa Pike.

It is not up to me to make room for her repentance or the state of her soul. The system gave her 30 years to repent, transform, etc. You ignore this. Regarding suffering, where is your compassion for the murdered victim and her family who cries out for justice? No where!



Justice matters to God and is the burden Christians have in this case at this time. The issues you've been raising from the beginning are besides the point. It's like you want to re-litigate the case and debate with the judge what the sentence should be, relentlessly avoiding the burden we Christians have as members of society have in this case, Justice. Your position is the civil authority in this case holds the sword in vain.

No, my position is not that the sword is held in vain.

My position is that you are defining justice so narrowly that anything other than advocating execution becomes opposition to justice.

I have repeatedly acknowledged Christina Pike's guilt, the legitimacy of civil authority, and the right of the state to punish wrongdoing.

What I have questioned is whether Christians should discuss a human being solely in terms of punishment while treating repentance, transformation, suffering, mercy, and the state of the soul as irrelevant.

Earlier, you agreed that those things matter.

If they matter, then they are not "beside the point."

You keep saying this thread is about justice. I understand that. But you are assuming the very thing under debate: that justice, in this case, means only one possible outcome.

The question is not whether justice matters. The question is what justice consists of.

Christ never reduced a person to the worst thing they had done.

The adulterous woman was guilty.
The thief on the cross was guilty.

Yet Christ's attention was continually directed beyond the offense to the person:

"Neither do I condemn you. Go, and sin no more."

"Today shalt thou be with me in paradise."

You ask where my compassion is for the victim and her family. Their suffering absolutely matters. Justice matters. The horror of the crime matters.

What I reject is the idea that compassion for the victim requires Christians to stop caring about the soul of the offender.

Scripture never forces that choice.

In fact, God says:

"I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live."

That's not my opinion.
That's God's stated disposition toward the wicked.

And while you say the system gave Christina Pike thirty years to repent, my point is that as long as someone is alive, Christians should desire exactly what God desires: repentance, healing, and salvation.

That does not mean abandoning justice. It means refusing to separate justice from the Christian concern for the soul.

The sword may answer a question about what the state is permitted to do.

It does not answer the question of what Christians should hope for.

This thread is entitled, "Failed execution of female murderer,"...

But a thread title doesn't determine what Christians are allowed to discuss. If the subject is a human being facing death, questions about repentance, mercy, salvation, and the state of the soul are not off-topic from a Christian perspective. In fact, they're exactly the kinds of questions Christianity has always asked.

 

[Wrangler]

My position is that you are defining justice so narrowly that anything other than advocating execution becomes opposition to justice.

It's so telling that all your posts are multiple, convoluted paragraphs. Does Christa Pike deserve to be executed under the law? Yes or No.

 

[amigo de christo]

You are so very wrong! What are called the Noahide or Noahic laws were commanded by God!

Genesis 9 King James Version​

9 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.
2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.
4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
5 And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man.
6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
7 And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.

Nowhere is Satan mentioned here! and these are not just for Jews for Israel was not even a people yet!

You are mixing the penalty of sin under the Mosaic covenant with the civil consequences of crime.

Romans 13 King James Version​

13 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

God established civil authority outside of Israel for they were not under the Mosaic covenant. Verse 4 is key! Civil authorities bear the sword for execution, not for having a fancy tool they parade around with.

Sounds to me like your faith be in the noahide laws . strange
Noahide laws will save none .
SO rather than preaching noahide laws , I SUGGEST WE PREACH WHO THE LAW AND PROPHETS POINTED TOO .
JESUS THE CHRIST . you in grave danger . I knew i whiffed it on you .
SO have you bought the lie yet . the lie . have you bought it .
IN other words do
you beleive that if jews and etc KEEP those noahide laws , THEN ALL IS WELL . IF so you have already bought the lie .
Because the last time i checked THE LAW cannot save you , it can clearly tell you what is good and etc
But no man can be justified by the law . Whether it be pre moses or any other law .
IT IS By FAITH . IT is HE who BLEIEVES GOD that actually pleases GOD .
And all who hear the gospel , whether jew or gentile but reject JESUS as the CHRIST
as the SON of GOD , as the MESSIAH and that HE was cruified for our sins and raised again for our justification .
And that ye must from the heart beleive HE rose from the dead and by the mouth confess JESUS as LORD ,
OH THEY CALL GOD A LIAR . and i sure dont see GOD being pleased with that .
This noahide laws OUGHT NEVER been preached . JESUS SHOULD HAVE BEEN . you all are being deceived .

 

[Moonwood]

It's so telling that all your posts are multiple, convoluted paragraphs. Does Christa Pike deserve to be executed under the law? Yes or No.

"Answer yes or no" only works if the issue is actually binary. My entire argument is that you're conflating "the state has authority to execute" with "execution is the only just or Christian response." Those are not the same thing.

