Hi KC

Thanks for the post.

As I have said in my previous posts I have never attended a Thieme service, listened to one of his tapes, or watched any of his videos. I have read numerous books of his though.

I did however go to Tetelestai Church in Pittsburgh for 15 years. Tetelestai is pastured by Alan Knapp, a Thieme prodigy. Knapp was ordained by Thieme in 1991. Knapp also made fun of other pastors, and other churches. He used to joke about “men in dresses”, which I assume was referring to Priests of different denominations. He also would make fun of other churches “happy clappy churches” I assume was a reference to Pentecostal, Baptist, or Evangelical churches.

This is one of the main reasons I stopped going after 15 years. I do not believe it is a pastors responsibility to monitor other churches, or other pastors, let alone make fun of them. Knapp also uses the term “Advanced Bible Doctrine” that you can only receive by him at Tetelestai church.

I understand some of the frustrations of people who come to this forum. Half of my mothers side of the family split over Tetelestai church. There are basically two sides on my mom’s side, those who go to Tetelestai, and those who attend other churches. Of course our churches are all inferior in their eyes, and like many on this site hear my aunts, uncles, and cousins refer to Tetlestai as a cult.

So you are probably wondering why I am here defending Thieme, & Knapp? For the record I am not defending anyone, I am just not sold that Thieme, or Knapp are running cults.

I agree that it appears cult like. For some reason when people start going there, they buy into it hook, line, and sinker. Arrogance, self righteousness, and raised brows seem to be the norm. The hierarchy that is taught that exists in eternity is somehow thought to exist in the present with these people.

My whole issue around the cult thing is that it still has all the basic Bible foundation. Even with all the made up formulas, diagrams, and words (grace, ultra-grace, super- ultra –grace, etc) it still has all the correct roots of Christianity, and I don’t think that Thime, or Knapp are somehow masterminds with a plot to brainwash people. I believe that they are intense, high strung passionate guys who believe they are providing the gift of Pastor Teacher to their respective churches. Are they wrong at times? Yes

I believe that as we mature as Christians we move on once, twice, three times, or even more to new churches with different pastors. I believe as we mature we need more in depth teaching. The whole milk/meat analogy in the Bible.

Somehow I moved on, and my guess is that Thieme’s and Knapp’s believers are convinced that they are at the super advanced state, and there is no other church, or pastor after were they are right now. There is no moving on for these belivers.

So the big question is whose fault is all of this? Thiemes & Knapps? Are they out of touch with their flock? Are they that wrapped up in their studies that they are unaware of what is going on? Do they think that they are the advanced super ultra church that is above all others?

Or, is this what happens to Christians when they begin to learn God’s word at such an in depth level? Thieme did write a book called “Spiritual Maturity” where he states that the vast majority of Christians never make it past spiritual autonomy due to arrogance. He states in the book that a very small percentage make it to full spiritual maturity.

I guess the best way to describe my experience with Knapp’s sermons is that it’s listening to a guy teach you not to be arrogant, except he himself is the most arrogant person in the building. Sort of like someone with a cigarette in their mouth teaching the dangers of smoking. He’s correct in his teaching, but going against what he’s teaching at the same time. Make sense?

Somehow I was able to take in the sermons, and not get caught up in the arrogance and idolatry.

Like I have said, I’m not sold on it being a cult, but I do acknowledge that something odd happens to people who listen to these men, and that these same people do know a lot about God at the same time.

Thanks

Voltaic

Quote

I refer you to post #44879 in this thread where I did briefly discuss this and where you went off into left-field about wanting me to go to jail because I believe Christians should follow the law when the Anti-Christ is in charge or something outlandish.

Truthtesty: What is outlandish is your concept of submission to earthly authority. Thieme often tried to smear people as if they were not making sense by labeling thier thinking as "in left field". Learn to think for yourself, and quit copying Thieme's terminology.




Truthtesty

SynergyCon,


Thieme is a cult leader because he meets the criteria of a cult.

