Friday, July 13, 2007

Thank you Zan!

Zan if you are reading this, thanks so much for your very logical defense on Amy's blog. Just in case it mysteriously disappears I am republishing it here.

Back to the fool comment. I was thinking that, if Elena was a fool for taking bits of your post and commenting on it, than I would love to know what you think Candy is? She does this all the time. She rarely puts up the entire blog comment and only posts snippets of it. She takes things down after putting things up. Just now, she didn't post Kitkats comment, but she "addressed" it on her blog. How can I know for sure what the comment really said? I don't trust anyone who doesn't atleast link to the original article (especially if they are opposed to it) If she doesn't have time to answer this stuff than she really shouldn't be talking about it.IMO. The liberal media uses these tactics all the time.

Elena linked to your article, so anyone with a brain could click on it and see what it said. Candy doesn't give this option. I remember a commenter actually asking Candy for the link to the anti-Candy blog and she said she couldn't in good conscience because of all the bad stuff there. (I'm paraphrasing here-she probably deleted the comment.) Well, I did a Google search and found the anti-Candy blog she was talking about and there was some stuff I didn't agree with, but nothing obscene like Candy wanted that commentor to think. She seems very "popish" to me. Very controlling and doesn't seem to think her readers have discerment. So, if Elena is a fool than Candy is X 10.

Hope I didn't floor you too much.

Thanks so much!


zan said...

Um...your welcome? I just like to be fair.

If there was a blog out there that blasted IFB and didn't allow any debate from IFB, than I would be upset about that too. It always seems that IFB bail out with the "I can't print your comments because they are SO BAD!" It is slanderous because the comments really aren't. They might be full of error, but error needs to be logically rebutted from scripture, not silenced. How will one learn unless they are allowed to learn? I, also, beleive that God will protect his children from error if they are His. I don't shut my ears to JWs or Mormons. I listen to them very nicely and tell them what is wrong. I treat them like I see Christ treating the lost. I make an attempt to "love them". IT is hard and that is not what my flesh wants me to do, but that is a better witness than slamming the door and telling them they are going to hell. If Candy believes that RCs are lost (mostly) than she should act like she has a heart for them. This one- sided argument is just going to make Catholics dislike her. Jesus freely debated the Pharisees and answered their questions. He didn't blow them off. I completely understand that if Candy doesn't have the time to allow for healthy debate than fine, but she should drop the subject. I don't put topics up on my blog that I don't have the time to be responsible for because I don't have the time or the brains for some of the things that I am passionate about.

When Candy writes an anti-Catholic post it is like someone throwing a grenade and running. When the smoke clears, you have a group of confused wounded people who are like, what? Yet, you never hear their complaints. I don't think any Christian should use those methods. This is what the liberal media does all the time!

I'll stop now.

Elena said...

Thanks for taking the time to come by Zan. I appreciate your insight.