No soapbox, no rebuttals, no flames in this one - just a plea for all of us to spiritually and maturely consider some of the discussions that we are anonymously putting in electronic form for the Enemy and his minions.

I'm writing in this subject area because Col Thieme's teachings provided vital perspective, information, and meat that was sadly absent or obfuscated in the "mainstream" venues - TV, radio, Bible studies, prayer meetings, Sunday sermons, etc. This I found to be especially true in churches that were bound to denominational governance - be it Baptist (all flavors). "charismatic" (all flavors), Presbyterian (covenant, united, etc.), Methodist, and on and on and on.

Prior to my studying under Thieme, much of my hunger had been lessened by L'Abri Teachers and good ol' boys like OB Greene and J Vernon. I got some insights from "Bible Speaks" as well. I'll not reveal my current sources of Bible Truth because some are denominational and some are probably controversial to readers of these pages and I fer damn sure don't want the Enemy to have any more advantages!

The overriding fact (yes FACT) that I want to share with whomever deigns to read this is that at salvation, we are indwelt by the 3rd member of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit, and that if we allow Him to function, we will grow from Milk to Meat, we will be able to discern true Truth (I hate that term but it's needed), and we will be able to (on our own and with His guidance) be able to separate the wheat from chaff, meat from bones, Truth from opinion, etc.

I have seen "cultic" behavior evidenced in all followers of every ministry and/or teacher I've sat under. But, the truly Godly of these have and are all up front in cautioning against blind lockstep adherence. I can easily understand why some would go overboard in devotion to such a strong personality as Thieme.

That being said, I cannot overstate the need for all who have accepted Christ as Lord and Savior to recognize that they are now a new Species, have been granted (among many many gifts) a Spiritual IQ far FAR beyond human intelligence and through the indwelling Holy Spirit, are empowered with discernment - this places much responsibility on the Believer and even more on those who would teach.

My only criticism of the strong teachers/ministries that are Orthodox is that many don't or can't provide a nurturing environment for the new/young/healed members of our Family. Let's fix that and deny the Enemy any advantage!!!

alsosavedbygrace:

Please read the rules again that you agreed to before posting at this message board.

No preaching.

To also:


The enemy is Thieme in his false teachings, the denial of the efficacy of the literal shed Blood of Christ being the most egregiously errored.


<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.

Thieme has every major cult dynamic characteristic at play at Be"reich"ah.</sub>

Dietrich Bonhoeffer "...nothing can be cheap to us which is costly to God"


Also Thieme's concept of maturity is as Dr. Wall stated: "totally off-balanced"

[l.b5z.net]


Truthtesty

To the Forum:


Clearly Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich says at times the figurative usage of haima means shed blood = literally kill:

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, ....

Clearly Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich says at other times that the figurative usage of haima means literal blood and literal life sacrificed:

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.).

Clearly Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich says at other times that the figurative usage of haima means the high priestly sacrifice of Jesus:

Of the high priestly sacrifice of Jesus Heb 9:12,14; 10:19, 1 J 1:7, Rev 1:5, 5:9


Thieme intentionally and purposefully misled thousands of Christians on the figurative/literal meaning of the literal shed Blood of Christ, for more then 30 years, without a repentence.




Truthtesty

To also:


For over 30 years, it was Thieme who obusficated the information from the lexiconagraphers Bauer, Arndt, and Gingrich. It was Thieme who obusficated the Truth about the Blood of Jesus and falsely denied the efficacy of the literal shed Blood.of Jesus It was Thieme's use of false cultic authority expressed and spoken through the false doctrine of right pastor (and taught as bible doctrine), that fooled many Christians and falsely drew them to Thieme. It is true that at times Thieme did speak the truth, but what had/has such a devastating effect was that Thieme mixed that truth with his poison, making it nearly impossible for the average Christian to discern. This along with Thieme's displays of false demands for submission to his authority alone (to reap the benefits of his teachings), cursing, displays of anger, academic bullying, and other false acts such as "griping someone out in the back" who wasn't really there intimidated, fooled, retarded the spiritual growth of many Christians, and ultimately caused many Christians to unecessarily capitulate thier own discernment and thier own thinking in favor of copying Thieme's words with extreme prejudice.

You expect this forum to assume that you are capable of "spiritually and maturely consider some of the discussions ".

Why don't you prove to this forum that you are mature and not here just to generalize praise for Thieme?

