To im:


im quote: Let's stick to what has actually been said,

Truthtesty: Let's stick to what has actually been said - you can start with what Thieme said about "Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich" and "haima".



Truthtesty

Quote
Imjustme
Mile2,

I never heard Bob teach that verse, and like I said, I don't care what it means.
I don't care if Bobby Thieme is qualified or not. I don't care how many wives
he's had. I don't care if he has a harem. He isn't my pastor, and he never will
be, and who or what he is is of no importance to me. Unlike yourself, I'm not
on a mission to discredit him, or any man in the ministry.

I haven't assigned any motive that isn't glaringly obvious. You ARE trying to
prove that this guy is violating God's law, are you not? That is "slamming" in
my vernacular, whether it's true or not. He isn't your pastor either, is he? So
what is the big deal? What stake do you have in the matter? And more important,
why are you badgering about Bobby Thieme?

I DON'T CARE ABOUT BOBBY THIEME!!!!!!!

You, and all the theologians on the planet, can claim he is screwed up for all I
care. OK? This is the last word I have to say about the wife issue. i'm only
hanging around here to converse with kcjones, then I'll be a big chicken and
scram.

Imjustme:

Thank you for your frank response to my question on Bobby's selection as pastor. I want to clear up a misconception you have regarding the purpose of my bringing up this topic.

My motive is not a personal attack against Bobby. My point is to reveal the true character of Bob Thieme. In order to secure the pastorship at Berachah for his son Bobby, Bob Thieme has deliberately violated the Word of God in I Tim. 3:2. Any pastor who knowingly acts contrary to God's commands is a rebel against God and a false teacher, who as we are warned in I Pet. 2:1, will bring "damnable heresies" into the church.

I John 2:4 says "He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."

Coupled with this antagonistic behavior are the innumerable lies Thieme has told regarding his personal life and upbringing. You didn't mention my most recent post to you that addressed Thieme's deception concerning his supposed wealthy family and disinheritance. But I still look forward to your comments.

You stated in your first post that you continue to be a student of Thieme and want to speak in his defense. You want to present a rebuttal to the statements here that are against Thieme. I know that it is a great shock to discover that a man in whom you have placed your confidence has deceived you. But facing the truth is far preferable to living under false pretenses.

So I hope when the going gets tough you will not " be a big chicken and scram", but will honestly seek the truth with me and others on this forum. Speaking for myself, I can say I have no ill feelings toward you whatsoever. It is not your fault that you were mislead.

To the Forum:

Instead of "sticking to what has actually been said", im has run over to the other thread "New to question the Colonel" [forum.culteducation.com]


Truthtesty

To the Forum:


Here we go again even on another thread on this forum [forum.culteducation.com]

She ate her weaties this morning and has her Thieme pom poms, but she can't answer the truth. She can't handle the truth. She can't stick to the truth.


Truthtesty

To im:


<sub>Thieme quote BOC 1979:

Thieme BOC As proof that there are others who understand that the blood of Christ is figurative, permit me to quote Arndt and Gingrich, the latest Greek lexicographers. Under the word haima, “blood,” they devote an entire paragraph to the figurative uses of the word. They describe it as “the blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice, especially the blood of Christ as the means of expiation.” Expiation is paying the penalty for sin, and Jesus Christ did not bleed to death to pay the penalty for sin.



Truthtesty:

Arndt and Gingrich "haima":
haima

1. lit.---a. of human blood J 19:34 etc... hemorrhage (cf. Lev 15:25, 20:18)
(then lengthy paragraph - including scriptural references, authors, and references to individual author's writings)

b. of blood of animals Hb 9:7,18,25 etc... It's use as food is forbidden (cf. Lev 3:17, 7:26f, 17:10)
(then lengthy paragraph - including scriptural references, authors, and references to individual author's writings)

