Proof that Open Theism protection of Free Will is correct and biblically sound!!
Oops... It came out!!! Cats out of the bag!!!!
I'll sometimes say 'proof' but such, imh estimation, leans more often toward sensationalism. I do believe there are proofs, rather than just evidence, that God exists, but because He is Spirit, critics have a point to object to proofs. That said, Paul said God is clearly seen that all men are without excuse (thus proof). So, I do give proof sets ( "if A = B, and B = C; then A = C").
The 'proof' in this case means it is likely true and is demonstrably true. I assume you mean that by Romans 7 so I'll look for it. It should be as clear as A = C else we'd say 'inkling of Open Theology" or "Seems to uphold Open Theology" etc. :think: Onward...
Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? (Fruit of the Eternal Father that is Blameless and TriUne) Certainly not! (Affirmed) On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. (Did God give us the fruit or tell us not to eat it?). For I would not have known covetousness (Covet what? Isaiah 14:14) unless the law had said, “You shall not covet.” 8 But sin, (1 Cor. 15:54f, 56) taking opportunity by the commandment (1 Cor. 15:56), produced in me all manner of evil desire. (Heb. 2:14) For apart from the law sin was dead. (Gen. 2:16) 9 I was alive once without the law (Gen. 3:5) , but when the commandment came (Gen. 3:7 ... the opposite of 2 Cor. 5:7) , sin revived and I died (Heb. 2:14). 10 And the commandment, which was to bring life (John 16:9), I found to bring death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me (Gen. 3:5 ... Rev. 12:9), and by it killed me. (Heb. 2:14) 12 Therefore the law is holy (Mk. 10:18), and the commandment holy and just (Gal. 3:24) and good. (Mk. 10:18) |
Whoops... is that the original counter doctrine to the "false doctrine" of "Predestined original sin"?
What's the true doctrine of original sin? (John 16:9; Isaiah 14:14; Proverbs 16:18; Ezekiel 28:17; Obadiah 1:4; Mt. 23:12; 1 Pt. 5:6; Heb. 2:14; Gen. 3:5; 1Co. 15:54f; 56; Rev. 12:9)
Classical Origonal Sin Counter Doctrine Courtesy of the Apostel Paul? Yep!!!
I think 'inkling' at best and 'wrong' at worst and here is why: This is talking about our condition in conjunction with the law.
His proof set would look like this:
A) SInner, dying, but doesn't know it. Without God in the world, but in ignorant bliss.
B) Sinner, realizes there is a God, and that he is apart from God and because of sin, unacceptable to God : Troubled dying spirit.
C) Therefore, a knowledge of God's Laws doesn't create death, but an awareness of it.
Therefore, Romans 7 first, does not really discuss freewill theism (Romans 9 does by example) and second, it supports just as well, the idea of original sin, and because the law applies to all men (Romans 3:23) it actually is against any contenders as far as evidence. Did I prove that? :nono: I did, however, give good scriptural reasoning from A-C that my understanding is Biblical and from Romans 7.
Scriptural Royal Flush... Jesus wins ALL!
(John 5:39f ... John 16:9 ... Ephesians 2:8f)
I hope I've shown your cards aren't all the same suit, if even the same color. I'd suggest in this case, it was a bluff, because 1) all of Romans points to the opposite conclusion regarding original sin 2) That you seem to confuse the doctrine of Original sin with Free will (not the same and so you seem to be jumping around a bit in Christian doctrine without making connections) and 3) that Romans 7 rather is describing recognition of sin in all men, when any one of them sees the righteous requirements of God and realizes he, she, them, have all fallen short from the preceding chapter (Romans 3:23; 6:23).