On Barth's dialectic

This is an attempt to understand Karl Barth's dialectic with the use of a Venn diagram, so I invite criticism and suggestions. It may also be useful in seeing how well our own beliefs match with the Word. The Venn diagram is on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology .

With regard to Barth, Barth takes the the Bible or the Word as a priori (these are given by the circle labelled "truths" in the diagram. ( See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology if it does not appear here. ) Beliefs is our Christian believe (presumably all or nearly all) of what the Bible tells us) if we have read it in faith so that the Holy Spirit helps with the interpretation. In that diagram knowledge (particular beliefs we obtain from a particular passage) is a part (that which is known) of the overlap of these.

I am not sure what definition of truth (for a list of philsophical definitions (NOT NECESSARILY PERTINENT HERE) see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth . On the one hand, it would seem to be that of Kierkegaard, existential and very personal. On the other hand, since Barth finally described his writings as "sermons", it would seem closer to the consensus (of believers) definition of truth, which would seem to be close to Peirce's definition, as 'the opinion which is fated to be ultimately agreed to by all who investigate' ) ("all" here meaning all believers). James, another pragmatist, allowed for emotional influences as well, -- if love and trust, that would point to a faith definition of belief. [For the above, see http://www.philosophyprofessor.com/philosophies/pragmatic-theory-of-truth.php .]

In my own (pragmatic) way of interpreting this, particular truths are those which gives results in accordance with what one observes inwardly due to the Spirit working on us. That is, both the meaning and the truth of any idea (in this instance in the Bible) is a function of its practical outcome. And the meaning of an idea is to be found in its "conceivable sensible effects" and that humans generate belief through their "habits of action." The particular " habit of action would be the intention of faith in God, in the the words of the Bible, etc. The "sensible effects" would be Paul's list of the fruits of the Spirit in Romans. And on the other hand, we have the wages of sin is death. In fact, Peirce defined the meaning of a concept or proposition as that form which is most directly applicable to self-control in any situation and to any purpose. For more on these pragmatic concepts, see ( http://radicalacademy.com/amphilosophy7.htm ).