2. fig--- a. as the seat of life (Lev 17:11, Wsd 7:2, Jos., Ant 1, 102) etc... shed blood = kill (Aeschyl.; Gen 9:6, 37:22, Lev 17:4,13, 1Km 25:31 al.;... Luke 11: 50, Acts 22:20, Rom. 3:15 (Ps 13:3, Is 59:7) Rv 16:6, Luke 11:51, Mt 23:20, Rv 16:6, 18:24, 17:6, 19:2, (1Km 9:7), 6:10, Pol 2:1, Mt 27: 4,24, Heb 12:4, (cf Heliod 7,8,2 ...) ...
(then lengthy paragraph - including scriptural references, authors, and references to individual author's writings)

b. blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice 1Cl 55:1---Esp of the blood of Jesus as means of expiation Rom 3:25... Eph 1:7, (Col 1:14 v.1.) (then lengthy paragraph - including scriptural references, authors, and references to individual author's writings)

3. of the (apocalyptic) red color, whose appearance in heaven indicates disaster etc...
(then lengthy paragraph - including scriptural references, authors, and references to individual author's writings)

Truthtesty: Arndt and Gingrich: b. blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice 1Cl 55:1---Esp of the blood of Jesus as means of expiation Rom 3:25...Eph 1:7, (Col 1:14 v.1.)

So to determine the figurative usage of "blood and life" as an expiatory sacrifice compare 1Cl 55:1 with Rom. 3:25.

1 Clement 55:1 says

1Clem 55:1
But, to bring forward examples of Gentiles also; many kings and rulers, when some season of pestilence pressed upon them, being taught by oracles have delivered themselves over to death, that they might rescue their fellow citizens through their own blood. Many have retired from their own cities, that they might have no more seditions.

[www.earlychristianwritings.com]

Truthtesty:
You can understand the true figurative usage meant by Arndt and Gingrich. In this case is that "haima" represents more than just literal blood it also represents[/u] literal blood and literal life sacrificed. The figurative usage of "blood" by Arndt and Gingrich is the word "blood" being used to figuratively point to the ruler's own literal "blood and life" as an expiatory sacrifice. Arndt and Gingrich are saying the figurative usage of haima in this case is that "haima" represents more than just literal blood it also represents literal blood and literal life sacrificed.

Arndt and Gingrich goes on:

Arndt and Gingrich: b. blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice 1Cl 55:1---Esp of the blood of Jesus as means of expiation Rom 3:25...

So comparing the Arndt and Gingrich's figurative usage properly as in comparison with Cl 55:1 we see that the figurative usage of "blood" by Arndt and Gingrich is the word "blood" "haima" being used to figuratively to point to Jesus' own literal "blood and life" as an expiatory sacrifice (not just blood alone). Thieme is jumping to a false conclusion to provide false evidence for his false theory of "spiritual death only" and in doing so is attacking the blood of Christ. Ardnt and Gingrich do not understand or agree with Thieme's false "figurative" teaching.

You can compare and see that Arndt and Gingrich's figurative usage haima in both cases 1Cl 55:1 with Rom 3:25, is the same figurative usages, although obviously used with different people.

Therefore Thieme's conclusion that this in some "sense" supports Thieme's false theory of "spiritual death only" and Thieme's false theory that "haima" is figurative and does not refer to literal blood, is not substantiated by the evidence of Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich.</sub>

Rebutt that im

Thieme has every major cult dynamic characteristic at play at Be"reich"ah.


Truthtesty

Mile2,

I did respond about the C.G. Hunt book, but it apparently did not get posted.
I said this is, indeed, a serious charge, but before I dump the beliefs I've held
for 37 years I would like more information about the author.

What is his full name? I did some cursory investigating, and I can only find this
one book to his credit. Has he written other biographies? I would like to read a
summary of his politics, so to speak, an author profile. I am a published author
myself, and I know this information should be provided for any legitimate
writer.

I assume the author conducted extensive interviews with Thieme, and they are
cited in his work? This is standard procedure for a biographer of a living subject.
If he did not include verbatim quotations by Thieme, his biography is bunk.

It is highly irregular for a liar of the magnitude that you claim Thieme is to lie
to his congregation for years, then spill his guts to be printed in a book, is it
not?

The reason I ask these questions, among other things, is that I find it odd that
anyone would choose to write a book about a minister that is relatively obscure,
from a church that just a relative handfull of Christians have ever heard of, and
if they have, they could care less? Either this man is an ardent admirer of Thieme,
or just another heckler. He certainly didn't write it for profit, which is the motive
almost every author on earth would have, else he would have selected a famous
man to write about, like Billy Graham, or the like.

