To the Forum:


Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol VII p.236

Quote

MERCY SEAT
The doctrine of mercy seat is divided into two parts, that related to the Old Testament and that related to the New. In the Old Testament the lid of the ark found in the holy of holies which covered the broken Law and which was overshadowed by the cherubim—protectors of the holiness of God—was the mercy seat (Ex. 25:17–22). It became a seat of mercy thus when sprinkled with typical blood. The animal blood was efficacious in that it looked on typically to the death of Christ. The high priest—a sinful man needing to offer sacrifice for himself as much as for others—went in before the mercy seat once a year (Lev. 16:2–15) on behalf of the people and there found mercy from God for them.
In the New Testament (Rom. 3:25; Heb. 9:5) [b:977d3c9628]the mercy seat is identified with its antitype, the body of Christ which hung on the cross, sprinkled upon as it were by His own blood. It becomes thereby the place where God can meet the sinner in saving favor[/b:977d3c9628]. The justifying grace of God is only possible through the redemption that is in Christ (Rom. 3:24). The importance of this theme is not seen in the Old Testament type of the ark and its covering, but rather in the antitype or New Testament doctrine of propitiation (which doctrine see).

Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol VII p 259

Quote

The mercy seat in the Old Testament could be made a ἱλαστήριον by sacrifice (Heb. 9:5), but [b:977d3c9628]the blood-sprinkled body of Christ on the cross has long ago become the mercy seat for the sinner once and for all. [/b:977d3c9628]It is there accordingly that God in righteousness can meet the sinner with salvation and restore the saint to communion. The mercy seat becomes a perpetual throne of grace. What otherwise would be an awful judgment throne is changed to one of infinite mercy.

Truthtesty

A couple quotes from Thieme that one of the RR posters found at [thiemite.blogspot.com]:

Quote

The soul is a receiver. The lungs of the soul are apertures designed to receive Bible doctrine. Either directly in Bible teaching or in Bible study or through the storage area of the human spirit.

The mechanics of this thing involves several aspects: You can store doctrine in the human spirit and use it later. You can take it directly through Bible teaching, and when you have become mature enough, so that you are spiritually self sustaining, you can read and benefit from the Bible, but the worst fallacy in the world is the idea that a born again believer can sit down and read the Bible and derive spiritual benefit. That is a farce, and every evangelist says, “Now read your Bible every day and everything will be alright.” And reading your Bible every day isn’t going to mean a thing, you have to be taught. So the greatest farce in the world is that you, a believer, a new believer, can sit down and read the Bible and learn something. That’s why the gift of pastor-teacher exists in the church and it’s a long time before you get to where you can read and understand. When you see a passage you may not understand it, but once you have categories of doctrine, you can identify categories and work it out. So, don’t kid yourself, when the day comes that any new believer can open the Bible and become an expert, that’s the day when we won’t need pastors and teachers, and I’ll go to Hawaii or I’ll go back into the service or something. ... So whether you like it or not, you are dependent on me.

Quote

1. No believer can attain spiritual maturity and become an invisible hero or glorify God apart from postsalvation epistemological rehabilitation.

a. This means that no believer can read the Bible and attain spiritual maturity. The Bible is our textbook, but the gift of pastor-teacher is designed to communicate the specifics of the mystery doctrine that cause spiritual growth. Doctrine must be learned under authority, and that authority is vested in the spiritual gift of pastor-teacher.

b. No believer can read the Bible daily for himself and discover and learn the mystery doctrine for the Church Age, and understand the mechanics of the protocol plan of God. It must be taught through authority. Authority is always the key to teaching.

Appalling. Absolutely appalling. Robbing the saints of their spiritual liberty.