Your trying to displace Thieme's error onto his followers as if there is only one side of the equation. What you are missing is the unnecessary inducement of coercion by the false authority of Thieme. Thieme's authority is not equivalent to God's authority, though most make this mistake in comparison of what Thieme says and what God says. Which by the way when Thieme says you won't get much out of the bible if you read it yourself, he's also saying [u:257d1520ab]that his words [b:257d1520ab]to you[/b:257d1520ab][/u:257d1520ab] [b:257d1520ab]are better than the individuals believers reading, prayer, and illumination by the Holy Spirit[/b:257d1520ab]. That's arrogance. Thieme's best illumination (or sermon) [u:257d1520ab][b:257d1520ab]never equated [/b:257d1520ab][/u:257d1520ab]to the wroughting and illumination of the Holy Spirit in the individual believer, but to listen to Thieme you'd think you were powerless to learn the bible any other way than submission to Thieme.

Idolatry is not just worshipping someone in place of God, [b:257d1520ab]it is also worshipping a false teacher [u:257d1520ab]side by side[/u:257d1520ab] of God.[/b:257d1520ab]


Truthtesty

SearchingForTruth,


Dr. Wall was Thieme's friend for years, then Dr. Wall went to Dallas Theological Seminary and earned his doctorate degree. Dr. Wall's doctoral thesis was written about Thieme's teachings. [l.b5z.net]
I suggest for quick reading to read the summaries and critiques at the end of each chapter.

It is also important to look at what the critics have to say about the husband's church. It's quite possible both churches are bad.

You all should pray and read the bible together, if you can't find out why then pray together again to see if that problem is really worth giving up your family for.

Learn the basic of cult chracteristics to discern what is cultic.



Truthtesty

Truthtesty:

Thanks for the reply, and your input.

Criteria of a cult? Just exactly what does that mean, and who gets to decide what the criteria are?

Here is the definition from carm.org: “A religious group that follows a particular theological system. In the context of Christianity, and in particular, CARM, it is a group that uses the Bible but distorts the doctrines that affect salvation sufficiently to cause salvation to be unattainable. A few examples of cults are Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science, Christadelphians, Unity, Religious Science, The Way International, and the Moonies”.

“Doctrines that affect salvation sufficiently to cause salvation to be unattainable.” Are people who attend, or have attended Thieme’s church, or listen to his tapes unable to attain salvation? I believe they ARE able to attend salvation, therefore it is not a cult.

Believe me Truthtesty, I understand your resentment, and concern. I can remember listening to Knapp (Thieme prodigy, ordained by Thieme in 1991, pastor of Tetelestai Church) telling us that we should NOT gather together for Bible study. He said that a group of believers gathering together at someone’s house to study the Bible would be the equivalent of a group of people gathering to attempt surgery without a doctor. He went on and said without a pastor teacher at the study, the believers would be unable to learn anything, and even worse, would learn false doctrine because none of the believers would be able to understand what the Bible says. Each believer would be stating what they think a particular passage says, or means, and according to Knapp this would be counterproductive to learning scripture. Therefore Bible studies were bad.

As twisted as this may seem, it does not make it a cult. Thieme’s & Knapp’s pastoral philosophy is that without a pastor teacher, the believer is unable to learn on their own. While I disagree with this, and you I assume disagree with this also, it doesn’t make them evil cult leaders.

You along with me have been affected by this theology, idolatry, or heresy from fellow family members. Your story much more severe than mine. If I am correct it is my understanding that your brother died due to the adult in the house listening to a Thieme tape instead of watching the child (your brother.) If this is correct, it is very sad, and tragic, but it is not Thieme’s fault in that really sad situation. It is the fault of the adult. I understand your bitterness and resentment towards Thieme regarding this, but if this is your motivation to declare Thieme a cult leader, than you are not acting objective, and unbiased. If the adult was watching Seinfeld while this happened, you wouldn’t be on the internet declaring Jerry Seinfeld a cult leader, or everyone who watched a Seinfeld episode a cultist would you?

