When the Pharisees Accused Jesus of Being used by the Devil...

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

There you go projecting again.

You guys are like the Psuedo-Apostolic version of Cheech and Chong.

Hissssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss sssssssss

[Coonskinner]

Kiddies, it has been fun.

Have to move along now...things to do.

Thanks for the memories.

[MissBrattified]

What I have seen from Rhoni is that she dishes out quite a bit, but is too sensitive to take it in return. If you can't take as good as you give, you shouldn't be on a forum, because forums are brutal, you are expected to have tough skin.

If she is in such a place that the forum is causing her to be emotionally unstable, then I certainly don't believe she should be here.

I don't find that rrford, Coonskinner and others have attacked Rhoni, as much as she has accused them of such attacks, and when they try to defend themselves or deny it, they are pretty much made out to be the bad guys, and I have rarely seen any scraps that were provoked by them, from the beginning.

There is not a single sarcastic or facetious note in this post. It's honestly how I see it.

Further, there are longstanding disagreements that have been carried over, and the history here is important to understanding the situation.

For instance, Chan[cellor] has always disagreed with practicing psychology (as a Christian), has made no secret of it, and has stated his beliefs anytime it comes up. I have seen equally persistent statements from Rhoni on other topics that interest her, on threads that did not "belong" to her.

Malvaro stated that one of her posts "reeked of rebellion", and while I wouldn't have used the same phrase, I have to agree that the post in question showed an unbiblical disregard for authority. Just a page or two earlier, Malvaro was defending Rhoni in response to Chan, and so it strikes me as odd that we label people as abusers only when they disagree with us.

There are personal issues at work that really have nothing to do with the forum, and in many cases warrant blunt and straightforward comments, IMHO.

Other than those particulars, I really do not get any vibe other than just the normal disagreements and personality clashes that are bound to happen.

As for abuse...I haven't seen it. Sorry. I read the thread. Unless Rhoni is being viciously attacked over the phone and in PM's where no one else reads it, then I would deny its existence, especially in reference to CS and rrford, and especially compared to what is considered normal give-and-take conversation on this forum. (And NFCF and FCF and GNC....)

I agree with the discomfort they have both presented at Rhoni advising folks in a manner that seems to disparage their pastors and the authority they should respect and heed.

Finally, this is a forum which allows conversation...I think it is totally unacceptable and unreasonable for Rhoni to expect to have a thread where she gets to determine who posts and how, and who has to delete their responses, and who can disagree with her, if at all.

There ya go. My 50 cents.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

There you go projecting fantasies again.

You guys are like the Psuedo-Apostolic version of Cheech and Chong.

You are like a pure, pedigreed high priest of the Lord of the Flies

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

What I have seen from Rhoni is that she dishes out quite a bit, but is too sensitive to take it in return. If you can't take as good as you give, you shouldn't be on a forum, because forums are brutal, you are expected to have tough skin.

If she is in such a place that the forum is causing her to be emotionally unstable, then I certainly don't believe she should be here.

I don't find that rrford, Coonskinner and others have attacked Rhoni, as much as she has accused them of such attacks, and when they try to defend themselves or deny it, they are pretty much made out to be the bad guys, and I have rarely seen any scraps that were provoked by them, from the beginning.

There is not a single sarcastic or facetious note in this post. It's honestly how I see it.

Further, there are longstanding disagreements that have been carried over, and the history here is important to understanding the situation.

For instance, Chan[cellor] has always disagreed with practicing psychology (as a Christian), has made no secret of it, and has stated his beliefs anytime it comes up. I have seen equally persistent statements from Rhoni on other topics that interest her, on threads that did not "belong" to her.

Malvaro stated that one of her posts "reeked of rebellion", and while I wouldn't have used the same phrase, I have to agree that the post in question showed an unbiblical disregard for authority. Just a page or two earlier, Malvaro was defending Rhoni in response to Chan, and so it strikes me as odd that we label people as abusers only when they disagree with us.

There are personal issues at work that really have nothing to do with the forum, and in many cases warrant blunt and straightforward comments, IMHO.

Other than those particulars, I really do not get any vibe other than just the normal disagreements and personality clashes that are bound to happen.

As for abuse...I haven't seen it. Sorry. I read the thread. Unless Rhoni is being viciously attacked over the phone and in PM's where no one else reads it, then I would deny its existence, especially in reference to CS and rrford, and especially compared to what is considered normal give-and-take conversation on this forum. (And NFCF and FCF and GNC....)

