[b:f6354ac96a]Hello everyone. I'm a 19 year old female and I just joined after reading some of these discussions.[/b:f6354ac96a] [i:f6354ac96a](Brace yourselves because this post has nothing of substance other than to describe my recent questioning of these principles.)[/i:f6354ac96a]

I have been raised on what I've come to refer to as "Bible Doctrine," under Colonel Thieme, and that's all I've ever known. It hasn't been until recently, in the past year really, that I've stepped back and realized that I associate my salvation with doing everything the Colonel says, not even the Bible, but the Colonel. I haven't come to question my faith, I am a Christian and I believe in God, Christ's death, and salvation through Christ with all that I am. But recently it's as though a window has opened in my mind and I've realized I can't back up anything I believe in, even to myself, other than it's what I learned from the Colonel. I think he is a good man and has many many great principles, but surely only what he says is okay is not what I should base my entire faith upon. And like many of you have said, when questioned about the fact that I am in a cult-like organization, I usually find myself thinking "well, person, surely you must not truly understand the Bible. Poor soul."
I even find myself feeling guilty by coming to this site and making this post. Not guilt as if I might be blaspheming or sinning, but guilt because I have always been taught not to question what Col Thieme says. I'm a naturally analytical and curious person, and not one to typically accept something "just because it's so." So I believe that in the back of my mind this questioning of his authority has been building up, yet supressed because of the emphasis of his word being final in my upbringing. I'm not from Texas, but visited the church several times with my parents over the years. Occasionally I'd find myself surprised by something he said or some rule he has that seemed off-the-wall, and once I even made a half-joking comment to my mother about I hope I wouldn't be excommunicated from the church because heaven forbid I broke one of their rules... It was as though I had questioned the existence of God himself. She didn't take it well.
Needless to say, I've decided my parents aren't the most unbiased people to discuss my sudden crisis with. But like I said, I'm very new to open my eyes to the fact that this just maybe isn't the absolute set-in-stone truth. I'm still figuring it out, and trying to decide where to go from here.

I suppose to sum up what I've been trying to say... This is all I know. If and when any of you first began to question some of his teachings after learning only that your entire life, where did you go? Where did you start, how did you come to a place that you felt good about, and did you have to learn to separate a few of the Colonel's oddities from God's word?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2008 10:21PM by rrmoderator.

If you're REALLY feeling bold, you might want to take a look at this thread in another forum:

[www.amazon.com]

I wasn't part of Thieme's group but was a member of a Christian cult for a few years when I was young.

Leaving and questioning does leave one with an empty space; we conduct our lives based on what we know to be correct, and when that knowledge is shaken it is tough to know what to do.

I spent the rest of my life examining religions (all) and spirituality, and philosophy even, to see if I could impart a new truth to myself.

After almost 30 years of this I have come to this conclusion:

No one group has all the answers; life is such a mystery that there is no one ordinary being who could offer an all-encompassing truth.

People who claim to be messiahs, or messianic mouthpieces, should be questioned. If you can't do this face-to-face then question them in your heart. Why on earth would they know more than you, or be more "privileged" than you to receive the "word of God"? Look at all the messiahs out there, now and throughout history. They all have conflicting viewpoints. They can't all be right, can they?

The best truth is the truth you choose to believe in, based on your own conclusions. Keep open, be grateful for this life you have, and don't let anybody tell you that you need to redeem yourself in the eyes of God. That's between you and God. (Oh, and if you get stuck with skeptics telling you there is no God, just ignore them. Science can't define God, ergo science can't disprove what it cannot define. If you choose atheism then that is your choice, but don't let anyone treat you like a dummy if it isn't.)

Congratulations on making your way out of the group. It is a lonely and uncertain road when you are re-examining your beliefs, but it's a necessary part of growing up. This is not an allusion to your age; this is a comment about human life in general.

It's good you are on this road now, rather than when you're older. It's easier to re-shape your beliefs when you're young.

Treat your spiritual journey like a smorgasbord and be careful of anything that seems too good to be true.

Learn to live with uncertainty in your beliefs. Be prepared to feel adrift a lot of the time. Treat people with your usual good manners. And be easy on yourself.

Any Thiemites out there have any constructive advice for someone leaving this particular group?

RO7...

