So um... Hi. As the millennials say, it's been a minute. I've been mulling over some of this for a while now (couple of years I guess) and I'd like to continue the conversation.
What follows is about 11 pages as I have it written up, so I thought it might be a TLDR situation. I considered attaching it as a separate file, but that would interfere with any resulting discussion. So, with apologies for the length, I'd like to just post it here. Apologies in advance for the uber long post.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This little essay is a bit of a turn for me. Recently, I've embraced a different mindset that has lead me to see the Bible in a different light. Since most of the spiritual growth I've experienced since leaving TWI has been sparked by online discussions, I felt it would be appropriate to share it here and see if it benefits anyone else, and perhaps clarify and refine it through discourse.
For years, I've held on to the basic tenet of PFAL that the Bible, as God's Word, cannot contradict itself. That premise lead to major issues with certain concepts, including judgment and justification. As I wrestled with these doctrinal issues, I started noticing more and more apparent contradictions in the canon. The ones that I fixated on most were the examples that defied the rules of Weirwille's “keys to the Word's interpretation'.
Those keys don't resolve contradictions where the same writer discussing the identical event wrote different things at different times. Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus is one such example. Luke, who claimed to have perfect understanding of all things, wrote in Acts 9:7 that, when Jesus appeared to Saul on the road to Damascus, his companions heard the Lord's voice, but did not see him. Then in Acts 22:9, he wrote that Paul said “they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice...”. None of the 'keys' in PFAL address this discrepancy.
The other one that stuck in my mind is in I Corinthians chapter 14. Here we have another instance where one writer, speaking about the same topic, essentially contradicts himself. But instead of it happening over the space of years of narrative, it happens within one chapter. So it intrigued and bugged me for many years. Until last September.
God works with people as individuals. There are probably more logical ways to start this conversation and more relatable threads to pull on to unravel this doctrine. But for me, it started here in I Corinthians 14. I have always loved this chapter and I continue to be an ardent believer in the genuine experience of the manifestations. I understand from past comments on this thread that many of you have dropped the belief that 'SIT' is indicative of salvation. I haven't. I speak in tongues daily and still value this part of my life as a Christian. So maybe that's why it started here for me. Those of you who have different opinions about whether tongues are a genuine proof of holy spirit or not will be asked to set that argument aside for a moment and follow the logic as it unfolds and flows into more consequential topics. How you receive it and whether you accept the same conclusion I did is of course, up to you. This was my avenue to a bigger realization. As I said God works with different people on different terms. Your mileage may vary.
Preamble and disclaimer aside, let's look at I Corinthians 14 and see how two seemingly contradictory statements are both true.
14:22 wherefore tongues are for a sign not for them that believe, but for them that believe not
This verse is one of the statements in the NT that presents the experience of speaking in tongues as genuine proof of conversion, of salvation, of the presence of pneuma hagion. It was enough to convince Peter and the Judaean believers that gentiles at the household of Cornelius had received the same gift they had (Acts 10:47). Even today, speaking in tongues gets people's attention. I've experienced this in my life on both the giving and receiving end. Seeing the worship manifestations in a twig fellowship meeting was one of the reasons I took PFAL in the first place.
The verses that precede vs 22 put this in context by asserting, in verses 5 – 17 that speaking in tongues is good for personal edification, but in fellowship meetings, speaking in tongues should always be accompanied by interpretation of tongues so that the entire congregation can be edified by the message in their known language.
I Corinthians 14: 17 - 22
14:17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
14:18 I thank my God I speak with tongues more than ye all.
14:19 Yet in the Church, I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that, by my voice, I might teach others also, than five thousand words in an unknown tongue .
14:21 In the law it is written, “With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that, they will not hear Me saith the Lord.
14:22 Wherefore, tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
The use of the word 'wherefore' sets verse 22 as the logical conclusion of Paul's entire treatise that begins in verse one. It sums up the proper distinction of the different profit of these manifestations of holy spirit. Speaking in tongues is part of the witness referenced in (I John) and is intended to reinforce the gospel and convince unbelievers of the genuine presence and power of the holy spirit. This is what happened at the household of Cornelius.
But the very next verse turns around and sets this conclusion on its head.