 

[amigo de christo]

Yet, you have totally abandoned justice. What post did you advocate for justice in carrying out the execution of the TN prisoner sentenced to death identified in the OP?

Man wrangler if i didnt know you were conservative i would have thought you were social justice .
I made that point to show us all something . WE are all being groomed into the same camp .
To the left it was sold as pro palestine
to the right as pro israel .
And wanna know what both sides have in common .
NETIHER SIDE PREACHES JESUS ANYMORE .
the left preaches social justice
and the right the noahide laws . And both are DECIEVED . for they preach the same lie .
NOT NECESARY TO have to BELEIVE ON JESUS and they both follow another jesus .
Just like it was sold to the muslims , just like it was sold to the jews and christendom and the other religons .
And when one comes along that dont point to the flesh of a jew
but only TO JESUS they run him out as anti semetic .
And if one comes along and dont point to social justice jesus but rather to the true gospel of JESUS
that side runs them out too .
GUESS who is being run out of BOTH camps . THE ONES WHOSE HOPE BE IN GOD , THUS IN HIS CHRIST
thus in HIS peace and in HIS gospel . many now follow the peace of anti christ .

 

[Wrangler]

"Answer yes or no" only works if the issue is actually binary.

That explains everything! Justice is binary; It either prevails or it doesn't.

All your paragraphs are to establish injustice in this case pursuant to the law while denying it through doublespeak.

My entire argument is that you're conflating "the state has authority to execute" with "execution is the only just or Christian response." Those are not the same thing.

As I've said numerous times, you keep bringing up irrelevant things to the matter at hand, justice under the law.

 

[Moonwood]

That explains everything! Justice is binary; It either prevails or it doesn't.

All your paragraphs are to establish injustice in this case pursuant to the law while denying it through doublespeak.


As I've said numerous times, you keep bringing up irrelevant things to the matter at hand, justice under the law.

I think you're assuming your conclusion.
You keep saying that justice either prevails or it doesn't, but then you define justice as carrying out this particular execution. That is the very point under discussion.
I've never denied Christina Pike's guilt. I've never denied that wrongdoing has consequences. I've never denied the legitimacy of civil authority.
What I've questioned is whether Christians should discuss a human being exclusively in terms of punishment while treating repentance, transformation, suffering, mercy, and the state of the soul as irrelevant.
Earlier you agreed that those things matter.
If they matter, then they cannot be irrelevant. They cannot be "beside the point."
And this is why I keep returning to Christ.
The adulterous woman was guilty.
The thief on the cross was guilty.
Yet Christ did not reduce either person to the punishment they deserved. He looked beyond the offense to the person.

"Neither do I condemn you. Go, and sin no more."

"Today shalt thou be with me in paradise."

That's not a denial of justice. It's a recognition that a human being is more than the worst thing they've ever done.
You keep saying my argument is irrelevant because this thread is about justice under the law. But Scripture itself does not discuss sinners only in terms of punishment. Christ certainly didn't.
When God says:

"I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live,"

He is speaking about the very people being judged.
So no, I don't think repentance, restoration, mercy, and salvation are irrelevant to a discussion about a condemned person. God didn't consider them irrelevant, and Christ didn't consider them irrelevant.
The question isn't whether justice matters.
The question is whether justice is the whole story.
I don't believe Christ treated it as the whole story.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

If that is God's desire, shouldn't it be ours as well?

As for war, that's actually a different issue. A war is fought to defend a nation, stop aggression, or protect innocent lives. The death penalty concerns what we do with a person who is already restrained and no longer poses an immediate threat.

But both are murder. War always murders innocent civilians from both sides of the conflict.

God established the death penalty in Genesis 9 for murder.

Salvation and carrying out a sentence imposed by Gods civil authorities are two different issues.

If you wish to see lives saved by the gospel when one is a murderer. Maybe we should send missionaries instead of bombs to offending countries.

What about teh fire bombing of dresden, hamburg, Berlin, Tokyo, and let us not forget Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Those were hundreds of thousands of people who posed no threat.

I understand your compassion. I really do, but laws are laws Jesus has the right to forgive sin and remove the consequences if He chooses, we do not!

Romans 13 clearly says governments do not carry the sword in vain. Swords are weapons to exact penalties that are death! If a state has life imprison with no parole, then that is the penalty. If they have the deatrh sentence, then that is the penalty.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Then why did you cite the Law of Moses death penalty in Genesis???

Sorry but Genesis 9 was written centuries before God gave the 613 Mosaic Laws.

War is MURDER! Yeah, Christians are against MURDERING thousands of people. I.E Hiroshima! Thousands of innocents were MURDERED.

Have you read the NT?