[b:f50bd2af2f]2 Cor 3:17 [/b:f50bd2af2f]Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

[b:f50bd2af2f]Gal 2:4[/b:f50bd2af2f] And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:

[b:f50bd2af2f]Gal 5:1 [/b:f50bd2af2f]Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

Untold thousands of God’s people have suffered persecution and given their lives because their Bibles were precious to them, and they refused to put their Bibles down. The right to read “God’s Book in their mother tongue” was more dear to them then life itself. And Thieme is taking the Bible out of the hands of common Christians once again, not through violence, but through subtle, cultish deception. He has betrayed the martyrs of the past and thousands of his own brethren who clung to their Bibles for strength in the most trying times. We expect Satan and the unbelieving world to discourage God’s people from reading the Bible. But it is truly incredible that a [i:f50bd2af2f]Christian pastor [/i:f50bd2af2f]would spend decades doing the same thing.

Liberty

Hi Liberty,

Thanks for the reply in the other thread entitled "Reading the Bible". I'm moving my reply to you here because I meant to post here in the first place. I must have pushed the wrong button. I am a novice at this. :lol:

Do you remember me? We corresponded a few times by email a while back. You sent me some of your books. Thank you again for that.

I was glad to find those Thieme quotes. I remember them well from the [i:827f5a89d2]bad [/i:827f5a89d2]old days at Berachah, but I don't have any of his books or tapes any more to find this garbage. "Appalling" is the correct word alright.....and I can think of a few more adjectives as well, but I will refrain.

I wanted any Thiemites who might be reading this to see what he actually said in black and white, since some of them don't seem to believe it.

Truthlover

Hi, Truthlover, good to hear from you again… And thanks for sharing what you found with the forum. Like you, I no longer have any of my notes or tapes from my Thiemite days. That’s what can make it difficult to pin down the Thieme followers in a debate—you may have heard Thieme make a statement a thousand times, but there may be very little written documentation available. And some of our Thiemite brethren appear to be in denial concerning what Thieme actually taught. But there is no getting around a statement like this: [i:00f4c53c26]“This means that [b:00f4c53c26][u:00f4c53c26]no believer[/u:00f4c53c26] can read the Bible and attain spiritual maturity[/b:00f4c53c26]. The Bible is our textbook, but the gift of pastor-teacher is designed to communicate [b:00f4c53c26]the [u:00f4c53c26]specifics of the mystery doctrine[/u:00f4c53c26] that cause [u:00f4c53c26]spiritual growth[/u:00f4c53c26][/b:00f4c53c26]. Doctrine [b:00f4c53c26][u:00f4c53c26]must[/u:00f4c53c26] be learned under authority[/b:00f4c53c26], and that authority is vested in the spiritual gift of pastor-teacher.” [/i:00f4c53c26]Thieme and other “doctrinal” pastors are dogmatic that their “mystery doctrine” is essential for spiritual growth, and that this doctrine can not be learned by reading your Bible. It is impossible to grow spiritually by reading your Bible, and therefore, if you depend on reading the Bible itself, you are doomed to be a “loser.” But Matthew wrote, “Whoso readeth, let him understand” (Matt 24:15). The Apostle John wrote, “Blessed is he that readeth” (Rev 1:3). And in Acts 17:10-11, we read that the Bereans were “noble” because they “searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” Searching the Scriptures daily for ourselves is what makes us noble Christians. Thieme’s statements are obvious contradictions of Scripture and plain common sense. God went through all the trouble to write this perfect, inspired, holy Book for His people, and preserve it throughout the centuries of attack and persecution, only to tell us it’s pointless for us to read it. Because only a very privileged few have the ability to understand the Bible, and the rest of us are helplessly dependent on them for our spiritual growth. If someone like Thieme had ever tried to teach this nonsense to the ancient Waldensians, 16th-century Protestants, or early colonial Americans, they would have laughed him out of town. A foundational principle behind the Reformation was the ability of the common people to read and understand the Bible for themselves—the “perspicuity of Scripture,” as it is commonly referred to. Yet Thieme has trampled all over this great principle that so many of our brethren laid down their lives for.