14:23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
Granted, the key phrase here is “all speak with tongues”. This scenario contradicts the guidance Paul has just given that, if anyone speaks in tongues in fellowship, let it be by two or at the most by three. So the logical guidance to follow this scenario should be, 'remember, don't let everyone speak in tongues in church'. But then he adds the following.
14:24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:
14:25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.
So, right after stating that prophesying serveth not them that believe not, but for them which believe, just two verses later Paul says that prophesy is to be desired when unbelievers visit a church.
The analytical Waybrain child in me wants to stand up and say, “But sir! You just said, tongues are a sign to unbelievers!” Paul spends most of the chapter laying out his case for the proper use of the worship manifestations in fellowships and two verses later, directly contradicts it.
My Waybrain wants to grab one of Weirwille's keys to the Word's interpretation and decide that one of these passages must be a mistranslation or something. What does the Estrangelo Aramaic say?
It says the same thing. This about face also exists in the Lamsa Bible. Before we dig deeper into the fundamentalist toolbox to try to resolve this contradiction, let's go back to the book of Acts to get some more context. Acts chapter two records the first time anyone ever spoke in tongues.
Acts 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the
Spirit gave them utterance.
On the Day of Pentecost, the apostles all spoke in tongues. Since no on prophesied, one might think that this passage doesn't shed much light on the contradiction in I Corinthians, chapter 14. But there's more to the story. As we know from I Corinthians 14:2, when someone speaks in tongues, they're speaking mysteries because the utterance given by the holy spirit is in a language unknown to the speaker. The 'miracle of Pentecost' was that the languages spoken by the Apostles were unknown to them, but known to the myriads of worshipers present at the Temple.
Acts 2: 5 - 11
2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
2:6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that
every man heard them speak in his own language.
2:7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which
speak Galilaeans?
2:8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
2:9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and
Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
2:10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome,
Jews and proselytes,
2:11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
As we know from the rest of the passage, after the outpouring of the holy spirit got the crowd's attention, Peter took the opportunity to preach the first public sermon after the ascension of Christ. So in this passage, we can see both of the truths reflected in I Corinthians 14:22 and 24.
When the crowd heard the apostles speak in tongues, they were all amazed and marvelled. This reinforces the truth that 'tongues are for a sign' to unbelievers. At this point everyone was an unbeliever simply because the gospel of the Resurrection had not yet been declared. And, because the crowd heard what was spoken in their languages, we see a reflection of verse 24. They heard the wonderful works of God and their hearts were opened to receive the gospel and salvation.
So I assert that the statements in I Corinthians 14 are indeed contradictory, but they're both true. And the reason both statements can be true is also encapsulated in the context of Acts chapter two. What happened was an example of what God does to reach the disparate and various souls of His children. The world is full of different kinds of people, with different mind sets, backgrounds, perspectives, and personalities: Parthians, Medes, Elamites, strangers, Jews, and Proselytes. One message in one language – even a mystical language that brings the divine into focus – cannot reach everyone. Truth is communicated to people on multiple channels.
The bottom line here, the lesson we need to carry into other Biblical inquiries is that apparently contradictory statements can both be true. As long as we cling to the VPW mindset of trying to screen out all apparent contradictions in the scripture, we will miss some of the complexities of how God works with mankind. We may miss some truths because they seem to conflict with others.
There are other examples of this dynamic where God may be communicating on multiple channels to reach different kinds of people. Paul's epistles are chock full of apparently contradictory statements.
The one that comes readily to mind is the passage in Romans chapter eight about the carnal mind.
Romans 8:3 - 10
8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.
8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
8:5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8:8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
Everything in this passage emphasizes the Christian's focus and conduct. Verse three uses the word walk, which indicates a lifestyle, a behavior pattern,a series of deeds. The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us who habitually act in accordance with the spirit, as opposed to living according to the flesh, the old carnal desires.
Verse five takes it a little deeper and focuses on the root of deeds. The mind is mentioned here as a verb. Those who live according to the flesh mind the flesh. The word mind is translated from the word phroneo, which means to consider, to focus on. Conversely they who dwell on spiritual matters live according to the spirit. Verse six continues the thought and presents the fruits and consequences of these dual focuses. The emphasis is still on the consequences of a believer's mental habits.
The carnal mind puts someone at enmity, hostility towards God and produces disobedience. And verse eight clearly and logically sums up the passage.
So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. Who are these people? We are. The context can be clearly traced back to verse four, which is written in first person plural. The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh.