Truthtesty, I don’t want to upset you on this subject. I’m sure it is very emotional for you to even talk about it, but you have to learn how to let go, and move forward.

Thieme is not running a cult. He may have some different views on a pastors way of running a church, and theology than you, but it is not a cult. According to CARM it is not a cult.

If it’s theology, I refer you back to pages 10 -14 on this forum. There used to be a member named Galiban who rebutted all of your theological claims. You and others on this forum started calling him names and ran him off the site. All he did was give thorough sound answers that it is not a cult to all who think it is a cult.

If those on here who keep telling themselves it is a cult instead of being objective and unbiased because of bitterness and resentment, or due to issues with family members want to only have people post that it is a cult then I too will leave if that’s what you guys want.

Just remember the old saying “misery loves company”

If Galiban’s sound scripture based answers couldn’t convince anyone here that it is NOT a cult, and CARM’s definition can’t, I’m surely not going to be able to either. The only reason I am even here is that I acknowledge Thieme, and in my case Knapp are controversial pastors. Their styles and theology are questionable to say the least, BUT they are NOT running cults.

Thanks to all

Sorry brother,

But Gabian did not do a very good job of defending Thieme's doctrine.

If you want to get down to the bare basics, ignoring the cult thing, the greatest harm that RB Thieme's ministries have done is to cause his brother to stumble (Romans 14).
And I'll come out and say it, Bob Thieme is a wolf (2 Peter 2:10, please read), he might have begun by teaching the Word correctly, but as soon as he let the first heresy come into his ministry, his butt should have been out of that pulpit. But with the system he set up there was no accountability, therein lies the problem, that's why the Lord had Paul set up the elders and deacons the way he did, there should be NO one person able to rule over a body of believers.

On being a hypocrite, As an Elder your supposed to be held to higher standard, am I right? Everyone is human, and we all sin, however as an elder/deacon they have a very specific set of guidelines to follow, if they don't they shouldn't be there.

Which would you rather learn from: A man who teaches the Word correctly, and has a decades long affair, or a man who does the same and is faithful to his wife?
Bob (and now his son) have strayed from what is a minister's role in a body of believers, you might not have gotten there yet (there is quite a bit of reading here) but PLEASE read the personal testimony of Juker on Page 41, and let us know what you think.

Cult or not, his ministry has hurt more than helped, my wife's family is a testament to that, as well as many others.

And that's why we are discussing it here.

Quote
Truthtesty

Quote
Voltaic
Uh, you are getting way too excited about one single phrase I used, a phrase which incidently was a joking allusion to a popular movie and was kind of anti-Thieme. But OK.

You are no one to judge my excitement. I will tell you about my excitement. I would be excited to meet you in person. That was an insult of conscience. I am not familiar with the movie. Someone with a conscience would apologize.

I am truly sorry for calling you "excited". It is a horrible and awful word to call someone.

Quote
Truthtesty

Quote
Voltaic
How is that a personal attack? I'm honestly curious. To me, a personal attack against you means I say something mean or evil about you; and is not when I say something mean or evil about someone else.

Oh really? And what if I have a 5 month old baby? How stupid are you?You don't find that offensive? Why should I have to explain simple common sense to you? Are you out of highschool?

Finding something offensive is different than a personal attack. And no, I don’t find obvious tongue-in-cheek statements to be offensive to me; I don’t get offended by much at all, actually.

Quote
Truthtesty
Do you happen to attend the Thieme affiliate, Amador Bible Church, outside Sacramento off of New York Ranch rd? Pastor Major Billy J. Puryear?

I found that website and I see that Pastor Puryear was under Thieme’s teaching, but otherwise I don’t see how they are a "Thieme affiliate". Is there some monthly dues they pay or distribute membership leaflets or something?

Quote
Truthtesty

Quote
Voltaic
"Vilify" means to speak ill of someone, make vicious and defamatory statements about someone, or to spread negative information about someone. Are you saying that Hitler and Saddam and Koresh spoke negative, defamatory information against themselves? Are you saying that there is no speaking ill of Thieme in this thread?