I've been studying under Bob Thieme for 37 years, and he has taught me all I know about
the Christian life, and I'm profoundly thankful for it. My life is blessed, and I have a
wonderful relationship with God, not because I worship Bob Thieme, but because I worship
Him. I do, however, attribute my knowledge of God, and my ability to manage my problems,
in part to the man who tutored me and showed me the way to stand independently before
God.

I am an independent thinker, and always have been, and if Bob Thieme had ever said, or
even intimated, that I must adhere to everything he says I would have been gone before
he finished the sentence.

The fact is that the man documented every single statement he made about the Bible with
detailed exegesis in the original languages and historical background. You know this to be
a fact. He doesn't just talk without backing up what he says with, many times, tedious
background information and cyphering the Manuscripts in the Greek and Hebrew. What
more could a teacher do to provide proof of his logic?

I have known families that browbeat their kids, as your parents apparently did, about Bob's
teaching, but is that his fault? Did you ever hear him endorse such conduct? To the contrary,
you can no doubt recall, as I can, that he insisted time after time after time that he has no
intention of telling people how to live their lives. His responsibility is to study and teach God's
Word, and how that information is applied is up to the individual.

You say that you have come to realize that everything you think about your faith is based upon
what Bob Thieme taught you. And this is a bad thing? The question is not whether you have
learned from many teachers, but whether the one teacher has taught you the truth. Isn't
that what's important? If Thieme teaches the truth, than what more do you need?

I read many posts that criticize Bob Thieme from people who, admittedly, have never studied
a word he taught. They base their opinions on the slanders that a few people write, people
who did sit in the Berachah congregation, but came to hate Theime. Literally all of them cite
the reason for their hatred as parents who insisted on their attendance, and for no other
reason that I can fathom.

And this is Bob Thieme's fault? He took absolutely no part in how they raised their children.
He teaches the verses that address parents and children, but how parents use that information
is their responsibility.

Now you are questioning your involvement with Berachah? You certainly have the right to do
so, and no person on this planet would defend that right more vigorously that Bob Thieme,
himself. You have heard him teach "the privacy of the priesthood" a thousand times, and
he has never, to my knowledge, crossed that line. He further teaches that anyone who
takes exception to his teaching is free to leave, and find a church they find more compatible.

I'm curious, what specific information that Bob taught you do you doubt? What in his manner
and bearing do you disapprove of? What reason is there for you to be disenchanted with
the life you live? What part does Bob Thieme play in your unhappiness? Did he personally
advise you to take the wrong course, or even from the pulpit? Why are you questioning
what you know about the Christian life, other than your exposure to just one pastor?

I will tell you what Bob would tell you if he read your post. If you don't want to be one of
his flock, fine. You are free to go elsewhere. Nobody will criticize you for it. God has
raised up many men and given them the gift of pastor-teacher. No one man can minister
to all of God's people. He never intended it so.

But I caution you about one thing, RO7, don't feed into these people who label Berachah as
a cult. That is absolutely ridiculous, and you know it. I have posted this information elsewhere
on this site; Berachah Church has none of the signal charactaristics of a cult, to wit;

A cult leader ALWAYS becomes heavily involved in the lives of his followers. Elsewise, he
could not brainwash them and hold sway over their every decision. As you know, Bob
has never done that, in fact, I have heard many people criticize him for not being involved
enough.

A cult always has a gimmick, like the impending rapture, or the end of the world, that the
cult leader claims to know about. Bob Thieme claims no such knowledge. He teaches that
no man knows the hour of the rapture, and furthermore, he teaches the Word line on line,
and does no hold his congregation by some scheme wherein he claims to be the only man
in the Universe who God confides in.

A cult typically requires that its followers give everything they own to the leader, to be used
as he sees fit. Bob teaches that giving is an individual choice, and if you wish to come and
give nothing, that is your business. We used to call the collection plate "the fastest plate
in the west".

A cult typically requires every member to submit to communal living, as a group, separated
from the mainstream. Nonsense. Berachah has never done that, and never will.

Apparently, a few dissenters claim Thieme is a cultist because there are thousands of
believers who admire him and study his tapes and other materials. And this is grounds
for making such a claim? Billy Graham, Charles Moody, Calvin, Wesely, Swindoll, Lindsey,
and hundreds of other noted ministers command large followings, and nobody claims they
are cults. Why Bob Thieme?