By the way, I was once told by a former Thieme taper that he actually taught the Bereans were [i:00f4c53c26]arrogant [/i:00f4c53c26]for reading the Scriptures for themselves, because they should have just listened to whatever their teachers told them. I was wondering if anyone else has heard this?

Thanks,
Liberty

genez 04-03-2007 09:30 AM "

Quote

I was disowned by my parents when I first became a Christian. Years later my Dad was given a few tapes by Thieme. He liked listening to him. My father did not become a taper. He stil, attended Jewish services.

After his funeral my Mom and I discussed the tapes I saw in his office. She looked at me and said with tears in her eyes. I wish your brother and sister would listen to him. Your Dad could listen to Thieme because the man had an open mind.

My brother and sister had gotten themselves wrapped up in fundamentalism which I stayed away from and avoided. Three Jewish kids. Three believers in Christ. Three different paths. One can easily say that Christianity attacked my home and broke it up. That Christianity is a cult. For it did break up my family. No preacher did. Christianity did.

Matthew 10:33-36 (New International Version)
"But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn
" 'a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law -
a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'

What do you do with that? Family members will become enemies of each other when Christianity finds a place in members of the family's hearts. Who will they blame? Christ? Or, the one teaching about Christ? A strong case for a cult can ensue. If someone attempting to put a stop to it is not keenly aware of this? It all will be branded as cult tendencies.

There you have it. Christianity will appear to have the same end results as a cult, yet be exactly what Christianity will be. Cults do not simply have controversial teachings. They have teaching which are shown to be contrary to the truth by even those denominations which will not agree with each over in areas that they do see as controversial.

Controversy in itself does not constitute a cult. It may reveal intelligence in action. It may not. But, it has nothing to do with being a cult. For if you were a Christian? You would know that there is controversy all the time. That is why we see so many denominations, and sub denominations.

Ok... No PM. There you have it.

In Christ, GeneZ

genez

Quote

"They have teaching which are shown to be contrary to the truth by even those denominations which will not agree with each over in areas that they do see as controversial"

Here's what I do with that.

Thieme is shown to be contrary to the truth in the teaching of the efficacy of the literal Blood of Christ. Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer considered teachings such as Thieme's as satanic. So this that is not just a minor controversial doctrinal disagreement. If you look back at the evidence of these Rickross pages you see that Thieme's evidence that Blood of Christ = "spiritual death only" does not add up. Thieme took Leon Morris' study in the Apostolic Preaching of Christ where Morris equated blood with death (total death) in some instances. Thieme stretched this to an extreme to say Blood of Christ = "spiritual death only" in all instances. This is false.

Thieme's doctrine of "right pastor" is another extreme false teaching.


Thieme initially asks you to have an open mind, but that's not how Thiemites minds end up. Thiemites are closed-minded in both regenerate and unregenerate cultic sense. I could say they same thing genez. Have an open mind. Look at the evidence presented here with an open mind. Jesus is called the Prince of Peace for a reason. Jesus will use what force is necessary to defeat satan. Many things can cause division and controversy, that in itself does not make them a cult. Even the unregenerate families have division ex if a sister steals from a sister etc... The question is the reason for division. After all Christians are to rightly divide the Word. Christianity can and does cause divisions, but look at one of the revealed reasons why the bible says christians need to be wary of divisions. One is called the Diotrophes syndrome

3 John
1:8
We therefore ought to receive such, that we might be fellowhelpers to the truth.
1:9
I wrote unto the church: but [b:339e868be5]Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. [/b:339e868be5]
1:10
Wherefore *, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith *, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church.
1:11
Beloved, [b:339e868be5]follow not that which is evil, but that which is good[/b:339e868be5]. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God.
1:12
[b:339e868be5]Demetrius hath good report of all men, and of the truth itself: yea, and we also bear record; and ye know that our record is true.[/b:339e868be5]
1:13
I had many things to write, but I will not with ink and pen write unto thee:
1:14
But I trust I shall shortly see thee, and we shall speak face to face. [b:339e868be5]Peace be to thee.[/b:339e868be5] Our friends salute thee. Greet the friends by name.