Yes, I am, inadvertently. They brought thier own negativity to themselves, either by thier own actions or words.

So if someone acts like a jerk in real life, and I go tell someone else that that person is a jerk, I’m not speaking ill of them?

Quote
Truthtesty

Quote
Voltaic
Look, you may agree or disagree with what I and others have posted, but the simple defintion of the word I chose makes my meaning above clear. If I say something negative about you, I am vilifying you. Whether it's true or false, good or bad intent, doesn't matter; that's what the word means.

Wrong. Check the meaning. If it's true it's not vilifying.
[www.m-w.com]

I don’t see anything in that definition that mentions whether the statements have to be true or false to meet the definition.

Quote
Truthtesty
Hitler spreading Nazi propaganda vilified the Jews. (Note Voltaic makes no mention of how Thieme vehemently vilified thousands of christians by of "bleeding heart liberals" or by calling black people "melanoderms", there are many more instances of Thieme's vilification of people, all of it, is on tape or in Thieme's literature.)

I haven’t mentioned a lot of things since I’m not here to rag on anybody. Good job continually bringing Hitler into the discussion, but you forgot Saddam Hussein and Josef Stalin.

Quote
sistersoap

Quote
Voltaic
This is actually what my very first post on this forum said: that each of us should examine our own consciences when making statement as are made here.

QUESTIONS:
1. Now that you have delivered your message to all of us here, not just to Testy, what else useful do you have to say to us?

I would like to say that I’ve cited dozens and dozens scriptures in all my posts so far, in my attempt to show that love is the central part of spiritual living. We all endure certain tests and problems in our lives, and if someone’s test is to grow up under an oppressive teacher, shouldn’t that person endure it for Christ’s sake (Matthew 10:37-39;11:28-30;16:24; Mark 8:34; Luke 9:23; 1 Corinthians 4:12-13; 2 Corinthians 5:4-5; Philippians 2:8; Colossians 1:24; 2 Timothy 2:3; James 5:10-11; 1 Peter 2:21; Revelation 2:3) instead of complaining (1 Corinthians 10:10; Philippians 2:14-15;4:6; James 5:9; Jude 1:16)? Are the teachings from our Lord Jesus Christ directly and clearly instructing us to love and do good to our enemies (Matthew 5:38-45; Luke 6:27-36) not enough? Please tell me what more you could possibly want!

Quote
sistersoap
2. Since you are so solicitous of our moral condition, what about all the other forums that need your help to be reminded of their spiritual danger? Or is this forum the only one you have graced with your advice? If it is the only forum you are attending to, WHY? BE HONEST.

No, I have been on other forums as well. In any case, my "advice" has been backed by Scriptures, not my feelings or anecdotes.

Quote
sistersoap
VILIFY does NOT MEAN WHAT YOU SAY IT MEANS. Use your dictionary before you attempt to instruct others. You cannot invent definitions Webster's NEW WORLD DICTIONARY says ABOUT VILIFY:

I was only paraphrasing the definition. I am so sorry I ever used the word to begin with. You are right that "to debase, to degrade, to defame, to attempt to degrade by slander" are totally different from "saying something negative about someone". In fact, they are total opposites. I repent!

Quote
sistersoap
Oh I know, you are too righteous to actually be specific! You can't be soiled by mentioning specifics lest you be contaminated by someone else's immoderate language! WelL YOU CAN ALWAYS REBOUND. Can't you?

I am not "too righteous". There is nothing good about me, and I am sick from my head to my feet. Only the Righteousness of Christ inside me is good (Isaiah 64:6; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10;7:7-25; 1 Corinthians 1:30; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Philippians 3:8-9). And yes, I can always confess my sins to God, presenting them through the expiating blood of Christ (Leviticus 5:5-6; Psalm 32:5;38:18; Proverbs 28:13; Isaiah 59:11-13; Jeremiah 3:12-13;14:20; 1 Corinthians 11:28-31; James 5:15-16; I John 1:9).

