Without realising it, you're agreeing with what I said in the OP.
I don't how you figure that.
To be fruitful and multiply was a command before the tree command was ever given.
Adam could have rebelled against that command, but there was no law specifying any condemnation of rebelling against that command.
You seem to have the impression that Adam was incapable of doing things that were against the rules that GOD would later give.
We know that's not true because Adam was running around naked with no condemnation for it.
And later we learn that running around naked is against the rules of GOD.
So it wasn't that Adam was not already doing things against what GOD rules would consist of.
It is just that there was no condemnation of running around naked because the law that would come
later could not nullify his innocence he had while running around naked before the tree incident.
Just as Abraham was declared righteous before the law that came later, and it could not nullify his faith.
There has never been a law that gives righteousness unto eternal life.
Righteousness cannot be obtained through a law.
Gal 3:21
Anyone that depends on any righteousness or obedience of their own are going against Rom 5:18-19 and against the faith that Abraham had before the law that came later that did not nullify his faith at all.
It is that faith likened to Abraham before the law came that Paul tell us to aspire to, not a faith of us keeping some law.
