The biblical truth is a dialectical equation

[APAK]

Another foundational dialectic...or "polarity" concerns the law.

Rom. 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Compare with...

Rom. 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.


So then grace establishes the law.

Epi..it has been a while....a little surprised at your OP....let me comment on just your comment here....

Romans Chapter 3 discusses the grace of YHWH to individuals that then brought the gift of faith to righteousness, under the Law.

Both the OT and NT saints were righteous and justified because first, the same grace of YHWH although for different purposes and effects, provided the same type of faith, to believe in Christ (I Peter 1:11 – in/on the spirit of Christ). The OT group looked forward in faith to the Day, and the latter to the past and the present, to his words, mission, joy, hope and love of Christ.

So Romans 3:31 says we keep the law and uphold it is made more meaningful as part of YHWH’s previous plan of restoration, because of the faith of those that looked forward to Christ’s Day by the Law – not that we practice it anymore.

It gave those rituals of animal sacrifice and prayers of incense under the Law, meaning, by one’s faith in the Promise.

Now Romans 6: 14 says we are not under the law as NT saints because the Law never took away the sins. It was an imperfect sacrificial sin cleansing system. Christ became the perfect sacrifice for sin and finally cleansed us from it.

We (NT saints) are now under the grace of YHWH that provided our Savior and his own perfect sacrifice for our restoration; without the Law.

So now, sin is not our master, as it would have been if still under the Law.

There is no dialectic of scripture truth concerning the Law if one takes the time to read and analysis the context of each passage, which are different and cannot be combined to form a universal truth of ones choosing that is miles apart from the truth.

Both are meaningful as each have different purposes and truth in them.

Summary: One grace of YHWH given for two purposes for the OT and NT. One faith given to bolster the significance of the Law and to believe in Christ. This same faith was given to the circumcised as well as the uncircumcised.

Not under the Law because it is not compatible with permanent sin cleansing.

And your OP on the dialectic thesis and antithesis on scripture truth is new to me. You have added a new twist to the Hegel/Marx philosophy it seems. So when the 1st verse conflicts with the 2nd presented verse you offer a 3rd verse of truth as the synthesis I gather, as you have stated. And you are dead wrong I’m afraid.

As I’ve shown, there is no conflict between these two verses. Are you trying to make a conflict in these verses or are you not seeing it?

I just found this OP and thread of yours and I thought I should chime in…

It’s been many months since I last read your comments at length. Or anyone else’s comments for that matter.


Bless you


APAK

 

[ScottA]

Surely you are exaggerating any understanding you have concerning the OP. God has hidden the truth so that very few can understand it. That's why we are to search for it as for hid treasure. The people that say they understand the bible understand it the least. And God made it that way.

And I marvel at this...to see the wisdom of it.

That explanation leaves out anyone who actually does understand the truth, even God.

You have purposed a riddle. Here is the answer:

You are correct in one respect: There is a built in thesis / antithesis, but not a synthesis. The thesis is man's own life, experience, and perspective; his truth is according to himself and being evil or fallen. But the antithesis is good and true, completely founded in God's perspective.

Men say, "yesterday, today, and forever." God says, "I am."

Take any subject that is of God, and men will lay it out a thousand ways, each claiming it is "yesterday, today, and forever." But with God, it is all "the same." Example: Men will say that salvation is a "process", because that is their experience. But if it is of God, by definition, salvation being of God, can only be "the same" (forever). "Yea or nay" And so it is also with every other thing that is of God...or, by definition, it is not "of God."

 

[bbyrd009]

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.

8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.

9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

in the beginning was the Bible, and the Bible was with Yah, and the Bible was Yah?
you think?

Free will does not exist.

he said, with utter cock-sureness look you sure you dont wanna qualify that even a little bit? Just in case? I mean up to you tho k

 

[DNB]

This has no biblical support and is based on a faulty view of foreknowledge, Free will does not exist.

Who wrote this post (on things pertaining to God), you or someone else?
If it wasn't you, are you willing to affirm that your point is infallible, ...and everything else that you post in regard to Scripture?

 

[Episkopos]

That explanation leaves out anyone who actually does understand the truth, even God.

You have purposed a riddle. Here is the answer:

You are correct in one respect: There is a built in thesis / antithesis, but not a synthesis. The thesis is man's own life, experience, and perspective; his truth is according to himself and being evil or fallen. But the antithesis is good and true, completely founded in God's perspective.

Men say, "yesterday, today, and forever." God says, "I am."

Take any subject that is of God, and men will lay it out a thousand ways, each claiming it is "yesterday, today, and forever." But with God, it is all "the same." Example: Men will say that salvation is a "process", because that is their experience. But if it is of God, by definition, salvation being of God, can only be "the same" (forever). "Yea or nay" And so it is also with every other thing that is of God...or, by definition, it is not "of God."