Yes, Bob teaches with passion and authority. Why shouldn't he? He spent thousands of hours
studying, and using his 12 years of preparation to learn and teach what the Bible says. Should
he teach any other way? If he isn't confident of his knowledge, then he shouldn't be
ministering to a Christian congregation. How would they have him act? Timid and self-
demeaning? Apologizing for his dogmatic manner of teaching?

You say you believe Bob to be a "good man". I agree. If so, and yet you find some reason to
be unhappy with your Christian life, then at least pay him the respect he is due, and depart
from his company and teaching without contributing to the campaign of slander that others
have waged against him.

Just my spin....

Fishbulb....

You ask; "Any Thiemites out there have any constructive advice for someone leaving this
particular group?"

Yeah, I do. Just walk out the door and go somewhere else. Nobody will ridicule her, least of all
Bob Thieme. He periodically advised this very thing for those who find fault in his teaching. This
young lady has come to question the basis for her Christian life, but Bob Thieme had no part
in her quandry. She says, herself, that she is wondering about things because she has no
knowledge of Christianity apart from what Bob has taught her. You read my post, above; If he has
taught her the truth, then what cause is there for concern? If she learned what she knows
from a hundred men, and they all taught the truth, then she would know the same things.
The number of people she has learned from, or lack of same, is inconsequential. It is WHAT
she learned that counts, and I can attest to the fact that Thieme is without peer when it comes
to parsing the Word. Even many prominent theologians have arrived at the same conclusion.
Some of them criticize him, but none of them deny his qualifications as a minister.

Just because some guy has come onto this site and claims Berachah is a cult, it doesn't follow
that he is correct. I suggest that you examine the person doing the accusing. He has been
cruising the web for years slandering Bob Thieme, and all because his parents made him
attend Bible class, to the exclusion of the social life of his buddies. He sat there seething
with resentment, and Bob Thieme, and the Berachah faithful, are taking the heat for his
spite.

Pitiful!

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".


Now im, I have no time for your false accusations, your false attacks, nor your childish remarks. No one else does either. This young lady needs help and counseling, not that it's her fault. She certainly doesn't need your parroting of Thieme. You have already admitted on another thread on this forum:

im quote"i'm only hanging around here to converse with kcjones, then I'll be a big chicken and scram."

Just because you don't like the truth about Thieme's falsehoods being revealed, don't be running around trying to handout advice when you can't even "stick to what Thieme did say".

Thieme was controversial, confrontational and he lied. Thieme brought the the heat to himself.

But let's stick to what Thieme did say:


Thieme quote BOC:

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

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.

[http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/1clement-lightfoot.html]

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.

Bauer Arndt 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

According to to Bauer Arndt Gingrich, Jesus did bleed his literal shed blood and give his life as means of expiation.

Thieme lied.

So im, let's stick to what has actually been said. You can start with what Thieme said about "Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich" and "haima".





Truthtesty

To MSR07:

The following was posted by "Thiemite" on [forum.culteducation.com]

This is a pretty good checklist for determining a cult. Not many cults can check everyone of the possibilities.

Be careful at your young age. I was predisposed and susceptible to the cult dynamic because of Thieme. I remember that after escaping from Be"reich"ah, I fell into 2 other cults over the years. I did not recognize the warning signs of a cult, untul someone helped me understand what a cult was. I remember that I wanted to be a part and fit in. There is nothing wrong with being a part of a group of people or fitting in, just check the group for cult characteristics 1st. Cults often prey on people who are "down on thier luck" or desperate.

September 24, 2007 05:16AMthiemite
Date Added: 08/07/2006
Posts: 18 R.B. Thieme Jr.SynergyCon,

I guess you are just choosing to ignore the different shades of description and all the documentation that has been provided here and elsewhere that demonstrates the cultish elements of the Thiemite system. Some here think it is a cult, others think it has cultish elements to it. I believe that it has very harmful, cultish elements to it but I don't think it is a cult. My wife, and others, especially on this board think the Thiemite system has become a full fledged cult.

Orangeperuviscacha, linked to ton of information that demonstrates clearly where the cultish elements come into play.

The doctrine of "right pastor" is popish and cultish by anyone's standards, except those involved in such systems.

As I told someone else, when Christians read the Scriptures, even new believers, they don't become: Thiemites, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormans, Arians, etc. Interestingly enough they learn God's moral commands and discover that God encourages Christians to go to church and serve one another. Imagine that.

