Tuesday, July 8, 2008

Our respone to Critics Answered.

Response to Critics Answered.

Candy did mention the Catholic issue a couple of times in today's response.

C "Hmmm. Just a couple of weeks ago candy posted this: "I dedicate the below song to Elena and the other anti-Candy-ites::  The Lord has called me to do a very special job, to spread the Gospel of Christ, and I WON'T BACK DOWN... :-D"
We were treated to a music video intended to underline Candys bold determination not to 'back down' but to continue, presumably, to 'take the fight' to the 'anti-candyites'. it was a conceited and hubristic display that no doubt she is regretting."

A A common theme I find with most of my critics, is that they try to guess my motives, then judge me off of that. EVERY single time I've received a comment about my motives - it's been wrong. My motive for putting up the "won't back down" song, was purely as stated - I WON'T BACK DOWN. I will continue to spread the Gospel of Christ, and I won't be stopped. I'm not fighting anyone, or picking a fight with anyone, I'm just stating that my critics are not going to stop me from spreading the good news of Christ to as many people as I possibly can. Furthermore, this let them know that if they are trying to stop me, they are wasting their time, and would be better off pursuing more obtainable goals.

Well she obviously was picking a fight with me because she mentioned ME by NAME!  The commenter didn't really ask her a question but rather stated that it was a conceited and hubristic display and surmised that she must be regretting it.  Candy never actually says that she doesn't regret it, but I think that she has spent soooo much time on the firestorm that followed shows that it has taken her time and attention. 

C "Apologise to those people whom you have hurt."

A I did, in the very post you put this comment on. And I quote:

"I am a BLUNT person, so I often just state things bluntly, and sometimes, in harsh terminology. I do not do this intentionally. If my words have ever hurt anyone on this blog, please know it was not intentional, and please accept my apologies. I'm not out to hurt anyone."
That's more an explanation than an apology.  It's hard to believe that it was not intentional when it is done continuously.

C "Are you going to continue to post the anti-Catholic rhetoric?"

A I will continue to post the truth, and spread the Gospel. I will continue to tell the Gospel to Catholics and to Protestants. Like the song says - "I won't back down." However, I've pretty much said all I need to say about the Catholic church here. I think I have it all out on the table, so I don't have anymore RC articles planned for the near future.

Well that's comforting!  With Kelly's baby coming and homeschool looming for me this means we won't have to be on red alert all the time.  (Not that we can't be ready to whip facts and information up at a moment's notice if we have to!!!)

I should reaffirm here that this blog will also not back down.  We will continue to point out theological inconsistencies and the truth about the Catholic faith for as long as necessary.  Incidentally, our answers to her side bar articles are in our own side bar!  Each one of her attacks was thoroughly rebuked and she has never ever been able to rebut our rebuttals!

C I came to your site orginally linked from a dear friends page. It was on a day that you chose to testify against the Catholic faith.
I truly do not want to upset or hurt you either, but just want an honest answer. Why?
I won't try and argue the Catholic faith to you, it seems there are so many others willing to do that in my stead, but when there are so many truly lost souls, without faith, not saved by the Grace of God. Why choose a religion? Why?
I don't want a response filled with reasons why you and I differ on the Catholic faith. We can agree that we disagree. But rather I would want your heartfelt reasons why you feel driven to this mission rather than seeking those Godless souls?
Neither of which would address the Christian woman's home keeping, but I truly understand the tangent. I do.
Thank you for your candor in advance

A I've also posted about New Age, The Emergent Church movement, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc. However, I have a special place in my heart for Roman Catholics, and love them so dearly.

 You cannot love someone that you do not know.  Candy does not "love" Roman Catholics because she does not know us, and she certainly does not understand us.  Oh, certainly she has met her fair share of Catholics who were on the verge of leaving the church anyway.  But she certainly has never met or gotten to know Catholics strong in their Catholic faith who could take her arguments on.  And I think that has stunned and frightened her.  It has also caused her to dig in her heels a bit like a stubborn child, "I won't listen, I won't learn, I won't back down!"  This is a battle of wills to her, not an intellectual or even spiritual pursuit. 
They are people who think they are doing God a service,

yet so many of them that I have spoken to (in person) had no idea that salvation is in Christ alone,

What we illustrated in our own com boxes last week is that they probably had no idea about HER very unique Protestant idea of what salvation is!