So you are in favort if a nation attacks the US to not resist their take over and murdering of civilians.

I wonder why Kesus, John the Baptist and Paul never told soldiers to leave the armies, especially when they had the perfect opportunities to do so.

I wish that war would never happen, but we live in a fallen world with fallen people.

My brothers don't promote MURDERING millions of people!

Neither do I! But nations are obligated by God to protect their citizenry

I trust God's promises, not Uncle Scam's!

So you would do nothing if say China invaded the US and killed millions. you would just sit and let them. OKAY. Never did the Apostles condemn any soldier. Nor did Jesus.

You're the one supporting MURDERING "innocent civilians"!

YOu are lying! I do not support it. I just realize in a sinful world when war breaks out, innocents do get killed. And the woman who is the OP is not an innocent civilain.

You're still picking the verses you like and totally ignoring the MANY execution COMMANDS in the Law! You really think you will receive mercy on Judgment Day and promote MURDER! Don't count on it.

Once again, you are lying when you say I promote murder. And realizing wars kill people and people kill people is not he unpardonable sin. And we are not under the MOsaic Law as the church, so whatever Many Execution commands in the law do not apply to the church.

Individually, I am not in favor of random killing and wish wars never happened. But I recognize the responsibility God gave to the civil authorities in Romans 13.

Your pacifism is honorable. but when you try to jam it down the throates of everyone as a law is just wrong. It is an indicidual choice! Jesus, JOh the Baptist, Paul and the other Apostles never condemend a Roman soldier for being a soldier when they had the perfect opprotunities to say being soldiers and having to kill people if you go to war is wrong.

 

[Wrangler]

I think you're assuming your conclusion.
You keep saying that justice either prevails or it doesn't, but then you define justice as carrying out this particular execution.

I don’t define justice. It’s already defined.

And yes, justice either prevails or it doesn’t. Simple.

Another simple question is in this particular case, is justice under the law executing Christa Pike? Yes or No.

 

[Jack]

Sorry but Genesis 9 was written centuries before God gave the 613 Mosaic Laws.

Do a little research. Genesis is certainly in the Law of Moses. Again you are EVADING the parts of God's Word you don't like!

So you are in favort if a nation attacks the US to not resist their take over and murdering of civilians.

UnGodly US deserves to be murdered, but that's up to God!

I wonder why Kesus, John the Baptist and Paul never told soldiers to leave the armies, especially when they had the perfect opportunities to do so.

EVASIVE! Give Scripture. You ain't got none!

I wish that war would never happen, but we live in a fallen world with fallen people.

Neither do I! But nations are obligated by God to protect their citizenry

By murdering innocents??? Sending them to Hell?

So you would do nothing if say China invaded the US and killed millions. you would just sit and let them.

Romans 12:19
19 Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord.

OKAY. Never did the Apostles condemn any soldier. Nor did Jesus.

YOu are lying! I do not support it. I just realize in a sinful world when war breaks out, innocents do get killed. And the woman who is the OP is not an innocent civilain.

YOU are lying to yourself. You are indeed supporting MURDERING innocents and even Christians. You don't know who those bombs and bullets will kill. But you insist on killing them!!!

Once again, you are lying when you say I promote murder. And realizing wars kill people and people kill people is not he unpardonable sin. And we are not under the MOsaic Law as the church, so whatever Many Execution commands in the law do not apply to the church.

Again your promote MURDERING innocents! Don't you read your own posts?

Individually, I am not in favor of random killing and wish wars never happened. But I recognize the responsibility God gave to the civil authorities in Romans 13.

Your pacifism is honorable. but when you try to jam it down the throates of everyone as a law is just wrong. It is an indicidual choice! Jesus, JOh the Baptist, Paul and the other Apostles never condemend a Roman soldier for being a soldier when they had the perfect opprotunities to say being soldiers and having to kill people if you go to war is wrong.

Mercy is not dropping bombs on innocent people! Satan has duped you!

Jas 2:13 He shall have judgment WITHOUT MERCY who has shown no mercy!

 

[Moonwood]

I don’t define justice. It’s already defined.

And yes, justice either prevails or it doesn’t. Simple.

Another simple question is in this particular case, is justice under the law executing Christa Pike? Yes or No.

You're still assuming the point under dispute.

You say justice is "already defined," but you haven't actually defined what justice is. Instead, you're treating the execution itself as the definition of justice and then asking whether justice should be carried out. That's circular.

The very issue under discussion is whether justice, in this case, is exhausted by execution, or whether justice can include punishment while also leaving room for mercy, repentance, and concern for the offender's soul.

So when you ask, "Is justice under the law executing Christa Pike? Yes or No," you're not asking a neutral question. You're assuming that execution is the definition of justice and then demanding agreement with the assumption.