I found a good checklist too, from www.carm.org, it is a checklist that may be used to evaluate groups to see if they have cultish elements to them. Get enough of these checked and it should give one pause for concern:

Applying these to the Thiemite system:

---------------BEGIN------------------
1. What is a cult?
1. Generally, it is a group that is unorthodox, esoteric, and has a devotion to a person, object, or a set of new ideas. (yes, all)
1. New Teaching - has a new theology and doctrine. (yes, Thieme often had theological "breakthroughs")
2. Only True Teaching - often considers traditional religious systems to be apostate and it alone possess the complete truth. (yes)
3. Strong Leadership - often an individual or small but powerful leadership group holds control of the group’s teachings and practices. (yes)
4. Asset Acquirement - (no)
5. Isolationist - to facilitate control over the members physically, intellectually, financially, and emotionally. (all but financially)
6. Controlling - exercises control over the members. Sometimes this is through fear, threatening lose of salvation if you leave the group. Sometimes through indoctrination. (yes, all but loss of salvation)
7. Indoctrination - possesses methods to reinforce the cult’s beliefs and standards where opposing views are ridiculed and often misrepresented. (yes, all)
8. Apocalyptic - to give the members a future focus and philosophical purpose in avoiding the apocalypse or being delivered through it. (yes, Russian invasion, Muslim hord invasion, etc)
9. Experience - various practices including meditation, repetition of words and/or phrases, and ‘spiritual’ enlightenment with God are used as confirmation of their truth. (no, debatable)

10. Persecution - predictions of being persecuted and often combined with claiming any opposing views demonstrated against them as a form of persecution. (yes)
2. Many have a non-verifiable belief systems
1. For example, they would teach something that cannot be verified. (yes)
2. Often, the philosophy makes sense only if you adopt the full set of values and definitions that it teaches. (yes)
-. With this kind of belief, truth becomes unverifiable, internalized, and easily manipulated through the philosophical systems of its inventor.
3. The Leader of a Cult
1. Often charismatic who is considered very special for varying reasons:
1. The leader has received special revelation from God.
2. The leader claims to be the incarnation of a deity, angel, or special messenger.
3. The leader claims to be appointed by God for a mission
4. The leader claims to have special abilities (yes)
2. The leader is often above reproach and is not to be denied or contradicted. (yes)
4. Cult ethos
1. Usually seek to do good works, otherwise no one would join them. (no)
2. They are usually moral and possess a good standard of ethical teaching. (no)
3. Many times the Bible is used or additional "scriptures" are penned. (no)
1. The Bible, when used, is always distorted with private interpretations. (yes)
4. Many Cults recruit Jesus as one of their own and redefine him accordingly (no)
5. Cult groups vary greatly.
1. From the ascetic to the promiscuous. (yes, promiscuous)
2. From esoteric knowledge to very simple teachings. (yes, esoteric)
3. From the rich and power to the poor and weak.
2. Who is vulnerable to joining a cult?
1. Everyone is vulnerable.
1. Rich, poor, educated, non-educated, old, young, previously religious, atheistic, etc.
2. General Profile of cult member (some or all of the following)
1. Disenchanted with conventional religious establishments.
2. Intellectually confused over religious and/or philosophical issues
3. Sometimes disenchanted with society as a whole
4. Has a need for encouragement and support
5. Emotionally needful
6. Needs a sense of purpose.
7. Financially needful