I agree with the discomfort they have both presented at Rhoni advising folks in a manner that seems to disparage their pastors and the authority they should respect and heed.

Finally, this is a forum which allows conversation...I think it is totally unacceptable and unreasonable for Rhoni to expect to have a thread where she gets to determine who posts and how, and who has to delete their responses, and who can disagree with her, if at all.

There ya go. My 50 cents.

Another home run of the variety that routinely echoes off Miss B's bat.

I agree.

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

You are like a pure, pedigreed high priest of the Lord of the Flies

ROFL!

Good show, old Chap!

[Nahum]

Posted by Miss Brattified:
There are personal issues at work that really have nothing to do with the forum, and in many cases warrant blunt and straightforward comments, IMHO.

So you think its all right to tell someone they are of the devil? That would be blunt and straightforward.

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

I don't see what your posts have to do with anything, EVER!
I have already said the serpents deception and man's lust led to sin.
But keep on arguing with the wall, if thats what floats your boat.

Well, that must be your poor reading comprehension skills at work.

By the way, I was responding specifically to YOUR post. To refresh your memory about what you posted, here it is:

Baloney!

If someone tells me that I need to be tolerant of false doctrine, THEY are spouting off devlish doctrine.

When someone piles on a fellow Christian, absolutely knowing that person is already wounded, suffering, and bleeding, THEY are devlish.

I cannot stand injustice, and neither could Christ!!!!!

Would you guys quit being so ignorantly politically correct?!!!!!! PLEASE!!!!!!

That's the biggest problem in the church today. We are too big a pansies to call sin what it is. We ride the fence because we don't want to hurt someones precious little feelings.

What about when Jesus could turn to Simon and say "Get behind me, SATAN". Hello people!
Even he recognized the devils work in Simon's statement.


Now, maybe you'll want to re-think your ridiculous statement, "I don't see what your posts have to do with anything, EVER!"

It was only after you were challenged that you gave scant acknowledgement to the slightest possibility of human responsibility for one's own sins. You didn't start out that way.

You seem to be thinking that someone (or more than one) said that Satan has no involvement whatsoever, hence your histrionic response quoted above. No one has said any such thing. What was said is that we can't blame Satan for what we choose to do.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Chan

Well, that must be your poor reading comprehension skills at work.

By the way, I was responding specifically to YOUR post. To refresh your memory about what you posted, here it is:

Baloney!

If someone tells me that I need to be tolerant of false doctrine, THEY are spouting off devlish doctrine.

When someone piles on a fellow Christian, absolutely knowing that person is already wounded, suffering, and bleeding, THEY are devlish.

I cannot stand injustice, and neither could Christ!!!!!

Would you guys quit being so ignorantly politically correct?!!!!!! PLEASE!!!!!!

That's the biggest problem in the church today. We are too big a pansies to call sin what it is. We ride the fence because we don't want to hurt someones precious little feelings.

What about when Jesus could turn to Simon and say "Get behind me, SATAN". Hello people!
Even he recognized the devils work in Simon's statement.


Now, maybe you'll want to re-think your ridiculous statement, "I don't see what your posts have to do with anything, EVER!"

It was only after you were challenged that you gave scant acknowledgement to the slightest possibility of human responsibility for one's own sins. You didn't start out that way.

You seem to be thinking that someone (or more than one) said that Satan has no involvement whatsoever, hence your histrionic response quoted above. No one has said any such thing. What was said is that we can't blame Satan for what we choose to do.

Ring around the rosie again Chanie-baby?
Go back and read the entire thread, Oh Wise One. Sorry to bore you with facts. Tell me, if I said the sky was blue, would you disagree with me?

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Chan

So, if a person lies, it isn't because he chose to lie but because the devil made him do it? Since Jesus said "there is none good but God," how can any unsaved person have a "good" spirit? Are we humans not born with a sinful nature and with a heart (seat of emotions, core of one's being) that is "deceitful" above all things "and desperately wicked"?

When are we going to stop removing from humans their responsibility for their own words, actions, attitudes, and beliefs? When are we going to stop placing the blame anywhere except in the wickedness of our own nature?

Notice anyone missing here, Chan?

The devil doesn't make us do anything, but he sure likes to help us along the pathway to poor decisions, Bubba.