Agreed. And that's the whole point of receiving all truth...it leads us right to Jesus Christ....in truth. (you shall know the truth)

But Jesus Christ is as much a stumbling block for people as He is the cornerstone and foundation of life.
In Christ mercy and truth have kissed. And these...without Him...could be seen as mutually exclusive. People will argue one against the other with a barrage of bible verses...fully missing the point. We see that trend on this very thread. And that's because the truth is very easy to resist...with the carnal mind.

There is a way that seems right unto a man...but there's no life in it.

So as @ DNB put it so aptly...we have paradox.

 

[Episkopos]

I think it's more like a paradox, that is, both statements are always true, even Calvin vs Arminius. And, like you said, it's reconciling the perceived conflicts that is required of one who rightly divides God's Word. And, as you also stated, this tends to separate the misguided (those who claim they fully understand, but barely do - couldn't agree more), from the wise and sincere.

Excuse me for re-posting a previous post of mine, but it reflects my view well on how to harmonize God's sovereignty, with man's free-will. I believe that this is what you are requesting, a resolve to two perceived, opposing Biblical axioms?

I think that between God's sovereignty, foreknowledge and omniscience, he knows exactly who are his, or, who will do what, in any given circumstance, before the beginning of time. And thus, he has created the environment that is conducive to expose those, who by their free-will, will either accept or reject the Gospel of Christ, accordingly.
God knows us better than we know ourselves, just as Jesus knew who would abandon him, despite the culprits declaring and insisting otherwise. This does not mean that anyone was forced, possessed, or wired to act in a particular manner. Wisdom just gives the possessor of it, that insight. Just as a parent knows their children, better than the kids know themselves. And therefore, they control the environment in order to bring out the best for them.

Good post. Yes...paradox. But it takes some honesty to see that...and quite a bit of seeking to find out why that is necessary.

 

[marks]

OK so that goes against the idea that none are righteous no not one as a stand alone thesis....the basis for evangelicalism.

So I say the proper response is not to call these thesis and antithesis, as you do in you OP, then deriving a synthesis. Rather, to seek a greater understanding of these passages so that you can see that they are not antithetical to each other, and the full and correct understanding will harmonize with both passages. There no synthesis, each are fully true in their own right, and a full understanding reveals this.

But I do realize that while you OP was ostensibly that the Bible was a dialectic, that your actual intent - appears to be - another thread against Luther, and another thread promoting self-righteousness.

So it's not about understanding these passages, it's more about using them against each other to support your synthesis, self-righteousness.

I've answsered you and there is no need to keep on repeating myself to someone whose only concern regarding me appears to be to bully me off his threads. But you do need to keep in mind this is a public forum, and your decorum reflects on you.

You post a thread about the Bible as a dialectic, but in reality it's a thread promoting your view of self-righteousness, and you call me dishonest.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

Chapter 16: Of Good Works
1._____ Good works are only such as God hath commanded in his Holy Word, and not such as without the warrant thereof are devised by men out of blind zeal, or upon any pretence of good intentions.
( Micah 6:8; Hebrews 13:21; Matthew 15:9; Isaiah 29:13 )
2._____ These good works, done in obedience to God's commandments, are the fruits and evidences of a true and lively faith; and by them believers manifest their thankfulness, strengthen their assurance, edify their brethren, adorn the profession of the gospel, stop the mouths of the adversaries, and glorify God, whose workmanship they are, created in Christ Jesus thereunto, that having their fruit unto holiness they may have the end eternal life.
( James 2:18, 22; Psalms 116:12, 13; 1 John 2:3, 5; 2 Peter 1:5-11; Matthew 5:16; 1 Timothy 6:1; 1 Peter 2:15; Philippians 1:11; Ephesians 2:10; Romans 6:22 )

3._____ Their ability to do good works is not at all of themselves, but wholly from the Spirit of Christ; and that they may be enabled thereunto, besides the graces they have already received, there is necessary an actual influence of the same Holy Spirit, to work in them to will and to do of his good pleasure; yet they are not hereupon to grow negligent, as if they were not bound to perform any duty, unless upon a special motion of the Spirit, but they ought to be diligent in stirring up the grace of God that is in them.
( John 15:4, 5; 2 Corinthians 3:5; Philippians 2:13; Philippians 2:12; Hebrews 6:11, 12; Isaiah 64:7 )

4._____ They who in their obedience attain to the greatest height which is possible in this life, are so far from being able to supererogate, and to do more than God requires, as that they fall short of much which in duty they are bound to do.
( Job 9:2, 3; Galatians 5:17; Luke 17:10 )