Quote
sistersoap
You ARE DEFENDING THIEME ON THIS THREAD AMONGST PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN INJURED BY HIS FALSE TEACHINGS. What do you expect us to say? You keep saying the same things over and over.

Please quote one time where I have defended Thieme. I want a direct quote.

Quote
Truthtesty

Quote

[[b:3acb401904]Notice Voltaic makes [u:3acb401904]no mention of the evil of Thieme's teachings[/u:3acb401904] [/b:3acb401904]that cause: the bumping into walls, falling down stairs, having nervous breakdowns, and suffering identity dysfunctions.)

Quote
Voltaic
[b:3acb401904]Now you are plainly lying about what I have or haven't said[/b:3acb401904]. I refer you to post #44879 in this thread where I did briefly discuss this and where you went off into left-field about wanting me to go to jail because I believe Christians should follow the law when the Anti-Christ is in charge or something outlandish. Maybe you don't agree with my answer or things could be misinterpreted, etc. That's fine and we can discuss it. But what I have or haven't said is very plainly documented here in this thread.

[b:3acb401904]If I am lying, then where did you specifically state Thieme's teachings are evil?[/b:3acb401904]

It is true that I never said Thieme’s teachings are evil. However, in your quote above, you said I made "no mention" of how Thieme’s teachings caused people to bump into walls, etc. But I did make mention of this in my post #44879, and you even replied to it when you said you wanted to send me to jail or something, etc. So saying that I did not mention it at all when I did, is wrong.

Quote
Truthtesty
Also, you have broken your own "[b:3acb401904]holier than thou art[/b:3acb401904]" rules, by specifically and falsely accusing me of lying, in public, and without me contacting you "privately".

I am not holier than thou, and I have no rules to that end. But, earlier you made a big deal that I was not mentioning specifics, and now you call me out for mentioning a specific. Which standard should I go by?

Quote
Truthtesty
If you really believe - "I wonder if disputes and accusations and engaging in these kinds of discussion violates the command to avoid the appearance of evil."-, then it sure isn't stopping you from "disputing and discussing" here, now is it?

No it isn’t, but it is something I think about and try to be conscientious about. I will answer to the Lord for all my posts here and I can only tell him that I thought I was doing right. He alone is qualified to judge if it is (1 Samuel 26:23; 1 Corinthians 3:11-15;4:5; 2 Timothy 4:8; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 3:20; Revelation 20:12). That’s the big difference between my position and the position of others on this forum: I don’t believe I’m qualified to judge another man’s servant; but only myself (Romans 14:4).

Quote
Truthtesty
Wonder all you want, fighting evil and bringing evil to justice is avoiding complicity with evil. For example, if you witness someone being beaten and robbed (or worse) and you do nothing about it,(you don't call 911, no testimony as a court witness, etc...) then you are complicit. You [b:3acb401904]appear[/b:3acb401904] as an accomplice of that evil. Fighting evil and bringing evil to justice of the light, is not evil, it's good.

Do you call 911 and report every car you see speeding on the road? Do you call 911 and report when someone litters? Do you file a lawsuit whenever someone gossips about someone else in the office? Do you make a big display whenever someone spews hatred against someone else?

You keep using examples of obvious physical harm like beatings and robbery when the answer is clear, but ignore the day-to-day evil of the world. I simply believe that Christianity in this Age of Grace or Age of the Church (whichever term you like) is about one’s personal relationship with God and others, not activism and working and doing for God. Good deeds are the result and demonstration of our faith, not the means to it .

Quote
Truthtesty
to test, examine, prove, scrutinise (to see whether a thing is genuine or not), as metals to recognise as genuine after examination, to approve, deem worthy

[bible1.crosswalk.com]

The testing the world at large would certainly be a part of "testing all things".

I agree with that, sorry if my post was unclear. This is what I tried to illustrate by mentioning a "proving grounds" where something is examined, tested, scrutinized, etc. as opposed to proving something in a court case where "proof" isn’t a test but a piece of evidence.

Quote
Truthtesty
If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. This is a conditional statement.