A few of the statements you made about this book raised a red flag in my mind;

So what if Thieme Sr. was a salesman? So what if he moved into a triplex? These
facts, if true, prove nothing. The richest man I know, personally, had millions, but
lived in the same nondescript house in Bellaire, Texas, and drove a rusted out Buick
the whole time I knew him (He was a silent partner in my father's real estate
business). Unless you knew his parents left him a chunk of the Permian Basin, the
richest oil country in the world, and he married a Stratton (heir of the Briggs and
Stratton fortune) you would think he was just a "man of modest means". Fact is,
he was just a penny pinching old putz.

Wikipedia cites that the Thiemes moved to Beverly Hills when they inherited a large
family estate. This would also support what I just said. Thieme Sr.'s occupation would
be of no consequence. Bob Thieme's uncle founded Lincoln National Life Insurance
in Fort Wayne, Indiana (where Theime was born). His name was Arthur Hunt. I don't
know where the inheritance came from, but this is one very likely source.

It also occured to me that Mr. C.G.Hunt may also be a relative of Arthur, and one very
feasable reason he wrote this book was because he was cut out of the will. I don't know,
but as I said, I need many questions answered before I embrace this book as factual
and unbiased. At this point there is good reason to hold this book as highly suspect.

I hope this response satisfies your post. I will look into this matter, I assure you, as
I am understandably concerned if Bob is a liar.

Ok Back from a semi-restful weekend.

Im, when I spoke about Jonah, He refused to go to Nineveh, which happened to be in Assyrian territory. Now remember, if we all believe God's word to be true, then if he meant the City and not the Country when it was written, then we have to stick to what God said there, and be precise.

This is one of my 'issues' with Bob's 'teaching', he never taught the fundamental Bible stories, which Paul said was beneficial. My wife, bless her heart, knows the ins-and-outs of 1st century Roman politics, but could not tell you who/why the 3 were tossed into a fiery furnace (Dan 3:8). If God wanted us to know the inside baseball of Roman politics in the 1st century, he would have put it in that little book. Not to harp on you, but getting John and Peter mixed up after 37 years of 'studying' tells me the something is amiss in the teaching method. It really pains me to see people so passionate about God, (you as well as my bride) but then to miss some of the biggest lessons available to us God's word.

-Listening to Bob's Teaching

Well I do you one better, I have actually listened to quite a few lessons from Bob (my wife playing them), read some of his 'booklets' and have even been to Berachah a couple times when both Bob and Bobby have taught. Now remember I didn't know squat about any of this until 5-1/2 years ago. But here are some of my Observations:

1. Cursing from the puplit (or you liked to call it salty old war-horse) this to me was like mixing water and oil, the mannerisms/and coursness of speech that Bob used had no place with God's word, I heard people talking like that Offshore, one of the reasons I quit that line of work, there is no excuse for it. (Eph 5:4)

2. Walking around Berachah with a open eyes, goodness, I felt like I was walking into shrine of a man, and not the One nailed to the cross. There are A LOT of photos of Bob there on the walls...I thought it was about God's word, not the teacher, he might tell you that it's not about him, but the place did not come across as that. Paul said he was LEAST of the apostles, -- "Philippians 2:3 Do nothing from rivalry or conceit but in humility count others more significant than yourselves." This goes for us as well as the Teachers.

3. Adding to the Scriptures - this is a biggy for me, Bob actually said that Jesus Christ Visited Uriah before he died due to David's covering a lie. Now I spent months trying to figure out where this was said in the bible, and figured out he just added this. But it is still WRONG(makes for a good story though) . Nowhere in the bible did it say Uriah was a general officer either, Joab order him to the front (means someone else was the 'general'). (Rev 22:18)

4. Books, just for an example his book on canonocity of scripture, Bob did a POOR job of citing sources, most would call it plagurism, I can not believe that he did all that original research into the history of scripture by himself. It would have served the Lord better if he had shown where he condensed all the information he had in there. You as an author should be very sensitive to that.