5._____ We cannot by our best works merit pardon of sin or eternal life at the hand of God, by reason of the great disproportion that is between them and the glory to come, and the infinite distance that is between us and God, whom by them we can neither profit nor satisfy for the debt of our former sins; but when we have done all we can, we have done but our duty, and are unprofitable servants; and because as they are good they proceed from his Spirit, and as they are wrought by us they are defiled and mixed with so much weakness and imperfection, that they cannot endure the severity of God's punishment.
( Romans 3:20; Ephesians 2:8, 9; Romans 4:6; Galatians 5:22, 23; Isaiah 64:6; Psalms 143:2 )

6._____ Yet notwithstanding the persons of believers being accepted through Christ, their good works also are accepted in him; not as though they were in this life wholly unblameable and unreprovable in God's sight, but that he, looking upon them in his Son, is pleased to accept and reward that which is sincere, although accompanied with many weaknesses and imperfections.
( Ephesians 1:6; 1 Peter 2:5; Matthew 25:21, 23; Hebrews 6:10 )

7._____ Works done by unregenerate men, although for the matter of them they may be things which God commands, and of good use both to themselves and others; yet because they proceed not from a heart purified by faith, nor are done in a right manner according to the word, nor to a right end, the glory of God, they are therefore sinful, and cannot please God, nor make a man meet to receive grace from God, and yet their neglect of them is more sinful and displeasing to God.
( 2 Kings 10:30; 1 Kings 21:27, 29; Genesis 4:5; Hebrews 11:4, 6; 1 Corinthians 13:1; Matthew 6:2, 5; Amos 5:21, 22; Romans 9:16; Titus 3:5; Job 21:14, 15; Matthew 25:41-43 )

You posted this at 9:18. Four minutes later a written post was offered stating basically it's incorrect, solves nothing. This proves some do not even read the posts, with the scriptures. There is no way these types are teachable, they're already banging their keyboard in protest of something they have not even read! That's so disingenuous and dishonest.

 

[marks]

Instead you just say..I don't see a problem with it.

I've given you an answer, and not said this, so, again, who is dishonest?

 

[Renniks]

And yet we see people being said to be righteous many times...without Christ.

Where? If someone is righteous it's because they have followed Gods ways, whether they recognize him yet or not.

 

[Enoch111]

I think the Bible says one thing, and does not contradict itself. That's what people do.

This is correct. Saying that the Bible is dialectical is JUST NONSENSE.

At the same time, if there are conflicting interpretations, they need to be compared with Scripture, not with other conflicting interpretations. We should also be aware that there are many who choose to believe false doctrines even after they are shown the truth from the Bible.

 

[Collin Feener]

The bible is written as a "dialectic"...where there is a thesis...an antithesis..and when these agree we have synthesis. it is a way to understanding the truth based on the way our brains work. We have 2 poles in our brain that function each separately. It's what allows us to become hypocrites for instance. So it is only as BOTH sides of the brain are brought into the mix that we can perceive what truth is. Most people will argue from one side or the other..so that they never are able to grasp the truth. instead they have "their" truth...a side of a truth.

A good example of this in religion is the Calvinist/Armenian dialectic.

So then neither is right. But by looking at arguments from BOTH sides we can arrive at a balanced understanding.

But this takes work and lots of thinking things out. As Einstein once said...thinking is hard work..that's why so few people do it!

It is now as it was in the beginning with the gospel of John. He has now come unto his own but they perceive him not. He is the truth that people just can't perceive but for those who do perceive him he has given the right to be as sons of God. Yet flesh and blood cannot teach us about God and the truth. Only God and God is no flesh. God is Spirit it is from the Spirit we learn truth.
The Spirit of truth is given when we stop seeing Jesus as he was in the flesh because you cannot receive the Spirit until it is given from the father. Spirit begets truth.
If people keep hold of Jesus as he was given in the flesh he is still with them but if they only look at what the Spirit says , Jesus has left and returns as the Spirit of truth from above. The Spirit is the truth.
These things that I teach are truth. They are not my truth, but from God's truth given from above.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

And yet we see people being said to be righteous many times...without Christ.

No one is righteous without Christ. It's interesting you say no evangelical can clear up your man made contradictions while at the same time you say you don't read them or "follow man" as you get all your teaching directly from God.

That and it's been proven you don't read posts yet respond to them to say they're wrong. Proverbs calls such behavior foolish, while the rest of Scripture proves your above statement heresy.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

You posted this at 9:18. Four minutes later a written post was offered stating basically it's incorrect, solves nothing. This proves some do not even read the posts, with the scriptures. There is no way these types are teachable, they're already banging their keyboard in protest of something they have not even read! That's so disingenuous and dishonest.