Quote
Voltaic
My Lord and Saviour said: "With God, all things are possible." (Matthew 19:26, [b:3acb401904]Mark 10:27[/b:3acb401904]).

[b:3acb401904]Mark 10:27[/b:3acb401904]
And Jesus looking upon them saith, [b:3acb401904]With men it is impossible[/b:3acb401904], but not with God: for [b:3acb401904]with God all things are possible[/b:3acb401904].

I say again "[b:3acb401904]If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.[/b:3acb401904]" This is a conditional statement. Paul is practical and realizes that there is going to be violence anyhow. You can briefly maintain your "[b:3acb401904]holier than thou art[/b:3acb401904]" beliefs, but if you don't work against, or don't toil against, or don't overcome evil then you are complicit with evil - you become evil, you appear evil, and your belief system collapses. I am not saying that you will go to heaven for fighting evil (Jesus did that and Jesus is victorious over principalities and powers), but good work is a fruit of the spirit.

The power of God made available to us knows no limits (Matthew 9:12; Mark 2:17; Luke 5:31; Romans 8:26; 1 Corinthians 1:25;2:4-5; 2 Corinthians 10:4;12:10; Ephesians 1:18-21;3:16-21; Philippians 4:12-13; Colossians 1:10-12; Hebrews 11:32-34; 1 Peter 4:11) and I refuse to live with the attitude that there are things I cannot do in His power; if I have even a mustard seed of faith, nothing will be impossible for me; so promises my Lord Jesus Christ (Matthew 17:20; Luke 17:6).

Incidentally, the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control (Galatians 5:22-23). These are the traits that define good works, not how much evil did you fight today or some such. Works without the Spirit are dead.

Quote
Truthtesty
The Gospels are for the whole world are they not? What type of Gospel, What type of Word, what type of TRUTH are you trying to sell, IF THE TRUTH OF WHAT IS EVIL, HAS TO BE HIDDEN AWAY IN SECRET? Can you provide a scripture that says hide the truth of what is evil? I have never seen a passage of scripture that supports this.

Quote
Voltaic
You are changing what I am saying. I have never said that the truth should be hidden, whether it is the truth of evil or truth of the Gospel or anything else. Not once. Go back and read my posts, there aren’t many.

I just asked you if you could produce a scripture that said to "hide the truth". The world at large includes christians too. I know there are alot of things to hide at Berachah. I also know that the truth is universal to the world, not just truth in church.

So now, exposing "truths" at Berachah is as important as revealing the truth of the Gospel that saves the world?

Quote
Truthtesty
My point again, why would it hurt to debate it in front of the whole world? What do you as a christian have to hide from the whole world? Paul just says it is shameful that unegenerates have to judge christian matters, because thier aren't wise enough christians to do it.

The command is to not to take Christian disputes before unregenerates at all (1 Corinthians 6:2-5). I don’t need to know "why", because I have Scripture commanding me to not do it, and I’m not bold enough to go before the Holy Spirit, who inspired Scripture, and question why He gave the commands He did.

Quote
Truthtesty

Quote
Voltaic
But there are Scriptures that say disputes between Christians (which is why in one of my first posts I asked if everyone agrees that Thieme is at least a brother in Christ) shouldn't take their disputes before the unregenerate world. For example, 1 Corinthians 6:1-6 says Christians shouldn't take each other to court and be judged by unbelievers even on worldy matters. In addition, Titus 3:8-9 teaches that we should be devoted to doing good to everyone instead of promoting controversies of doctrine. To me this includes public displays in front of the unregenerate world such as, oh, an internet forum.

Your interpretation is not to be trusted. 1 Corinthians 6:5 says
"[b:3acb401904]I speak to your shame[/b:3acb401904]. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? [b:3acb401904]no, not one that shall be able [/b:3acb401904]to judge between his brethren?"
This is saying in question form "Is there not a wise enough christian(s) able to judge matters among you, that therefore the unregenerate have to judge matters?". Modern day examples of unregenerates having to judge: Andrea yates, BTK, David Koresh, etc...