About his military service, Bob flew a desk during the war (I have good friends that are officers in the Air Force, and this is a funny way of saying bureaucrat ). Don't get me wrong, being an administrator of a training facility is an important job during wartime, but he was as about as far removed from the ultimate sacrifice one can make during war as you can get. His love of war and battle also does not fit with those who have 'seen the elephant' (had to kill their fellow man) that I have met in my life, and really doesn't fit with a man teaching about God's Love for us fallen creatures.

And fundamentally, this is why I have so many problems with Berachah church, the lack of Love in the church body. Now before anyone goes to the and uses the ulitmate trump and calls me a 'Hippie', please be aware that when I 'rebelled' during my youth, I went and got a flat-top without my parents permission. I'm about as 'hippie' as Hank Hill is (from King of the Hill). Bob denigrating God's other ministries, sharing the Gospel, taking care of those in need, etc. is not what He taught his children. So much potential was wasted there because I think Bob's lack of Love of his fellow man, it just breaks my heart to no end.

Imjustme,
TT he is very passionate about Bob's ministry because he's been hurt more than most, and please don't diminish that pain, it is what it is, and he's doing what he can, argue the points or ignore him, don't mock the man. Remember, deep cuts take a long time to heal.

I don't want to 'joust' with you. But I would be HAPPY to correspond with you. - You've posted enough you should be able to send me an PM through the bulletin board now. I have one request for you though. Would you read out-loud some scripture to yourself for me? Doesn't have to be in front of anyone, just by your lonesome, right before you start your tape up. Come on humor this 'hippie', it can't hurt nothin'.

Please read out-loud, TWICE: 1st Corinthians 13: 1-3

I'll even post up the ESV version for those who don't have a bible handy.

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.

On a fun note, please be careful Chicken when you head back to the 'Colonel' - He does have those 11 herbs and spices....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/22/2008 12:57AM by kcjones.

Thanks for your post, kc. At least it is well thought out and heartfelt. Nobody can ask more,
and I also note that you both incorporate a generous dose of humor, and do not slime Bob
with meaningless, superficial tripe.

Your objections are noted, and some of them carry some weight, but please understand
that you heard a few tapes, and went to a few classes, and this is partially the basis for
your views. I have studied under Thieme for 37 years, and some of your comments
don't paint an acurate portrait. Except for a few random remarks, below, I won't write a l
aborious rebuttal on every issue. At this point I don't believe it would serve any purpose.
You have your views, I have mine, and from all appearances, we have irreconcilable
opinions. Let's leave it at that.

I will comment on a few things, however;

I have an abysmal habit of mislaying details. I have artistic genes in hyper mode, and
it seems that my mind is always racing a mile ahead of my mouth. This is an Aquarian
trait, I am told. I kid my wife and girls that they are always correcting me (I say "What
is this, the Correct Bowl?), because I am into an explanation, or something, and they
interrupt me. The majority of the time I know the correct information, but I goof when
I'm not really concentrating on them. My gaff about Peter is no reflection on Bob's
ministry, nor my knowlegde of Scripture, not that I am compelled to defend my
relationship with God. You just seem to be making more of it than it is.

The pictures of Bob in the hallway were not placed there by his order. He is not a guy
who pays hardly any attention to those details, and leaves them up to Katie, his
secretary, and the Board of Deacons. I'm not sure he even knew they were up there.

You are WAY off base about love in the Berachah Congregation. The best friends I have
I met there, and every member of that group that I know of likewise had a large circle
of friends, and partied together frequently. Cindy and I attended a bash almost every
weekend.

But Bob was a stickler about keeping the church out of the personal lives of his flock,
and for good reason. He did not invade the privacy of newcomers by having them
stand, or come to the front of the assembly, and I heartily agree with that policy. I
vistited a buddy's chuch on liberty one weekend when I was in the Marine Corps,
and they made me wear a little tag and stand up. I suppose they were just trying
to be friendly, but I DIDN'T LIKE IT and never went near the palce again.