3. Recruitment techniques
1. They find a need and fill it. One of the ways they do this is called
1. "Love Bombing" - Constant positive affection in word and deed. (no)
1. Sometimes there is a lot of physical contact like hugging, pats on the back, and touching. (no)
2. Cult group members will lend emotional support to someone in need. (no)
3. Help them in various ways...whatever is needed. (no)
1. The person then becomes indebted to the cult.
4. Compliment them, reassure them, and make them the center of attention.
2. Many Cults use the influence of the Bible and/or mention Jesus as being one of their own; thereby adding validity to their system. (yes)
1. Scripture twisting (yes)
1. Those that use the Bible take verses out of context (yes)
2. Then mix their misinterpreted verses with their aberrant philosophy. (yes)
3. Gradualism
1. Slow altering of thinking processes and belief system through repeated teaching (yes)
1. People usually accept cult doctrines one point at a time. (yes)
2. New beliefs are reinforced by other cult members.
4. Why would someone join?
1. The cult satisfies various needs:
1. Psychological - Someone could have a weak personality, easily lead.
2. Emotional - Someone could have recently suffered an emotional trauma
3. Intellectual - Someone has questions that this group answers.
2. The cult gives them approval, acceptance, purpose, and a sense of belonging.
3. The cult is appealing for some reason. It could be . . .
1. Moral rigidity and purity
2. Financial security
3. Promises of exaltation, redemption, higher consciousness, or a host of other rewards. (yes)
5. How are they kept in the cult?
1. Dependence (yes)
1. People often want to stay because the cult meets their psychological, intellectual, and spiritual needs. (yes)
2. Isolation
1. Outside contacts are reduced and more and more of the life of the member is built around the cult. (yes)
2. It then becomes very easy to control and shape the member.
3. Cognitive Reconstruction (Brainwashing):
1. Once the person is indoctrinated, their thinking processes are reconstructed to be consistent with the cult and to be submissive to its leaders. (yes)
2. This facilitates control by the cult leader(s).
4. Substitution
1. The Cult and cult leaders often take the place of mother, father, priest, teacher, and healer.
2. Often the member takes on the characteristics of a dependent child seeking to win the approval of the leader and or group.
5. Indebtedness
1. The member becomes indebted to the group emotionally, financially, etc.
6. Guilt
1. The person is told that to leave is to betray the leader, God, the group, etc. (yes)
2. The person is told that leave would mean to reject the love and help the group has given.
7. Threat
1. Threat of destruction by God for turning from the truth. (yes)
2. Sometimes physical threat is used, though not often. (yes, Thieme often said, come see me after class and mentioned his "boxing", etc)
3. Threat of missing the apocalypse, or being judged on judgment day, etc. (yes, loss of "rewards")
6. How do you get them out?
1. The best thing is to try not to let them get trapped in the first place.
2. If you are a Christian, then pray.
3. But, to get a person out of a cult takes
1. Time, energy, and support.
4. Teach them the truth.
1. Give them a true replacement for their aberrant belief system
2. Show the cult group's philosophic inconsistencies
3. Study the group and learn its history seeking clues and information.
5. Try and get them physically away from the cult group.
6. Give them the support they need emotionally.
7. Alleviate the threat that if they leave the group they are doomed or in danger.
8. Generally, don't attack the leader of the group...that comes later.
9. Converts often feel a loyalty and respect for the founder of the group.
10. Confront them when needed.