And what is one of the revealed examples of not doing good?

Romans
3:12
They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is [b:339e868be5]none that doeth good[/b:339e868be5], no, not one * (5748).
3:13
Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
3:14
Whose[b:339e868be5] mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: [/b:339e868be5]
3:15
[b:339e868be5]Their feet are swift to shed blood:[/b:339e868be5]
3:16
[b:339e868be5]Destruction and misery are in their ways: [/b:339e868be5]
3:17
[b:339e868be5]And the way of peace have they not known: [/b:339e868be5]



Truthtesty

(Qualifed to judge, confident, and winds in the sails)

Quote
SpiritualLiberty
[i:8c7b35f863]PROOF TEXTS are vital, to them and to me. Bible IS proof text, Heb4:12, 1Jn4:1-6. Oh, I'm citing again, as I'm required to do in order to demonstrate [b:8c7b35f863]the location of a doctrine[/b:8c7b35f863]. Sorry.[/i:8c7b35f863]

brainout,

In your response, you ignored the second half of my sentence: “Much like Galiban, you like to make statements followed by a string of ‘prooftexts,’ but [b:8c7b35f863]you do nothing to [u:8c7b35f863]show that those scriptures actually support your statement[/u:8c7b35f863][/b:8c7b35f863].” Anyone can rattle off a list of scripture references as the alleged “location” of their doctrine (including Catholics, Pentecostals, Hyper-Calvinists, et al), but this by itself proves nothing. You have to demonstrate that those verses actually teach “Confess your sins to be filled with the Spirit.” Otherwise all your Scripture quoting is meaningless. I could make a statement that “Pigs can fly” and throw in a list of verses after it. But my statement, like yours, is meaningless until I can show that those “prooftexts” actually support my statement.

[i:8c7b35f863][b:8c7b35f863]IT'S IN THE GREEK,[/b:8c7b35f863] using a very famous LXX Temple-purifying verb, "katharizw", and 1Jn uses the term in parallelism.

Greek verb katharizw is used for purifying the OT Temple so the Spirit could fill it[/i:8c7b35f863] [where do you find the Spirit filling the Temple?][i:8c7b35f863], all over the LXX (94 occurrences, search on the root). So 1Jn1:7 uses katharizw and parallels that to the Cross[/i:8c7b35f863] [the Cross accomplished [b:8c7b35f863]salvation[/b:8c7b35f863], not the filling of the Spirit; the filling of the Spirit is part of the spiritual life [b:8c7b35f863]after [/b:8c7b35f863]salvation][i:8c7b35f863], as does Isa53:10 in the LXX; so 1Jn1:9 demonstrates filling in the Temple of the Believer (so to speak) using the same keyword.[/i:8c7b35f863]

So this is what it takes to figure out “rebound.” .....
Thanks,
Liberty

Hello Liberty,
I loved your dealing with the subject of "rebound" and forgiveness.

I would like to add my two cents' worth.

A cardinal doctrine of Biblical Christianity is that of FORGIVENESS. Liberty brings out the illogical contradictory teachings of RBTJr and not a few other preachers and teachers on this topic. Either God dealt with all sins at the Cross and finished His righteous judgment of them there, or He did not. If He did, then all sins of all people of all time were finally judged there. The unsaved person rejecting Christ assumes that his life will somehow be righteous enough in his own strength to please God, but he is blind to the fact that in order to be holy as God is holy you have to be PERFECT. Just one sin makes you unfit to enter heaven and have eternal life. God offers his grace salvation as a gift. Thieme preaches this, but he fails to recognize the contradiction when he subsequently tells his listeners that the gift is not enough to take care of sins committed after salvation. And according to him, one must keep “confessed up” in order to be “in fellowship” whatever he really means by that, for that is not in the Bible either. Being “in fellowship” according to Thieme is necessary for what he calls the “filling of the Holy Spirit” and it is AUTOMATIC upon confession of all “known” sins. Now Thieme makes it clear that the Blood of Christ covers the sins you have forgotten so you cannot confess them. But wait! If God forgives forgotten sins, He can also forgive unconfessed sins. So that is a big contradiction.