When we moved to another city some years ago Cindy returned to the church where
she encountered Bob's tapes, which led to her moving to Houston, and ultimately our
getting married. Unlike Berachah, this outfit did encourage church sponsored activities,
what I assume you would consider a show of "love". Right off the bat, within days, the
Pastor's wife admonished Cindy, telling her that I was out of line staying home and
studying tapes, rather than attending their services. BULL! It was none of her damned
business.

Later, the pastor told her that one can't grow listening to tapes, alone. BULL! If that
were true then the epistles would have been useless. The soul must be engaged,
not necessarily the body.

Anyway, Cindy soon learned that there was a cast system in the congregation, with
a few families at the apex, dictating to everyone else. When the pastor finally stood
up and tried to correct this situation the congregation turned on him and voted him
out. He was a pretty good pastor, and I felt sorry for the guy. Now he teaches
out of his home, and the church couldn't keep a minister, and closed.

So much for a chummy atmosphere, and the explanation of why Berachah stayed
away from that activity. Human beings being what they are, it can easily lead to
distortion, and servere problems.

I never felt rejected, or left out. There was abundant opportunity to make friends
and socialize.

As for most of your other comments, I will remain silent. I like Bob's ocassional epithets,
and his devotion to the military. My father served under him as an aviation cadet,
and he credits Thieme and General Yount with saving the lives of many airmen,
because of their outstanding training. Bob volunteered to go into Greece and
make contact with the Greek underground once, but he only knew ancient
Greek, and was disqualified. All eight of the men who went were captured by the
Krauts and executed, so one might assume that God had other plans for him.
At any rate, desk or no, I wouldn't intimate that Bob is a coward, or that his
service was not invaluable. I know you didn't say that, but the inference was there,
else you wouldn't have brought it up.

As much as I have enjoyed our discussions kc, I have many other pursuits that
pique my interest, and defending Bob Thieme is something I do only rarely. God
knows all the facts, and whatever discipline or blessing he has coming will be
meted out by Him. I remind myself that all the noise about him does no good,
and accomplishes nothing where God is concerned.

Adieu, kc. Take care. I have a feeling that you and I might be friends, if per chance
we knew each other better. Drop me an IM if you have an uncontrollable urge to
contact me. My time on this site is at an end.

Semper Fi

To im:


Semper Fi?

Keep running Marine. Keep making excuses for Thieme. You can blow positive smoke all day about Thieme, it still doesn't turn Thieme's lies into the truth.

You didn't "stick to what Thieme said." You could not handle the truth.

I think your doing the right thing leaving - If you can't back it up, then pack it up.

Here' a suggestion, perhaps the next name you choose on a forum should be "Imjustyella".



Sic Semper Tyrannis


Truthtesty

Imjustme:

All your questions about the author C.G. Hunt normally would be very valid. However in this case they are not relevant because of the way in which the book was written. C.G. Hunt took no position either pro or con Thieme, but simply compiled biographical data that came from sources available to the public, such as newspaper articles, books, and documents that are a matter of public record. He made no conclusions based on the data and presented it in a completely objective manner. Some time ago I responded to another member of this forum who had questions similar to yours. So I would like to quote my response then because it may answer some of your questions now.

"Thieme's mother probably did receive some inheritance upon her father's death in 1928. In 1929, Thieme's grandfather Frederick was reported to have left Indiana to join his son RBT Sr. in Beverly Hills. However, any inheritance would have to have been shared by Thieme's mother, a brother by a 2nd wife, and his 3rd wife and 2 young children.

Thieme's grandfather (superintendent of the Wayne Knitting Mills) wrote in his will that he had given his son Robert Sr. and daughter Martha financial support in the purchasing or furnishing of their homes. When he died in 1937 he left his entire estate of $60,000 to his wife. Bob Thieme was a freshman at the University of Arizona at the time. His family had already left their rental home in Beverly Hills before this time and were living in a triplex in Beverly Hills. When Thieme's father filed for divorce from his mother 2 years later he listed their community property as consisting of &quot;automobiles, furniture and fixtures, linens, rugs and silverware, and no other property.&quot; His father married again 6 months after his divorce was final and moved to a large apartment building in L.A. I'm sure his father probably made a decent living as a water purifier salesman, but there could be no mistaking the fact that he was not wealthy. When Thieme said that his father disinherited him when he decided to become a pastor he led people to believe he gave up a large sum of money to serve God. After all, he repeatedly told stories of a priviledged life in Beverly Hills. This is the impression all those in his ministry I have spoken to have. He was lying about that because his father really didn't have much to leave him and he knew that.