---------------END------------------

There are an awful lot of yeses that are checked there for the Thiemite system. Yes, there are a few items which your average church could be checked for but the Thiemite system, when evaluated objectively, is able to check yes for so many of those items that it should give one pause for concern.

We are not talking about simple theological differences among brothers, we are talking about some very bad theology and cultish behavior that should be avoided and has been made an integral part of the Thiemite system.

Again, Christians who read Scripture, even new Christians, are able to discern the gospel, learn God's moral law and standards of conduct for believers, and are taught among many other things, to find a local church to be apart of, to participate in service and receive the means of grace for believers (the preached word, corporate worship, the Lord's supper), etc.

Where do you now attend church?

Chris


That is what Thiemite thought. I think I found a few more yes(s).

I am not asking for you to tell me or this forum, but the real question is what do you think MSR07?


Truthtesty

Quote
MsR07
[b:f6354ac96a]Hello everyone. I'm a 19 year old female and I just joined after reading some of these discussions.[/b:f6354ac96a] [i:f6354ac96a](Brace yourselves because this post has nothing of substance other than to describe my recent questioning of these principles.)[/i:f6354ac96a]

I have been raised on what I've come to refer to as "Bible Doctrine," under Colonel Thieme, and that's all I've ever known. It hasn't been until recently, in the past year really, that I've stepped back and realized that I associate my salvation with doing everything the Colonel says, not even the Bible, but the Colonel. I haven't come to question my faith, I am a Christian and I believe in God, Christ's death, and salvation through Christ with all that I am. But recently it's as though a window has opened in my mind and I've realized I can't back up anything I believe in, even to myself, other than it's what I learned from the Colonel. I think he is a good man and has many many great principles, but surely only what he says is okay is not what I should base my entire faith upon. And like many of you have said, when questioned about the fact that I am in a cult-like organization, I usually find myself thinking "well, person, surely you must not truly understand the Bible. Poor soul."
I even find myself feeling guilty by coming to this site and making this post. Not guilt as if I might be blaspheming or sinning, but guilt because I have always been taught not to question what Col Thieme says. I'm a naturally analytical and curious person, and not one to typically accept something "just because it's so." So I believe that in the back of my mind this questioning of his authority has been building up, yet supressed because of the emphasis of his word being final in my upbringing. I'm not from Texas, but visited the church several times with my parents over the years. Occasionally I'd find myself surprised by something he said or some rule he has that seemed off-the-wall, and once I even made a half-joking comment to my mother about I hope I wouldn't be excommunicated from the church because heaven forbid I broke one of their rules... It was as though I had questioned the existence of God himself. She didn't take it well.
Needless to say, I've decided my parents aren't the most unbiased people to discuss my sudden crisis with. But like I said, I'm very new to open my eyes to the fact that this just maybe isn't the absolute set-in-stone truth. I'm still figuring it out, and trying to decide where to go from here.

I suppose to sum up what I've been trying to say... This is all I know. If and when any of you first began to question some of his teachings after learning only that your entire life, where did you go? Where did you start, how did you come to a place that you felt good about, and did you have to learn to separate a few of the Colonel's oddities from God's word?

Well, if I were you (and I was you at one point, about 5 years ago), I would do several things.

First, realize (which I think you already have) that it is very important not only to know what you believe, but to know why you believe it. And "cause the colonel said so" isn't a good enough reason, (as he would undoubtedly agree.)

Second, get yourself a good electronic bible. The best and cheapest I've ever seen can be downloaded for free at www.e-sword.com With this, you can search for ideas and keywords in the bible much faster and easier than with a paper bible. Also you can look up the greek and hebrew definitions of words, etc. It's just a very good bible study tool, and best of all it's free.

Third, pick a doctrine or concept that the Colonel has taught you that you either disagree with or just are uncertain about. If the Colonel has written a book on this subject, get the book. (this is also free.) And read the scripture references that he quotes to make his points. And then (this is critical), READ THE WHOLE CHAPTER.
If the Colonel quotes 1Corinthians 2:4-7, then read all of 1Corinthians chapter 2, and maybe even the last verse or two in chapter 1 and the first couple of verses in chapter 3. Context is sooooo critical in understanding the bible, so if you pick one verse out of the chapter without also considering the surrounding verses, it can be misleading.

Fourth, let God speak to you through His word. If you are a Christian and you are reading the word, God will speak to you. And compare what God is telling you to what the Colonel has told you. If they are the same, then you are finished. If they are different, then you need to listen to God and forget what the Colonel taught you (about that one issue.) Don't throw out everything you learned from the Colonel just because you discover that he was wrong about one thing. You have to evaluate each doctrine individually in this way. No pastor is correct 100% of the time, and the Colonel is no exception.

This is what I had to do about 5 years ago (and I am still doing it.) Because like you, I was questioning some things I had learned at Berachah. And you know what? I have come to the conclusion that yes, some of those things that Col. Thieme had taught me were wrong according to the bible. But I had also learned that many (dare I say most) of the things he had taught me were correct. And now they were really driven deep into my soul, because I now had the confidence of knowing why I believed them. And if someone were to ask me now, why I believe in certain doctrines, I have a much better answer for them than "cause the Colonel said so."

Each person has got to figure out what they believe for themselves. And no man (including the Colonel) can do that for you. Lot's of people just take what he says as the truth without ever questioning anything, because he is just a confident authoritative teacher. And it's even harder for a child growing up in Berachah especially if your parents are also the types who don't ever question anything. It's hard, but not impossible.

Since I have started trying to validate my beliefs with the scriptures, I have spent an enormous amount of time in the Word, and I wouldn't take anything for it. It has been a good time of fellowship with my Lord.

Just remember, that your faith is in God, not any one man. Even the bible says this. It says that you are cursed if you place your faith in men.

That long list of cult attributes (above) could be ascribed to Christianity (as invented by Saul/Paul) - it is no surprise to me that so many cults are spawned from Pauline ideas since the cults bear the image of the matrix from which they emerge.