The main point to me is that if God withholds forgiveness until the Christian confesses it, as Thieme teaches, why did Christ die in the first place? And if confession is required before forgiveness can be received, what did Christ die for? If you must confess your sins before you can be forgiven that is saying that Christ did not need to die for sins to be forgiven, He could have skipped that part and just told us to confess our sins and they would be forgiven us.

Either all sins were cleared from the account of mankind at the Cross or we are toast!

It is also important to note that forgiveness alone is not salvation. Forgiveness is required in order to be saved, but salvation is being saved from the wages of sin, which the Bible declares is DEATH, not ” loss of fellowship” as Thieme (and others) teach. The only remedy for death is LIFE. The Bible locates eternal life in the Son of God, Jesus Christ. Thieme's teaching and his style puts lots of distance between the person in the “pew” and the Lord Himself. I have noted many times in this thread that people defending Thieme's teaching give convoluted answers that really do not answer the question that was asked, nor do they show a basic understanding of the English text. If you can't reason from the English and come to a sensible conclusion, what are you doint messing around with Greek and Hebrew? Depending on experts is what you are doing. Subject to their studies, not your own.

If God had expected the truth and our understanding of it to depend upon knowledge of Hebrew and Greek WHY DIDN'T HE SAY SO all through His Word? Sure those who have that skill can help us clear up some questions, but they are fine points compared with the whole flow of thought within Bible books.

One of the most harmful things about Thieme's style is that it ATOMIZES Scripture and interrupts a person's understanding of the flow of thought in the context of the whole book being studied. We are responsible to God for our understanding of His Word, and He says a spiritual man can understand it. While you are suspending your understanding of the entire book of Romans, say, you get so interrupted by “doctrines” and “points” and digressions into Thieme's personal opinions and his rants against various groups he hates such as homosexuals and Jehovah's Witnesses and Democrats. While all this is going on you lose your place in what Paul has to say and you are at the mercy of Thieme to tell you it some future time if ever you finish the Romans series. You are made dependent upon Thieme for truth from God. He says so, too, and more than once.

I lost touch with the contents of my Bible while “under” Thieme. I regret deeply the almost thirty years I spent “taking in” his “Bible doctrine.” I have had to slowly and painfully relearn to read that Bible and ask God to teach me His truth. He can do it if all you know is English. I prefer the Kjb for many reasons. That is not the subject of this thread, EXCEPT that Thieme declared that no English Bible was good enough for us to learn truth from it. I believed him. I ended up running around in circles knowing lots of “doctrinal breakthroughs” and totally believing every word from Thieme's pulpit was “Bible doctrine,” which it was NOT. When I investigated things for myself, I learned there was such a thing as disagreement among scholars as to which texts of the Bible were sound and which were not. Thieme never hinted there was such a thing as a disagreement. He said this is it, and if you disagree, you should leave. I was afraid to leave. I thought I was the only person who had a problem, and it took me years to figure out that the problem was with the teacher, not with the subject. I learned that I could have confidence in my King James Bible, and that I can read it and learn what God has to say to me. He does teach me from the English in spite of Thieme's claims to the contrary.

But back to the forgiveness topic: Thieme shares the same contradiction about forgiveness that lots of other Bible teachers do. But forgiveness is not salvation. Since the Bible says the wages of sin is death, it takes (guess what) LIFE to remedy death. And the only life available is in the Son as Scripture says. If you have the Son you have life, eternal life. You can quite easily lose this simple statement under Thieme's teaching. If ever there was a case of a person losing the simplicity that is in Christ just like the Pharisees this is it. Thieme made me a first class Pharisee. I doubt that I was the only one.