But then, just as the humble reader is examining himself or herself to determine whether we are carnally minded or not, just as we are challenging ourselves to think and walk according to the spirit so that we may please God, verse nine takes a tone that completely contradicts those conclusions.
8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
Wait, what? This is such a jarring juxtaposition that it boggles the mind. If they who have the spirit of God are not in the flesh, why were just told that they who are in the flesh cannot please God?
Suddenly Paul shifts focus from walking, from minding, from our deeds and their consequences, to something we received by grace and which abides as a constant presence.
The language of verses 3 – 9 is conditional. The language of verse 10 is absolute.
If Christ be in you, the body is dead. The Spirit is life.
The cumulative statement of verses 3 through 8 clearly teaches that our mind can disconnect us from life and peace and set us in a state of being at enmity with God. Then verses nine and ten seem to flatly contradict that conclusion.
Both are true. There are two levels of truth being simultaneously communicated. Verses three through eight direct our attention to our mental habits and the importance of striving to manage them. Verses nine and ten present a parallel truth that if you have received holy spirit, you are still God's child and still sanctified by his gift. The holy spirit remains despite our fleshly weaknesses and distractions. So we are simultaneously encouraged to set our minds on spiritual matters, cautioned against the consequences of failing to do so, and comforted that the overarching grace of the new birth means that, even when we are walking carnally and failing to please God, we are still His children.
We see the same bifocal exhortation in I Corinthians chapter six. The shift in tone and the apparently contradictory language is introduced by the phrase “but ye”, just as it is in Romans 8:9. The shift is made more emphatic here by the figure of speech repetitio.
I Corinthians 6:9 – 11
6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
Again, we might wonder, if we were such people, but are now washed, sanctified, and justified by the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God, why did Paul just tell us “Be not deceived: neither fornicators, not idolaters, nor covetous...shall inherit the kingdom of God. The language of verses 9 and 10 clearly indicate judgment for ungodly behavior. The immediate context leaves no doubt that this behavior was occurring in the Church. Paul wasn't railing against the evils of the secular world. He was reproving the Corinthian congregation. The language of this reproof couldn't be more stark. If those in the church who are covetous, idolatrous, thieves, drunks or extortioners shall not inherit the kingdom of God, that's a truth that must be understood and heeded.
And just as we're beginning the self examination that follows such a warning, Paul sweeps it aside by implying that all of that is behind us because we were sanctified by the gift of holy spirit.
What gives? What are we to believe? How can we be saved by grace, sanctified by the Spirit of God, and yet be in danger of not inheriting the kingdom of God?
Perhaps the answer lies back in Acts Chapter two and I Corinthians 14. On the day of Pentecost, God used the introduction of a new manifestation of holy spirit, to reach out to thousands of disparate believers gathered from all over Asia. He spoke to them simultaneously in different languages, broadcasting pure truth on different channels. Why did He choose to do that?
Simply put, because people are different. Some are Medes, some are Parthians. Some hear the manifestation of speaking in tongues and respond with awe and believe the gospel. Some people are freaked out by speaking in tongues, yet will receive a word of prophecy and repent. Some hear “they who are in the flesh cannot please God” and fall on their knees, resolving to do better. Others reading those words alone might be crushed by despair and give up.
Since the entire goal and purpose of the gospel is to reach people, to connect human beings to God and Christ, why wouldn't the presentation thereof be varied and rich and complex enough to reach different kinds of people with different kinds of messages? A monolithic, simple, absolute truth might be easier for everyone to understand, but it would not be easier for everyone to receive.
Admittedly there aren't 4, 5 or ten different gospels presented. There are only two apparent channels in the epistles; the grace channel and the works channel. Goodness and severity. Salvation by grace focused on what God did in us by the work of Christ, and inheritance by works focused on what we do with that gracious gift. So, despite the fact that I am convinced that there are contradictory truths in the Bible, there may be something else going on here.
Saved Unto Good Works.
Perhaps these dual tracks in Paul's epistles aren't really showing us contradictory messages. Perhaps they're showing us two different aspects of one truth that involves both grace and works, sanctification and inheritance.
