Friday, June 13, 2008

Chicken fried apologetics

I love this!

Two weeks later, the DH picked up the test results on his way home. He gave it to me. DD is severly allergic to chicken. Chicken?! This is not the information I expected. I had a few options (pay attention. this is the good part): a. ignore my husband bringing me the information (he wasn't the actual source of information. just a messenger. he could be wrong), b. disbelieve the test results (they can't really know by testing her blood), or c. accept the results and stop eating chicken. I didn't want to believe it. I really like chicken. But it didn't matter what I wanted to believe. The source of truth (in this case the doctor and the allergy test) said it was true. My feelings and preference did not matter in light of the truth.

So, how does this apply to our discussion of truth and the Bible? You and I are discussing our opinions of how the universe operates and who will and will not be saved. But our opinions do not matter. You are I are not sources of truth and information on this topic. We must go to a source of information. In my illustration, the source of information was a doctor. What source of information will we agree upon for the discussion of salvation and eternal souls? Candy and I agree that the Bible is the word of God. It is true and is to be trusted. My own opinions and ideas must be put aside as I accept this source of truth.

So, to finally answer your question Candy's posts stem from her belief that there is a source of truth outside of us. That source is the Bible which is the word of God (his message to all people). I wholeheartedly adhere to this belief as well. If you notice, Candy does not refer to her own feelings very often in these discussions. She is constantly refering to the Bible as the source of her understanding. It is the truth!

highdesert, I hope that answered you question. The belief in a source of ultimate truth is loosing popularity in our culture. But, I don't care what is popular, the Bible is still true. PS, my daughter feels a lot better since I stopped cooking chicken.

Actually she refers to her understanding of the Bible as the source of truth. There's a difference! And while Christians do revere the Scriptures, not all Christians agree on all interpretations of what those scriptures mean! Which is why we have three main branches of Christianity, with the Protestant branch severely splintered! Whose interpretation is the correct one? On Candy's blog, it is her interpretation. That's fine. My issue is when she condemns others to hell for not adhering to that same interpretation.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button


Amanda said...

Are you still getting her home page, the actual blog? When I type in OR, I am redirected to

I'm trying to figure out if she's somehow just redirecting my ISP or what. Odd.

Anonymous said...

I can still get it. Why not use bloglines?

Deeny said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Elena said...

Deeny, I did remove your comment - because it deserves its own post!

I have it in my e-mail - congratulations you will be my guest blogger for Saturday!!


Deeny said...

Eeww. I just noticed all the grammatical errors in my post. Wish I could go back and edit Lol. Don't tell anyone I was once an English major.

Amanda said...

OOooh, bloglines! Good thinking! Thank you :)

Amanda said...

Sorry if I'm hi-jacking your comments today.

Okay, I'm the reader she's talking about today. I said NOTHING vile or sick to her. I only said that I felt she was banning comments for the exact reason one of her minions have given: "The truth does not fear lies, but lies fear the truth."

Furthermore, while my emails would be catagorized as rude, my comments at no point were rude; in fact, I always made sure I was polite. But no matter how polite, if you disagree with her, she doesn't want to hear about it.

GAH! I shouldn't be wasting so much energy on a person so filled with hate as she is.

Rachel said...

Amanda, thank you for speaking out here and letting your side be known! I had a feeling the commentor she was talking about would make their way here. I was kinda confused.. she said this rude commentor went on to email her for a few days... why didn't she block the IP address sooner?

Again, thanks for coming here and giving your side. :) g

Amanda said...

Including the appology I sent, I sent her 3 emails over the course of 2 days. The first I sent sometime Wednesday night. She wrote me back, telling me she had no idea who I was, but if she had banned me, I must have been nasty in my comments and I should leave her alone and quit saying vile things (which I had not). I wrote her back saying that my comments were not vile, only dissenting. Then she wrote me back to tell me she was marking me as spam, blocking my ISP, and if I persisted, she would have my internet shut off. She also found "my address"--which isn't mine at all, but my in-law. I suppose she was trying to frighten me by "knowing" where I live.

Later last night, it was bothering me that I had wrote to her at all. As I said, my emails were not vile, but they were rude. I sent her another email, from another address and ISP and appologized. Whether I think she's, well, regardless of what I think of her, my emails were far from Christian and did cross the line. I don't know if she read my email or, if she did read it, if she believed it, but for myself, I needed to make the effort.

unknown anon said...

Wait a minute---she located you IRL (even if it was your in-laws) and threatened you with her knowledge?

I'm just trying to understand here. Because that is at least the second time she has done that, and I find it terrifying that she is going to such lengths to track down those with whom she does not agree.

Did you save that piece of correspondence?

Amanda said...

Here is the email:

"Goodbye to:

Amanda O----
*In-Laws Address*

With PrairieWave Telecommunications Internet Service Provider - via Cable Modem.

You will no longer be accepted through my email account, and should any further problems persist, your ISP may be contacted, and you could lose your internet access.

As for me, I still don't know what you have against me, except to think you must be some sick, crazed person, so I will retain your personal information, should I need to turn it over to the authorities, along with the multiple daily harrassing emails you have sent me.

Meanwhile, your account with your ISP will no longer be accepted by my email account. All emails from you will be marked spam, and I will never see them they will never make it to my inbox. Go ahead and waste your time, and send 2,000 emails a day, if you'd like. I will never see any of them again.

Thank the good Lord for technology."

Again, I sent three total emails, which I'm not sure constitute "multiple, daily" but, *shrug*