Thieme might say we are complete in Christ but then he like some others denies it teaching partial forgiveness. There is nothing wrong with confessing sins to God, but there is no justification in claiming that you must do this in order to get forgiven as a Christian. God forgives the Christian, the born again Christian, because of what Christ did for us on the Cross, and being his child, you are a forgiven person. Dealing with sins and the products of the flesh was a very weak area in Thieme's teaching, and even worse in some of the Thieme clone churches.
I can quote Scriptures to prove my point about forgiveness but I get the idea that doing that is not welcome here.

Speaking up about Thieme and his theological claims requires speaking about religious faith and Biblical teachings so I hope I have not transgressed a forum boundary about “preaching.”

Thanks for participating, Liberty. You had some very good things to say and I appreciated it.

Hi, sistersoap,

Thank-you for your response, and you hit the nail on the head many times in your post. Two statements I found epecially poignant were these:

Quote

One of the most harmful things about Thieme's style is that it ATOMIZES Scripture and interrupts a person's understanding of the flow of thought in the context of the whole book being studied.

Quote

I lost touch with the contents of my Bible while “under” Thieme.

This is an excellent description of the Thieme's teaching method and its results. We were always getting sidetracked with long tangents full of technical terms and philisophical speculation, during which we lost the train of thought of the book we were supposedly "exegeting." How can a teacher claim to believe in presenting the whole counsel of God, when it takes years to get through a four-chapter epistle? Most of the Bible will never even get touched under such a system. And since reading the Bible for ourselves is pointless, there are many books that we'll never even see in our entire lifetime.

As an FYI, it appears that the forum rules allow us to post scriptures to specifically address Thieme's teachings. This is a post from the moderator on 03-30-2007 (on page 20 of this thread):

Quote
rrmoderator
To whom it may concern:

It is alright to cite/quote scripture for the purpose of exegesis regarding a specific point conerning a certain group or leader.

Preaching for the purpose of converting people at the board is not allowed, i.e. proselytizing.

Thanks again, sistersoap, it's good to meet you.

Forgiven in Christ,
Liberty

Hello Liberty,
I have learned some things from you that I never saw until now. The horrifying consequences of Thieme's rebound beliefs ~~ the way you expressed yourself made it so clear where the real problem lies.

You have a tremendous grasp of what should be obvious, but which cannot be obvious to people stuck in the THIEMEPARK as I call it. I am so glad I left. It took years after leaving to even begin to recover my living relationship with Christ. It indeed took me years before I could actually pick up the Bible and just read it, expecting God to teach me His Truth from it.

And thanks for correcting me about the forum policy quoting scripture. That is good to know. Sometimes I might not realize I am "preaching" but one thing I have learned since I exited said Thiemepark and that is how to be wrong and accept correction

Keep on pressing for answers from the ones here who try to defend Thieme. Maybe God in his mercy will wake them up. That is how I finally learned and admitted REBOUND WAS WRONG. It does not work the way Thieme says it does, and you have done a wonderful job of making that crystal clear.

Sistersoap

Thank-you, Sistersoap, your encouragement is much appreciated.

I remember very well the kind of person I became under Thieme’s influence. I lost all capacity to appreciate my brethren from other churches and fellowship with them. The pervading thought was always, “They’re losers headed for the sin unto death. Their prayers go no higher than the ceiling.” Many of my relatives are Presbyterians, and while I have theological differences with them, they are good, faithful Christians who love the Lord and His Word. But at Thanksgiving dinner I would always look around and think how they were all “negative toward Bible doctrine” and would surely come under severe divine discipline. It was a whole new experience the first time I got together with the relatives again after I left Thieme’s teaching. I had a peace and joy being around my relatives and my Christian brethren that I hadn’t had in many years. It was such a blessing just to be able to honor and love them as the Word commands us. I am resolved to never look down my nose at a Christian brother as a “loser” ever again.