The answer to this puzzle may be found in II Peter chapter two. This chapter is a prophecy similar to the messages delivered by Paul to the leaders of the church at Ephesus and to Timothy (Acts 20:29 & 30, II Timothy 3:1 – 8). They all warn of dark times ahead for Christ's church, brought on by corrupt ministers. Rather than quote the entire chapter, let's look at a few select verses to get the gist of the message.
II Peter 2:1 - 21
2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
2:2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
...2:12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;
...2:17 These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever.
...2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
2:21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
There are ample references in this passage to indicate that the false teachers referenced are not – as Craig Martindale taught – men of Belial. They are Christians who were saved but have abandoned truth – or will abandon truth, or will have abandoned truth, depending on your position in the timeline – for the pleasures of power and deceit.
The fact that these are not 'men of belial' is pretty clearly indicated by verses 20 and 21. They have escaped the pollution of the world through the knowledge of the Lord. Verse 21 says they had known the way of righteousness. These are not men born of the seed of the serpent. We're not talking about the kindred of the high priest. These are ordained ministers.
The severe judgment awaiting these born-again Christian leaders is also quite starkly portrayed. Verse 12 says they are made to be taken and destroyed and that they shall utterly perish in their own corruption. These judgments are hard to accept for those of us who have been taught that once a person receives Christ, he or she is heaven bound and all hell can't stop them from going. But God's message of impending judgment for these saved sinners is hard to understate. How can both things be true?
There is a clue in verse 17, which refers to them as “ to whom the mist of darkness is reserved forever”.
This may mean that they will retain the benefit of everlasting life, but will spend it banished from the Lord's Kingdom. I am reluctant to quote the Book of Revelation, because I agree with Martin Luther's assertion and can in no way detect that it was authored by The Holy Spirit. But there is a passage near the end that might shed light on this conundrum.
If Revelation is indeed inspired Scripture, and if the events described in the last chapters of Revelation are presented in chronological order, Revelation 22:15 asserts that – after the white throne judgment and the second death (Rev 20:11 – 15), and after the second death (Rev 12:8), and after the coming of the new heavens and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness (Rev 21:1 - 4) – that, even in this final paradise - there will still be people excluded from the presence of the Lord. The context here is New Jerusalem, the dwelling place of God and the Lamb.
22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
How can there still be dogs and sorcerers, whoremongers and liars in the New Heavens and New Earth wherein dwelleth righteousness? Where will these evil folks come from, and how will they escape the judgments that precede the restoration of paradise?
Perhaps this state of being in the new heavens and new earth, having survived the judgments of the second death and the lake of fire, only to be banished from the New Jerusalem, is the final fate of the false teachers warned about by Peter and Paul. If this is the fate reserved for 'grievous wolves' of whom Paul and Peter prophesied, it actually gives the rest of us struggling laypersons a little comfort.
This judgment is not associated with simply struggling to live righteously. It seems to be reserved for those in positions of leadership. For to whom much is given, much is expected (Luke 12:48). II Peter chapter two serves as the most serious warning for those to aspire to minister the Gospel that they do so with a pure heart.
Of course, we should also remember Paul's apparently contradictory exhortation in I Corinthians chapter six. Fornicators, idolators, extortioners, thieves, drunkards, etc, shall not inherit the kingdom of God. But we have been washed, sanctified, and justified. We received that cleansing by grace. We who accept Christ are saved by grace. But we are also repeatedly warned that our works may deprive us of inheritance in God's kingdom.
So how does this relate back to the original topic of apparently contradictory truths? Simply that, just as it is true that tongues serves for unbelievers, but an unbeliever may be converted through prophesy, it is also true that people who accept Christ are saved by grace, but may fail to inherit eternal life by ungodly works.
Again, I know I Corinthians 14 may not be the most salient connection for those who dismiss the validity of speaking in tongues, but it's how God got me over the 'God's Word cannot contradict itself" hurdle.
There is a very helpful summary of these contradictory truths that TrustandObey posted earlier on this thread (June 11, 2018). It lines up verses that communicate salvation by grace in one column and those that communicate salvation by works in another. All of these verses are from the New Testament. It's one of the most succinct summaries of this dichotomy I've seen yet. Once Saved Always Saved
So, does the Bible teach that we are saved by grace through faith? Yes. Does the Bible teach that Christians can lose their inheritance in heaven by ungodly works? Yes! Aren't those contradictory messages? Yes! But they're both true. Because contradictory truths are still true.
