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

Originally Posted by J-Roc

You know very well that the motive for her starting that "Dear Rhona" thread was to be a beacon of hope and healing to anyone in the community that was looking to find good ideas and words of encouragement.

Yes, that was the motive and there is nothing wrong with that. But her "beacon of hope and healing" is based not in Christ and His word but in a wicked worldly philosopy, i.e. psychology.

The motive of the thread was obvious and so it did not need anyone policing over it. For those that can do without her advice, they can simply move on to the next thread. There are many threads set up with the motive to strike up a debate, bring out the swords and the guns or whatever and that is fine...but this was not one of them.

The problem wasn't with the purpose of the thread, it was that she was offering advice based on a wicked worldly philosophy (psychology). Worldly philosophies or (as Paul put it in 1 Corinthians) "wisdom" has no place in the Church. The only valid source of wisdom is God and His word.

If anyone had a sincere desire to question any particular advice, then it could have been done in a civil and unaggressive manner. Instead, the thugs came in with their daggers and knives and machetes with the sole purpose of cutting deep into her emotions like wimps. And since the theme on AFF the past 3 days have been about analyzing people's personality trait, here is my analysis...these thugs that picked on Rhona are the same clowns who were bullied in school and were made fun of and now are taking a vengeance and looking for retribution. Yeah...a silly analysis, but I figured I'd plug it in.

No one was trying to do anything to Rhoni's emotions. She needs to stop taking attacks on her worldly philosophy as attacks on her personally. She is NOT her worldly philosophy and she is NOT her profession.

BTW, I don't remember who said what in her post and don't know if you were one of them, I just know that there was a collectivity and not just one individual.

Maybe you should go back and read exactly what was said and note the context in which it was said (as well as Rhoni's own comments).

Yes, pathetic is the word that came to my mind too when I saw these cowards doing what they did on her thread.

There is nothing cowardly about challenging false doctrine and worldly philosophies.

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

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.

Now you're starting to get it! It's about time!

Yes, Satan roams like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour but he doesn't force us to do anything.

[SDG]

Oh boy...

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Chan:
There is nothing cowardly about challenging false doctrine and worldly philosophies.

You mean like humanism which teaches we are exempt from supernatural influences?

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Chan

Now you're starting to get it! It's about time!

Yes, Satan roams like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour but he doesn't force us to do anything.

You are so frustrating. You would argue with a fence post!

Of course, the fence post would win.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

You mean like humanism which teaches we are exempt from supernatural influences?

Or humanism taught in Bible schools about 4 astrological personalities that are God ordained.

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

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?

You WILL stop with playing around with my name!

No, you have not presented any "facts."

And, YES, I would disagree with you if you said the sky was blue. The truth of the matter is that it only looks blue: the chemicals that comprise our atmosphere have no color.

http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/sky_blue.html

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

You mean like humanism which teaches we are exempt from supernatural influences?

Humanism teaches essentially that there are no supernatural influences, not that we're exempt from them. NOT that anyone here has actually said anything even remotely resembling being exempt from supernatural influences.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

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

No, I didn't say harsh and malicious. I think Chan is way over the top with his persistence on this particular note, and I've stated so in the past. It's enough to state your views once and let them be heard. However, in spite of his brusque nature, I respect his intelligence, and appreciate his contributions. But what does Chancellor have to do with Coonskinner and rrford?

Why are they all being lumped together? I disagree with Rhoni on a number of issues. Does that mean I'm also going to be called harsh?

Chancellor posted his disagreements in the same way, in the same fashion, with the same persistence and frequency on the NFCF and FCF. It's to be expected. So I am not even addressing his posts in my assessment of the thread.

Heated disagreement does not equate abuse. That's just my opinion. I'm straightforward and blunt, but I do not believe I have ever posted a single post that could be called abusive, and I certainly have never posted a single post that I am ashamed of. And yet, there are probably some who would label me as a Big Fat Meanie, and when they do I say "go ahead", because I like the way I post, and if that makes me a BFM then I embrace the term, because I believe I am a godly person and my posts reflect it.

I think it's great that you and Daniel and J-Roc have decided to be Rhoni's defenders, and I assume you feel she is a damsel in distress. Be her heroes. Go for it. Just don't be upset when others don't hold the universal opinion that you are being heroic.

Just to clarify, previously I had only skimmed a few posts on the thread, and this morning I only read a couple, as I stated to you in PM. However, I have spent the last 45 minutes reading the thread more thoroughly, particularly posts by CS, rrford, Malvaro and Rhoni's responses to them, so I think I'm qualified to offer my opinion.

My sympathies don't really lie with Rhoni here. Does that mean I'm a meanie?

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Chan

You WILL stop with playing around with my name!

No, you have not presented any "facts."

And, YES, I would disagree with you if you said the sky was blue. The truth of the matter is that it only looks blue: the chemicals that comprise our atmosphere have no color.

http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/sky_blue.html

I'm so sorry. What is your name today?

I think you just love disagreement.