I wasted a lot of time in blind cultish submission and religious elitism during my years with Thieme, but I look at it as a testimony to the mercy of God, who was patient and faithful until He finally delivered me. I think Jeremiah 3:22 sums up my experience with Thieme-ism: [i:6f944941ef]Return, ye backsliding children, and I will heal your backslidings. Behold, we come unto thee; for thou art the LORD our God.[/i:6f944941ef]

[b:6f944941ef]Mat 5:6[/b:6f944941ef] Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

Free in Christ,
Liberty

To the Forum:

I previously stated that Thieme did not serve any active duty time during any other wars other than WII. Apparently I was mistaken. As I was so kindly informed, Thieme did serve several active duty tours post Korean War and up to the 1st year of the Vietnam Conflict. What makes this timeframe so intresting is that during this timeframe the image of the United States was embarassed by American POWS who confessed and collaborated with the North Koreans. (see "The Prisoners Who Broke," U.S. News and World Report, (August 21, 1953), and other articles). Brainwashing became a major concern for the United States.

Edward Hunter was a journalist who coined the term "brainwash" and was also CIA. (CIA (source:"Brainwashing" Theories in European Parliamentary and Administrative Reports on "Cults" and "Sects" ))

Thieme is associated with Edward Hunter at least by CACC (http://www.schwarzreport.org/Newsletters/1960/june60.htm)

Quote

"Houston Anti-Communism School Attended By Over 1000
"The Third Annual Christian Anti-Communism Crusade School was held the four Saturdays in March at the S.P. Martel Auditorium with some of the outstanding speakers in the country participating. This school is held in a little different manner from our other schools in that it is conducted on four consecutive Saturdays in March every year.
"The speakers this year included Clifton Ganus, Vice President of Harding College in Searcy, Arkansas; Capt. Richard Gregory, Commandant NROTC unit, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana; [b:f558657d40]Col. R. B. Thieme, Jr., [/b:f558657d40]Commandant Training Guidance Staff, 2697 Air Reserve Center, Ellington Field, Texas; [b:f558657d40]Edward Hunter, author of "Brainwashing and the New Who Defied It," "Story of Mary Lui," and many other books, from Moultrie, Georgia[/b:f558657d40]; Fu Sung Chu, Minister Plenopotentiary from the Chinese Embassy in Washington, D.C.; Rev. Bob Ingram, Rector of St. Thomas Episcopalian Church, Belliare, Texas; Fred Schafley, Attorney from Alton, Illinois, who was one of the co-authors on the 1958 American Bar Association report that has had such widespread distribution; Rev. C. S. Dunker, the Spiritual Leader of the Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation in St. Louis, Missouri, telling of his experiences in China; Constantin Boldyreff, who has worked in the underground behind the iron curtain and now serves as lecturer and author from Arlington, Virginia, gave some new insights on what can be done behind the iron curtain in this battle for freedom.
"Dr. Fred C. Schwarz topped off the school with seven talks on Saturday, March the 26th.

It has been reported by some that Thieme delt with "training" pilots who were downed behind enemy lines. Thieme was seen in WWII declassified DOD training film and was said to be "very familiar with the techniques". The modern version of the POW survival program is called SERE (Survival Evasion Resistence Escape).

Much of Dr. Robert Lifton's work was based on Nazi doctors and Korean POWS from this timeframe.(http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/lifton_robert_thoughtreform.htm)

So we have Thieme, Hunter, and Lifton, all doing work from WWII to Vietnam. All were involved with US military POW studies.


There is much more to these stories and I do not have all the facts. However, it appears Thieme may have had 1st hand knowledge of the mind-control studies of the period in question (WWII - 1961). Thieme made much hay about Communist mind-control, brainwahing, and propaganda. It is very telling that Thieme never mentioned the actual techniques that were used. It appears Thieme wanted to keep all that manipulative power and control for himself and applied it's usage on his flock. If you want to call them a flock, I'd say it was more like a CIA propaganda experiment.



Truthtesty