Yes, I noticed this as well.
On this board there are several that try and fashion some new insight, that no one else could ever consider.
Thinking things out is nice, but to delude ourselves to a point of dubious conclusions is tedious.
Truth gets put on hold.

 

[r1xlx]

Surely you are exaggerating any understanding you have concerning the OP. God has hidden the truth so that very few can understand it. That's why we are to search for it as for hid treasure. The people that say they understand the bible understand it the least. And God made it that way.

And I marvel at this...to see the wisdom of it.

You surely cannot understand the Bible but mask your ignorance with philosophical claptrap.
Get a good large print KJV Study Bible and start studying.

 

[r1xlx]

More nonsense from you. You won't engage the OP...just look to disagree and derail threads as if knowledge was a virus to be immunized from.



Instead you just say..I don't see a problem with it. Is it reading comprehension? Wilfull blindness?

You need to look in a mirror and tell the guy you see that what he wrote is philosophical claptrap better suited to a juvenile debating society.

 

[marks]

OK so that goes against the idea that none are righteous no not one as a stand alone thesis....the basis for evangelicalism.

So are you renouncing Luther? Do you understand how these things work? Or do you just accept that things don't add up...and walk away.?

Again, we need to pull back a bit, take in a broader context, and your supposed contradiction goes away. But again, I realize that your OP of the dialectic was more a vehicle to get to self-righteousness.

So let's take a look:

9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
16 Destruction and misery are in their ways:
17 And the way of peace have they not known:
18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.
19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

Some things this passage tells us . . .

All are under sin, and none are righteous.

No flesh is justified by deed of law.

Righteous is from God, not by works of law, but by faith. All have sinned. All have fallen short. All.

Luke 1
5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.
6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.
7 And they had no child, because that Elisabeth was barren, and they both were now well stricken in years.
8 And it came to pass, that while he executed the priest's office before God in the order of his course,
9 According to the custom of the priest's office, his lot was to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord.

Righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

Is this written contradicting the passage in Romans? Certainly not!
But if all sin, and none are righteous, how can it be that Luke calls them righteous?

They were righteous before God, walking in the commandments and ordinances of the Lord, blameless.

Does this mean that they were without sin?

Why, in the very same passage,

18 And Zacharias said unto the angel, Whereby shall I know this? for I am an old man, and my wife well stricken in years.

This is the lack of faith in God's messenger that resulted in his not being able to speak.

Doesn't walking in the commandments and ordinances under the law include the keeping of the offerings and sacrifices, by which these sins were covered?

But now in Christ those sins are removed.

Before, the Law could give one access to God by sins being covered, now it is different, as we become born His children.

Philippians 3
4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.

The righteousness which in the Law is not to be compared to the righteousness that is of God by faith in Christ.

Elisabeth and Zachariah were righteous under the Law. But the righteousness of the Law does not make one a new creature. None are righteous of themselve, but by keeping the Law they were righteous before God, sins covered.

But covering sins does not remove them, which is why we Must be born again, and to have the righteousness that comes from God by faith.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

You surely cannot understand the Bible but mask your ignorance with philosophical claptrap.
Get a good large print KJV Study Bible and start studying.

Yes, he's into some mystical philosophy, like some new age mystic nonsense, add some Gnosticism, all cloaked in faux sheep's wool.

He is leading others astray and neither side knows it which is why I point out his inconsistencies, self contradictions, errors, heresies.

It reminds me of some of the things Paul warned of in Colossians. He's not going to crack open a bible, that's for those who don't know anything, know it all's wing it like him.

 

[Episkopos]

You can lead people to knowledge...but you can't make them think. And since thinking is out of the equation....all that is left is a lack of experience with God and to replace that...a dogmatic certainty based on a one-sided ideology that props up a feeling of a good outcome for they who blindly and unthinkingly accept it.


So basically religious Phariseeism.

Hey it's easy to do and requires no thinking or actual encounter with God.

Luther came to that kind of ideological solution centuries ago...and people call that a reformation.
So people believe what they want to.

 

[marks]

....all that is left is a lack of experience with God and to replace that...a dogmatic certainty based on a one-sided ideology that props up a feeling of a good outcome for they who blindly and unthinkingly accept it.

Endlessly repeating this does not embue it with the meaning it lacks. You've strung together some words. How is this any different from a kid in the schoolyard throwing rocks? This is righteousness???

Constant digs against those who challenge your teaching. Never a Biblical response, just contant needling.

Who exactly has the lack of experienc with God? By their fruits you shall know them. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.

Thus speaks the man who insists he is righteous outside of Christ. I'm not buying it.