Coolhermit:

Please keep in mind that this thread is specifically about Thieme and his leadership.

Try to stay focused on this topic rather than drifting into a more general discussion.

Of course you can start a new thread if you wish, i.e. within the rules of the message board.

Quote
MsR07
[b:f6354ac96a]Hello everyone. I'm a 19 year old female and I just joined after reading some of these discussions.[/b:f6354ac96a] [i:f6354ac96a](Brace yourselves because this post has nothing of substance other than to describe my recent questioning of these principles.)[/i:f6354ac96a]

I have been raised on what I've come to refer to as "Bible Doctrine," under Colonel Thieme, and that's all I've ever known. It hasn't been until recently, in the past year really, that I've stepped back and realized that I associate my salvation with doing everything the Colonel says, not even the Bible, but the Colonel. I haven't come to question my faith, I am a Christian and I believe in God, Christ's death, and salvation through Christ with all that I am. But recently it's as though a window has opened in my mind and I've realized I can't back up anything I believe in, even to myself, other than it's what I learned from the Colonel. I think he is a good man and has many many great principles, but surely only what he says is okay is not what I should base my entire faith upon. And like many of you have said, when questioned about the fact that I am in a cult-like organization, I usually find myself thinking "well, person, surely you must not truly understand the Bible. Poor soul."
I even find myself feeling guilty by coming to this site and making this post. Not guilt as if I might be blaspheming or sinning, but guilt because I have always been taught not to question what Col Thieme says. I'm a naturally analytical and curious person, and not one to typically accept something "just because it's so." So I believe that in the back of my mind this questioning of his authority has been building up, yet supressed because of the emphasis of his word being final in my upbringing. I'm not from Texas, but visited the church several times with my parents over the years. Occasionally I'd find myself surprised by something he said or some rule he has that seemed off-the-wall, and once I even made a half-joking comment to my mother about I hope I wouldn't be excommunicated from the church because heaven forbid I broke one of their rules... It was as though I had questioned the existence of God himself. She didn't take it well.
Needless to say, I've decided my parents aren't the most unbiased people to discuss my sudden crisis with. But like I said, I'm very new to open my eyes to the fact that this just maybe isn't the absolute set-in-stone truth. I'm still figuring it out, and trying to decide where to go from here.

I suppose to sum up what I've been trying to say... This is all I know. If and when any of you first began to question some of his teachings after learning only that your entire life, where did you go? Where did you start, how did you come to a place that you felt good about, and did you have to learn to separate a few of the Colonel's oddities from God's word?

I THANK GOD FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. You are going to be thrilled by what God REALLY SAYS IN HIS BOOK.

I don't have lots of time right now but plan to take more time later to answer you more fully. Please be encouraged by taking the first most difficult step and that is to simply say, "IS THIS ACTUALLY IN THE BIBLE?" iF NOT, why should I believe it?

One of the very first and most important issues to settle for you is the ISSUE OF FORGIVENESS.

check out the subject on several helpful ministries which have ministered peace and hope to me in the midst of coming out of the Thieme system:

the PEOPLE TO PEOPLE ministry with Bob George has wonderful clear and simple help for those struggling with the issues of life. They even have a live call in question and answer radio show. Just enter the name in to a search engine and you can easily find them. They have lots to say about 1 John 1:9.

LIFETIME GUARANTEE with Bil and Anabel Gillham also have a wonderful searchable web site. I suggest researching FORGIVENESS there, too.

finally, THE BEREAN BIBLE SOCIETY teaches grace and forgiveness in the CONTEXT of the whole Bible, putting the pieces together in a very helpful way that is simple to understand.

And if the moderator decides to delete the references to these three specific ministries, PLEASE PM ME AS SOON AS YOU CAN and I will get back to you immediately I see your message. I have a DISCUSSION GROUP which has lots of information and personal testimonies from former followers of the Thieme ministry. In the beginning, it was very freeing for me to read these and to stand up in public and say why I could no longer support, recommend or follow this man's ministry after nearly thirty years in it.

Be of good cheer, GOD DOES LOVE YOU PERSONALLY unlike what Thieme said about God's IMPERSONAL LOVE. GOD IS YOUR FRIEND, not your distant enemy.

Thanks so much for having the courage to speak up.

You encourage the rest of us who have left this system mightily. Don't give up!

Sistersoap