True it was to the Corinthians’ shame that there were none wise enough to judge these matters, but that doesn’t mean they were supposed to take them to the unregenerate instead. Verse 4 even tells them to just appoint someone of small stature in the church, as it is better than going before the unbelievers.

Quote
Truthtesty
Titus 3:9 is speaking about contentions and strifes about Jewish Law, not christian doctrine.

[bible1.crosswalk.com]

Also reference Chafer Volume 7, p 168.

But the problem is that Jewish Law was being brought in to replace, supplement, or change Christian doctrine.

Quote
Truthtesty

Quote
Voltaic
If he or his son were here, that would at least be Biblical. All the scriptures I see say that if a brother ignores rebuke or exhortation, you just leave it alone and go separate ways (Titus 3:10); none of them talk about taking it to the people or speaking it to the world or what have you.

Wrong.

I would imagine that Thieme or his son have probably read this site. Thieme and his son are allowed to join this forum. Thieme has been spoken to about these matters. In any case this site is mostly for the healing of the victims, who need to hear [u:3acb401904][b:3acb401904]the truth[/b:3acb401904][/u:3acb401904]!

I sympathize with their need to hear healing truth; I simply don’t agree that they need to hear negative truths and I believe that many of the posts here are made with evil motivations, such as revenge, spite, hatred, etc., which is why I made my first post and have continued to stress love over all else. Apparently this is contentious.

Quote
Truthtesty

Quote
Voltaic
Even Paul says he rejoices when people preach Christ for false motivations as long as Christ is preached (Philippians 1:17-18 )

Philippians 1:17
But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel. 1:18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.

[bible1.crosswalk.com]

It doesn't say for false motivations, it says "in pretence".

This depends on the translation you use. I normally use what someone here called the "vile" New International Version.

Quote
mile2
You wrote that you had recently read the biography, "Robert B. Thieme, Jr.:His Ancestry: His Life" and were disturbed by the typos, etc.

Not disturbed, annoyed. I dislike bad copy-editing in any published work. It bothers the English major in me and reeks of unprofessional work.

Quote
mile2
The editorial flaws in the book, though they may be irritating to you, certainly do not discredit the validity of the statements made, or lessen their impact on the reader's understanding of Thieme's life story.

I spent about three sentences talking about how it’s a good overview of his ancestry and background, so I agree with you and never said that any of it is discredited or anything else. Don’t make the mistake of others here and think that because I disagree with the [i:3acb401904]way[/i:3acb401904] all of this is being presented, I automatically disagree with [i:3acb401904]what[/i:3acb401904] is being said.

Quote
mile2
But in no way does Independent Study compare to the rigors of a typical class of 30 competing peers, studying under a demanding, preset curriculum.

You should contact the U of A about that. I have no way to agree or disagree with your conclusions because I wasn’t there and don’t know how rigorous it may have been. I imagine the standards have changed in the last 65+ years.

Quote
mile2
Are you familiar with Thieme's story of how his military superiors during WWII approached him with a secret mission in which he would parachute into Greece behind enemy lines? They supposedly chose him because of his ability to speak Greek. He was ready and willing to go until it was noticed that he had a slight accent from classical Greek that differed from the modern spoken Greek language. So in the end the plan couldn't be executed.

Could it really be that in Independent Study Thieme learned to speak classical Greek?! (If you have not taken Greek, be sure to ask someone who has.) And is a slight accent the defining difference between modern spoken Greek and ancient Greek?! That story is absurd on its face and evidence that Thieme was lying to exalt himself.

Nope, never heard that one. It doesn’t change anything I have said though, as I am neither defending nor attacking Thieme. I would be interested in the source of that statement though, perhaps a tape citation or something (there are a lot of things he is supposed to have said that don’t seem to be well documented).