(Sorry, I couldn't find a MEEZE version of Catholic praise and worship!)

and that once one has accepted Christ's FREE gift, they are savED, not in a long, drawn out process, of "being saved."

 That certainly would have been news to St. Paul who was "working out" his salvation with "fear and trepidation" as he "persevered to the end " after running the "good race!"  
rejoice, because so many souls have come out of the RC religion, and testified to me that my writings had something to do with it. I saw a whole family's life change in just a 6 month period, after they came out of RC, and into true, saving faith.

I specifically target the RC Church, because its many members truly think they are Christians, but the very writings of the RC church say that if one believes that Christ alone is their Saviour, and they are savED by faith alone, then they are anathema. So many RCs don't know their own Catechism and writings of the Holy See. There are some truly saved Christians in the RC church, and God is calling them out of it. I am part of that plan. This is part of the path I am to walk, and part of my job from God. I take up my cross and follow Him gladly.
It's clear from this blog that we not only know our catechism, but we own a couple and know how ot use the online search engine!  Candy on the other hand, has a few snippets that she has been spoon fed from anti-Catholic sources and she is unable to do any sort of debate or discussion after those sources are totally discredited and rebutted.  That is why Candy claims not to read here - because if she did read here and admitted it she would have to answer our rebuttals such as Vatican vs. God and Whore of Babylon.  But as I said before, she does not, because she cannot.  Her messiah complex is just creepy.

C I have commented in the past to correct a couple of historical bloopers in your post on 'Catholic atrocities'. My comments were very moderate and polite in tone. I was certainly in no way rude.
I was surprised to find that you deleted my comment and banned me from commenting further.
This kind of comment control is very alienating. I am taking great care to word this in such a way as to give you no cause to be offended, but I also want to convey my point so that you can understand.

A Please read this for an explanation why. I don't recall your comments, but I would guess you possibly continuously reposted the same thing over and over, so I banned you, in order to have peace in my comments, or you started your comment off with some derogatory, incorrect statement, such as "why do you lie?", or "why do you hate Catholics?" or something along those lines. I will freely tell you that when comments start off with such trivial statements, I tend to reach for that delete key, without reading further.

This is classic Candy!  When Candy behaves badly it is because SOMEONE made her do it!  She had a similar reason for things she has done and said to me.

C "will you remove from your sidebar the links to sites that catholic readers find so repugnant and offensive?"

A No. Having an article that quotes what the Vatican says, and placing it side by side with what the Bible says is not offensive and repugnant. I will not stoop to the ecumenical lie. People have gotten saved from those articles. I love Roman Catholics too much, therefore I will continue to tell them the truth - they need to know.

In the interest of truth we will continue to tell our side of the story because, everyone needs to know. 

Time to move on. I hope my answers to the above questions helped clear things up for some people, and that those of my critics who are actually intellectual, and not just out there for "juicy gossip," will see that I'm not much different than the average person. I'm just a Christian, trying to do what is right.

Well, we see you're not much different alright.  For now it will continue as before and to coin a phrase, we are not backing down. 

AddThis Social Bookmark Button


Kelly said...

I believe the first "critic" is actually a comment on the other blog, and that is why it is written in third person.

Dana said...

whatever happened to:
bless your enemies -- which is exemplified beautifully here

if one smites your cheek, turn to him the other?

I believe that one of those is in the book of John which was studied by her.

I just canNOT get my head around the fact that she justifies through hyperbole.

Thank you ladies for reaching out in charity and really striving to stick to facts. You have helped countless people of all faiths to a higher understanding which would seem to me, ' trying to do what is right'.

Too bad that her absolute truth is really the remnants of trusting in her own heart (which is deceitful above all things, who can know it.)

many blessings to you all

KitKat said...

great post!

Tracy said...

What can I say Elena.. great post as always:)