Why don't you prove to this forum that you are mature and not here just to harass, because we point out Thieme's errors?

Why don't you show your "maturity" by confessing Thieme was wrong about the Blood of Christ?

The facts are all out in the open and clearly before you, this forum, and God.


Truthtesty

To the Forum:

This goes on:

Clearly Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich says at other times that the figurative/literal usage of haima means (literal Blood and literal Life) as an expiatory sacrifice OF the high priestly sacrifice of Jesus:
blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice Of the high priestly sacrifice of Jesus Heb 9:12,14; 10:19, 1 J 1:7, Rev 1:5, 5:9, B 5:1

B 5:1 stands for Barnabas 5:1. It reads: Barnabas 5:1
For to this end the Lord endured to deliver His flesh unto corruption, that by the remission of sins we might be cleansed, which cleansing is through the blood of His sprinkling.

Clearly what is in Bauer/Arndt/Gingrich's view is the literal Blood and literal life of Jesus.


And it goes on:

blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice As the means from freeing from guilt Rom 5:9

blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice Esp. in the institution of the Lord's supper Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; cf. 10:16; J 6:53-5; 1J 5:6,8

blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice Described as bringing about fellowship Acts 20:28, Eph 2:13, Col 1:20

blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice Love descr. as the blood of Jesus ITr 8:1, IRom 7:3, ISm 1:1, IEph1:1,

(The I stands for Ignatius so ITr stands for Ignatius Epistle to the Trallians, and so on: Ignatius Epistle to the Ephesians, Ignatius Epistle to the Magnesians, Ignatius Epistle to the Romans, Ignatius Epistle to the Philadelphians, Ignatius Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, and Ignatius Epistle to Polycarp).


I presented a brief description of b. blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice. The more detailed references can be read on page 23 of the following download:
[www.4shared.com]

You can read about Blood (Haima) from Bauer, Ardnt, and Gingrich pages 22 and 23 for yourself here
[www.4shared.com]
[www.4shared.com]

Clearly what is in Bauer/Arndt/Gingrich's view is the literal Blood and literal life of Jesus.

There is but 1 Flesh and Blood authority - the Flesh and Blood of Jesus.

The flesh and blood of Thieme was not an authority.



Truthtesty

I am

I am curious to know why you thought a new thread was necessary to address your concerns?

Second, I don't think you are preaching. You are simply testifying apparently of your positive experience "under" the teaching of RBT Jr. The topic of that ministry is Christian faith, and if you can't talk about the content of that faith, however others may disagree with it, there is no point to any of these threads.

Third, if you want a place to "preach" I can provide a link if it is permitted to post one on a RR Forum thread. That will also permit opposition to what you may say.

Sincerely,
sistersoap

Im,

Just excellent. You are well-spoken, and have very well explained how Berachah church couldn't possibly be any further from a cult.

I have personally attended Berachah church in Houston, as a child, as a teenager, as an adult.
I have also attended many other churches, as Berachah is a pretty long drive from where I live.

There are several things I disagree with that Col. Theime Jr. has taught.

1. It is best to find a "right pastor" and not learn from many pastors.
(I wouldn't trade anything from what I've learned from RB Theime Jr., but I also wouldn't trade anything for what I've learned from Joe Griffin, Robert Mclauglin, etc.)

2. 1Corinthians 13:8 teaches cessasion of certain spiritual gifts at the completion of the full canon of scripture. Also there is a dispensational division of post-canon church and pre-canon church. I see no such division in scripture other than that one verse, and I think it clearly is talking of Christ's return, not the completion of the the scriptures.

There are also some things I disagree with about how church is conducted at Berachah.
As you have said, Col. Theime not only doesn't get overly involved in the lives of his congregation, he doesn't get involved at all.

I think there is a serious lack of communtity and fellowship that happens at Berachah. I don't think the Colonel really even wanted it to be that way, but it just turned out that way. I think the church should be more like a family. I have attended Berachah church off and on for probably about 15 years, and the most conversation I've had with the Col, or the new pastor (his son, Bobby) is "hello." The same goes for most of the congregation. They aren't unfriendly. They are just there for a purpose, and that purpose is to learn God's word, to the exclusion of even human interaction.

Because of that, I picture the Berachah church environment as more of a seminary than a church.



All that being said...

