Biblical views on online dating
General Observations When one takes Scripture woodenly, it is easy to misunderstand.Unfortunately, the unbeliever / God-hater does not possess the correct tool(s) to understand Gods Word.But there is always the hope that careful study-always under the guidance of the Spirit-will lead us to a hearing of the "hard sayings" in such a way that Gods Word can do its work in our lives." He further states, "The reading and study of any writing, if it is to be faithful to the authors purpose, must take seriously at least three things: (1) the nature of the writing itself, (2) the purpose for which it was written and (3) the situation or context out of which it was written. (The closest equivalent today would be saying, "The President sent troops to Kosovo" or "Hitler invaded Europe".) In his 11th newsletter, Mc Kinsey attempts to answer this situation by claming that Pilate merely assented to the whole affair, pronounced Jesus innocent, and washed his hands of the affair. Mc Kinsey quotes only what is before the italic letters, which puts a dent in his idea that this verse means that the doctrines of Christ are not perfection. It is simply one they could never live to see fulfilled. The verse is translated in more modern terms thusly: 24. -23 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law...(etc.) Accuses Paul of being a "religious chameleon" and of "opportunism." Well, considering that Paul was trying to offer people eternal life, and not getting any rewards for it himself, what's the problem here? There was no need for Peter to "become as a Jew" here because he was not acting as a missionary and changing his behavior for the sake of clear communication and understanding, but acting as one who was trying to ingratiate himself with others to avoid consequences. Among the charges made are those of changes in tense (past/present/future), changes in punctuation, and complete changes in wording, misapplication (this has to do with typology), as well as "nonquotation" (a non-existent quote).Failure to observe these matters is more likely than not to lead to misunderstanding or misinterpretation." Acts , "He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins." and, Romans b, "Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us." This significant section of Mc Kinseys Chapter 12 covers almost five pages. A Roman procurator would hardly act as he supposes. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: Written: "According to Paul's reasoning, it would appear anyone who was ever crucified or hung on a tree could be a savior." I'd like to see that line of reasoning played out. The word is better rendered finishing or consummation and refers to that of the hearers, not of the doctrine, as the full context of the verse makes clear. More about Paul's view of the law, failing to grasp the progression of Paul's arguments in Romans; same reference as above. Objections about divisions within Christianity, outside our scope. See here; plus no one argues that miraculous signs are God's exclusive province and can't be done by evil forces. Is it being a "chameleon" and being "opportunistic" to absorb local customs and behaviors for the sake of viable communication? All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not. The reasons for these variations are many, and as Mc Kinsey is merely applying modern rules of citation to ancient writers, it will suffice here to offer these general replies.Allow me to use an illustration using the airplane example: I am a retired Naval Aviator.At an airshow in Idaho Falls in 1981, I had the interesting and futile experience of explaining to a little old lady why the F-14 Tomcat that I was displaying could land aboard an aircraft carrier.First, she refused to believe that I was in the Navy.
As the reader will soon see, close attention to the Greek is critical here to properly understand the meanings in these passages, and to cut through the abundant misinformation that Mc Kinsey spews in this section: "..the very early years of Christians use of Pauls letters, the possibility of either understanding or misunderstanding, of either proper or improper use, have been ever-present realities. Objected that there were no "princes" that crucified Jesus, only a mob and some soldiers. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. 7:2-3 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually. These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. See Glenn Miller's article on Christian use of the OT.
Just as one who abhors airplanes does not understand how they fly or why anyone would wish to ride in one, so does the person who rejects God not understand His revelation to us.
Christians must understand that our ability to understand the Bible comes not from ourselves, but as we are led by the Holy Spirit [I Corinthians ; I John 5:7; I John ; II Peter ; Hebrews ].
Mc Kinsey is also skilled at debate tactics, which he uses to obscure his errors and lack of cogent argumentation.
For this review, we will provide some general comments to start, followed by a chapter-by-chapter "answer key." We will not cover chapters beyond our concern (such as claims of contradiction in Mormon and Muslim scriptures).