I acknowledge her guilt. I acknowledge the state's authority to punish wrongdoing. What I do not grant is your unstated premise that justice and execution are identical.

The question is not whether justice prevails.

The question is what justice consists of. Until that is established, a simple "yes" or "no" does not actually address the issue being debated.

 

[Moonwood]

But both are murder. War always murders innocent civilians from both sides of the conflict.

God established the death penalty in Genesis 9 for murder.

Salvation and carrying out a sentence imposed by Gods civil authorities are two different issues.

If you wish to see lives saved by the gospel when one is a murderer. Maybe we should send missionaries instead of bombs to offending countries.

What about teh fire bombing of dresden, hamburg, Berlin, Tokyo, and let us not forget Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Those were hundreds of thousands of people who posed no threat.

I understand your compassion. I really do, but laws are laws Jesus has the right to forgive sin and remove the consequences if He chooses, we do not!

Romans 13 clearly says governments do not carry the sword in vain. Swords are weapons to exact penalties that are death! If a state has life imprison with no parole, then that is the penalty. If they have the deatrh sentence, then that is the penalty.

I agree that Romans 13 teaches that civil authorities possess authority from God and do not bear the sword in vain.

What I think is often missed is that Romans 12 and 13 address different subjects.

Romans 13 discusses the authority and responsibilities of civil government.

Romans 12 discusses the disposition of the Christian: love, mercy, patience, blessing one's enemies, refusing personal vengeance, and leaving judgment to God.

The question I have been asking throughout this discussion is not whether the state possesses authority.

I have already granted that.

The question is what Christians should desire for the offender.

Ezekiel 33:11 says:

"I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live."

If that is God's stated disposition toward the wicked, then why should Christians desire something different?

You say that laws are laws. I agree that lawful authority has a role to play.

But acknowledging a lawful sentence and desiring the death of the offender are not the same thing.

A Christian can acknowledge guilt, acknowledge punishment, acknowledge civil authority, and still desire repentance, conversion, and salvation.

In fact, Christ consistently directed His attention toward the restoration of sinners.

So my question remains:

Does Romans 13 merely establish the state's authority to punish, or does it require Christians to hope for the death of the offender?

Because those are not the same claim.

 

[Jack]

But both are murder. War always murders innocent civilians from both sides of the conflict.

EVASIVE!!! People choose to MURDER innocents and you are clearly approving it! Read your posts! You have approved it over and over! And you will be reminded of it on Judgment Day!

 

[Wrangler]

You're still assuming the point under dispute.

You cannot even answer whether Christa Pike deserves execution under the law. This shows how you dispute, denying the very thing you are disputing. You have showed, proved what is disputed. There is no assumption about it.

Your intellectual dishonesty is so despicable, I’m going to put you on ignore now. I’ve had it with your nonsense!

 

[Moonwood]

You're still assuming the point under dispute.

You say justice is "already defined," but you haven't actually defined what justice is. Instead, you're treating the execution itself as the definition of justice and then asking whether justice should be carried out. That's circular.

The very issue under discussion is whether justice, in this case, is exhausted by execution, or whether justice can include punishment while also leaving room for mercy, repentance, and concern for the offender's soul.

So when you ask, "Is justice under the law executing Christa Pike? Yes or No," you're not asking a neutral question. You're assuming that execution is the definition of justice and then demanding agreement with the assumption.

I acknowledge her guilt. I acknowledge the state's authority to punish wrongdoing. What I do not grant is your unstated premise that justice and execution are identical.

The question is not whether justice prevails.

The question is what justice consists of. Until that is established, a simple "yes" or "no" does not actually address the issue being debated.

You cannot even answer whether Christa Pike deserves execution under the law. This shows how you dispute, denying the very thing you are disputing. You have showed, proved what is disputed. There is no assumption about it.

Your intellectual dishonesty is so despicable, I’m going to put you on ignore now. Ikve had it with your nonsense!

I've answered your question repeatedly. I acknowledge Christa Pike's guilt, the state's authority to punish crime, and the legal sentence that was imposed.

What I have not conceded is your assumption that justice is exhausted by execution.

That is the point under discussion.

Disagreeing with your definition of justice is not intellectual dishonesty.

In any case, I wish you well.

 

[Wrangler]

Do a little research. Genesis is certainly in the Law of Moses.

Speak for yourself. You don’t seem teachable to ignore the 7 covenants of the Bible. @Ronald Nolette is referring to 3 not 5.

Do you not get that what @Ronald Nolette quoted pre-dates the time of Moses? From 7 Major Covenants in the Bible | Explained Simply & Biblically

1. Edenic Covenant​

2. Adamic Covenant​

3. Noahic Covenant​

4. Abrahamic Covenant​

5. Mosaic Covenant​

6. Davidic Covenant​

7. New Covenant​