I have learned a great many doctrinal truthes while studying under RB Theime Jr, and RB Theime III, that have completely changed my life to the extent that I followed them.
When I am applying the doctrinal principles I have learned there (sometimes I fail to do this) it brings me peace, joy, confidence, a relaxed mental-attitude in the face of severe conflict and turmoil. And confidence in my relationship with God.

I do not idolize the Colonel, and I know from first hand personal experience, that becoming an idol is not his goal.
To the contrary, he teaches strictly against putting our trust in men, and that our trust should only be in the Lord Jesus Christ. And where did he get this idea from? The same place he gets all his teachings, directly from the bible.

That is what he does. He teaches deep bible doctrine. He's done it, and done it very well for over 50 years.

I decided about the time I got married that I needed more than bible doctrine from my church. I needed family and fellowship, and I just wasn't getting that at Berachah. So now I attend a church where I am getting that. The downside is that the doctrine taught there is not as deep. But I listen to tapes of the colonel, downloads from other doctrinal pastors (most of whom were ordained by the colonel himself), and they are a good suppliment. I can focus more on serving than learning when I am at church on Sunday, and I do most of my learning listening to MP3's on my commute to work and back.


If Berachah were a cult, and RB Theime Jr. it's leader, could I be so supportive of his ministry while disagreeing with several of his teachings? Usually with cults, you either drink the whole cup of kool-aid or none at all. Pardon my blunt metaphor.

The Colonel is a brilliant man and a true servant of God. The desire of his heart has always been building up believers in Christ, and giving them the knowledge they need to grow spiritually, and get a closer relationship with Jesus Christ. Nothing more, nothing less.


Truthtesty,
You're replies are shallow, emotional, and make you look extremely foolish, especially when compared to the posts of your opposition in this thread. Take your personal vendetta elsewhere, and stop attacking a man who is building up the church. In 53 years, don't you think God would've done something about Colonel Theime, if his teachings were really as bad as you say they are? Do you think he slipped through the heavenly crack, and God didn't notice him?
To the contrary, the Colonel has always taught "giving" to the church as a completely voluntary act. He infact discourages those from giving, who are only doing so out of compulsion. Have you ever heard any other pastor of any other church, disuade anyone from giving, for any imagineable reason? I haven't. And yet his church has always thrived and flourished. His tapes and books which cost the church a considerable amount of money to produce, have always been given out freely to anyone who wants them. He has always financially supported many missionaries. And yet without begging for donations or promising the congregation the favor of God in exchange for their offerings (as many churches do) Berachah church has always met it's financial needs. That fact is a serious testament to the validity of his ministry, and God's approval of it. Attacking a pastor is really not a wise thing to do. God will deal with a pastor if he is off-course. If you interfere, he will deal with you as well.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/20/2008 12:08AM by logos.

logos:

Warning.

The rules you agreed to preclude personal attacks.

Such personal attacks actually make you look "shallow, emotional, and...extremely foolish."

Also, invoking God's name to deal with some pastor's critic makes you look like a "cult" member.

FYI--God is not the only way pastors are dealt with, as most Protestant pastors have meaningful accountability through democratically elected church government and denominational oversight, which can discipline and if necessary fire a pastor.

Quote
rrmoderator
Warning.

The rules you agreed to preclude personal attacks.

That wasn't a personal attack. I didn't say "you are foolish." I said "you're posts make you look foolish."

Quote
rrmoderator
Such personal attacks actually make you look "shallow, emotional, and...extremely foolish."

And with all due respect, if what I said to truthtesty was a personal attack, then what you said to me is also a personal attack.

Quote
rrmoderator
Also, invoking God's name to deal with some pastor's critic makes you look like a "cult" member.

I use God's name often in my daily life. If your best friend's name was John, then you would use that name often when talking about him. It is no different for me and using Jesus' name. If that makes me look like a cult member to you, I think you have an axe to grind.

Quote
rrmoderator
FYI--God is not the only way pastors are dealt with, as most Protestant pastors have meaningful accountability through democratically elected church government and denominational oversight, which can discipline and if necessary fire a pastor.

It may not be the only way, but I believe it is the only CORRECT way, according to the bible. God appoints pastors, committees do not, if you believe what the bible says. If you don't believe what the bible says, then what pastors do or don't do is not truly your concern. I am defending RB Theime Jr. not "most Protestant pastors" as you referred to. He is unlike most protestant pastors I've seen, and that is a good thing to me.


Aren't forum moderators, supposed to be unbiased? Just a question.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/20/2008 12:24AM by logos.