You mention that C.G. Hunt's book is an unauthorized biography. A true biography is neither pro nor con the subject. It should not need the authorization or approval of anyone, because it should be as accurate and unbiased a rendering of the facts as possible. It should present all the facts-- those that are complimentary toward the subject and those that are not. After all, the Bible presents the whole story of men such as David, who had great virtues and great flaws. Hunt says in his Introduction, &quot;Extreme care has been taken with this biography to record an accurate rendering of past events. That is why no interviews were conducted to gain factual information concerning Bob Thieme, and all information was taken from documents that are a matter of public record.&quot;

Personal interviews would only lead to misinformation in my point of view. You could interview a long time &quot;taper&quot; and his account would elevate Thieme to the position of the 2nd Apostle Paul. Or you could interview someone who left his ministry who would consider him to be the antichrist. I think Hunt tried to be as objective as possible. What he uncovered just happened to contradict over and over again what Thieme had told his supporters.

I did not notice any assumptions in the book, and all speculations are clearly stated as such. The reader is simply presented with likely possibilities. They are never stated as fact."

The book is extremely well referenced and every statement made can easily be checked out. There is a great deal of erroneous information written about Thieme by other biographers. Many have relied on an interview with Katherine Tapping of Berachah Church. That is why Wikipedia contains incorrect statements. However, C.G. Hunt corrects this misinformation in his book. I don't know the source of your information but several parts of your post are in error.

It was not Bob Thieme's uncle who founded Lincoln National Life Insurance in Indiana. Rather his great uncle Theodore Thieme served as its director and his grandfather held stock in the company. Bob Thieme has no uncle by the name of Arthur Hunt. In your original post you also said:

"Colonel Bob Thieme was the youngest Colonel in the U.S. Army Air Corps (25
years old), the personal aide to General Yount. When Bob announced that he
was resigning to go into the ministry the general encouraged him to remain
in service, assuring him that he would surely become a general himself. Bob
declined."

First, Bob Thieme is a lieutenant colonel, not a full colonel. The military records of former military men are a matter of public record and from them C.G. Hunt reports a thorough discription of Thieme's service. Thieme was given the commission to Lt. Colonel on Dec.18, 1945 after the conclusion of WWII, while he was waiting to be relieved of active duty at a separation base. His age at that time was 27, 2 months shy of his 28th birthday.

As far as serving as General Yount's personal assistant, the military records (Yount's is on the internet and Thieme's is in the book) show that the only time both men were assigned to the same base was in Fort Worth, TX for the short period of 2 months from May, 1943 to July, 1943. During that time the records say that Thieme served under Col. E.W. Suarez and no mention of General Yount is made. I'm sure Thieme was acquainted with Gen. Yount and may have worked with him in some capacity, but to characterize his service during WWII as the General's personal assistant is a gross exaggeration.

I also think it is highly unlikely that Gen. Yount would predict that Thieme could become a general if he remained in the military. Thieme was a non-rated officer, meaning he was not a pilot. He went into the reserves when he left active duty in 1946 and did not retire until 1961. But in all that time he never received a commission to a full Colonel. The reason is (based on conversations I have had with several veterans and as stated in the book) that an Air Force officer who could not fly rarely could rise beyond Lt. Col. I'm sure Gen. Yount knew this. Contrast this with the actor, Jimmy Stewart, who became a Col. during WWII and then in the reserves rose to the rank of brigadier general. Of course Jimmy Stewart was a pilot, who flew 20 combat missions during the war.

I strongly urge you to read "Robert B. Thieme; His Ancestry; His Life". Only then will you see the true picture of Thieme's distortions and fabrications.
It is extremely important because if a man would lie about his life and accomplishments in such a fashion for the purpose of self-aggrandizement, he is not a minister of God and nothing he says can be trusted.