Just to be 100% clear, since people keep getting confused about this:

I am not blogging to non-believers.

I am blogging to Christians.

You have to talk to the two groups differently on religious manners.

I am blogging about sin because the church has forgotten what God says about it.


Read the above line again. I have the verses, if you don’t believe me.

I am not calling out any single people group, I am sharing what God says about certain things.

I don’t want to hear about your ‘feelings’ on the issues if you’re trying to prove me wrong. Show me I’m wrong in God’s Word.

I do not blog about all sins because for the most part, Christians still believe murder, theft, adultery, and other sins to be wrong. They’ve forgotten when it comes to things like homosexuality, divorce, and abortion. So that’s what I blog about.

If you don’t like my style, I’m sure there’s a blogger out there who is saying exactly what you want them to.

Believe it or not, my way is effective, maybe just not to you. Not everyone is like you. Try seeing a different perspective for once.

I am not Catholic, so if you are Catholic and try to argue with me on the validity of the Bible, please don’t, because we will just disagree.

I hope my stance is clear and that you can be tolerant of it.

20 thoughts on “Clarification

  1. miriam says:

    A Catholic who is arguing against the validity of the Bible is not making any sort of sense. We may use different translations with different books but the Bible is still sacred and the truth. Any sort of discussion there would simply be about which way are you translating it, which as far as I can see, nothing you blog about opposes what the Catholic Bible says in any way. Catholics are Christians and the foundation of our belief is arguably the same. It saddens if some Catholics have disagreed with any of your points, none of which are contrary to church teachings. They of course can also fall into the sins others are. Denying sin with emotional excuses is extremely easy to do. Especially, as you said, when no one calls each other out anymore for fear of offending someone.

    Liked by 1 person

    • It’s not always the validity of it exactly I guess, it’s the authority of the Bible. They tell me I should put the authority of the church of the authority of the Bible. I understand that Catholocism traditionally listens to the Pope, but people sin. God’s Word is perfect. So I just don’t really get what there is to argue about, because then it’s just trying to trip me up, not arguing that what I’m saying is wrong, you know? Sigh. People.


  2. Natasha Hastings says:

    Catholics definintly believe in the the validty of the bible. And as far as putting the Pope in authority: Jesus Christ himself made St. Peter the first pope. IT IS IN THE BIBLE.


    • Yes, Im aware, my point was I do not believe in putting a man in higher authority than God’s Word. And I have had a Catholic argue with me on the validity of the Bible and a couple other on the authority of the Bible. I want to respect Catholic beliefs, so I just wanted to say that we will disagree on matters like that and that’s ok.


      • Natasha Hastings says:

        Catholics do not believe that mans authority is higher than the bible either. And before you say anything about Catholics or Catholicism again you should check your info and make you are spreading truth not lies.


      • Natasha, I did not say it was all Catholics. I just said I had a few arguing with me. I am not telling people anything about Catholicism because I don’t know enough about it, I have just had problems with a handful of Catholics.


  3. Natasha Hastings says:

    You clearly stated that you understood that “Catholicism traditionally listens to the Pope, but people sin. God’s word is perfect.” To me that means that you 1. don’t understand whom the Pope is to Catholics and what he does and 2. that you think your way is better. That is in a way bashing. So don’t do it. Assuming things makes you look foolish and makes me look foolish.


    • Ok, that is only bashing if you really really want it to be. And I have spoken to Catholics, and yes the head of the Catholic church is the Pope. Am I wrong about that?
      And of course I think my way is better or else I would be Catholic, but I have no problem with Catholics since they believe Jesus is the Messiah. I am very close friends with a Catholic. But I am not going around telling Catholics that they need to be Protestant. You may stop looking for things to argue with me about because it’s getting pretty old. I am protestant, but first and foremost I believe in what the Bible says. That is my view. I do not have a problem with Catholics. Please do not twist my words around.


      • Adrian Combe says:

        Send those Catholics my way 😉
        If you understood them correctly, they are confused.
        The real issue is whether there is a human being, or group of human beings, who have the authority to say definitively what a specific Scripture passage means and doesn’t. In other words, is there an infallible interpretation of Scripture?
        Catholics believe the Church has this authority; however, it has only been exercised on a handful of occasions.


      • Haha ok. Yeah, I understand that not all Catholics think that way ( I do know your daughter after all) but it’s odd that I only ever have those conversations with Catholics. I’m glad it’s not a thing though. And your right, there isn’t an infallible interpretation. The best we can do is pray for wisdom 🙂


      • Adrian Combe says:

        I didn’t actually say there is no infallible interpretation of Scripture, only that it’s rare.

        There is in Catholic theology a concept known as sensus fidelium

        So, for instance, when, in your blog, you state that certain passages of Scripture teach that homosexual acts are inherently gravely evil, you are interpreting Scripture infallibly, by virtue of your limited authority as a solitary lay believer being reinforced by your consensus with the panoply of Christian doctrine and tradition.

        Another example of an infallible interpretation that John 3:16 refers to the Sacrament of Baptism, which has been taught and believed everywhere the Gospel has been preached, since the apostolic age.

        Liked by 1 person

    • By the way, if you don’t like my blog and the way I write, you are free to find a different one. You don’t have to read mine because I am not changing for you unless you show me that I am doing something Biblically wrong. But don’t read it if your purpose is to point out every little flaw. I’m aware I’m not perfect.


  4. Natasha Hastings says:

    I never said that i thought you had a problem with Catholics. I said that you are misinformed about some things you have said about Catholicism. And if you don’t know what you’re talking about then don’t talk about it.


Whatcha thinking?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s