Quote
mile2
You say "It is a little bit weird that the author went around to all these private residences and took pictures of their current facades." If you have heard the claims Thieme has made concerning his family and upbringing, you should be able to understand what these pictures reveal. As a point of correction you mention the picture on p.64 as the door of Thieme's college rental from the lower staircase. Actually this picture is the entrance to the triplex his father moved the family to sometime prior to the spring of 1937. It's not exactly the scene of opulance that Thieme refers to in his teachings.

I understand why Hunt took the pics, I just thought it was creepy how they were presented. It would have been nice to have some overall city or neighborhood pics of those areas from the 30s and 40s to present a context for us. What was a wealthy mansion back then is a regular 3-bedroom house with garage nowadays. And it was creepy him shooting a doorway from a lower staircase, like he had to run in and do it before anyone noticed or something (he had already shot the house's facade on the previous page).

Quote
mile2
To recognize and appreciate an in-depth bio requires more than a superficial reading.

The book is not "in-depth" by any means; it’s just over 100 pages long and over half of that is family history before Thieme and Betty. As I have said [u:3acb401904]repeatedly[/u:3acb401904], it was a good but basic piece of research.

Quote
Truthtesty

Quote
Voltaic
I refer you to post #44879 in this thread where I did briefly discuss this and where you went off into left-field about wanting me to go to jail because I believe Christians should follow the law when the Anti-Christ is in charge or something outlandish.

What is outlandish is your concept of submission to earthly authority.

I’ve only got Scripture to guide my life on this matter, and it doesn’t matter what translation you use (Romans 13:1-7; Hebrews 13:17; 1 Peter 2:17). Even David didn’t kill the king whom God had already condemned (1 Samuel 24:4-7). Exceptions can be made in one’s own spiritual life as led by the Spirit, but that’s a personal matter.

Quote
Truthtesty
Thieme often tried to smear people as if they were not making sense by labeling thier thinking as "in left field". Learn to think for yourself, and quit copying Thieme's terminology.

Searching for the phrase "out in left field" on Google yielded over 250,000 hits. Of the first twenty hits, only number 9 and 14 were actually about baseball, where the term first came from. But some of the hits were sites where this very common phrase is studied, such as:
[www.phrases.org.uk]
[www.bobcongdon.net]

I’m surprised you’ve never heard the term before and make it into some Thieme thing. I’m curious, will you be chiding sistersoap and thiemite and others in this thread for their references to Thieme terms? Or just me for a term that wasn’t really his anyway?

KC:

Thanks again. I went to page 41 and read all of Juker’s posts.

I guess that since I never attended a service pastured by Thieme I cannot offer any true honest insight. As for Juker’s stuff about Thieme firing everybody, and taking total control, there are posts in the earlier pages from current members and others that say this never happened, or that there are deacons and elders.

Again, the only reason I am here is because indirectly Thieme has had a very big influence on my life. It was one of his books that I read when I was young that brought me to Christ. It was attending a church based on his theology for 15 years that I grew as a Christian. However, it was also indirectly that Thieme divided my mother’s side of the family, and Thieme’s books and teachings that almost led me to divorce with my wife.

If the stuff that Juker says is true, then I think it is alarming. However, I still don’t consider it a cult. Tetelestai church maybe a clone of Thiemes church, but it has elders, deacons, musicians, etc. The pastor teaches right pastor, and doesn’t think believes should hold Bible studies, but again the mission statement is rooted in solid Bible doctrine. Even Juker in his post listed some of the positive things practiced by Thieme.

Allow me to share some views and theories I have on certain things. Paul when talking about marriage in 1 Cor 7 makes reference to “if one is celibate like him,” that it is a blessing. Paul eludes to the fact that this lets him spend the majority of his time on learning God’s word. I am married and have four kids, two dogs, and own my own company. My 70 year old mother lives with my 93 year old grandmother. They live in a house that is over 100 years old. Needless to say there is always something that needs fixed or done there. I also have an 85 year old mother-in-law who lives with her 55 year old handicapped son. Again in a very old house that always needs something. I’m lucky if I can get 6 hours of sleep on any night.

I have an aunt who never worked, and her kids are all gone. She listens to tapes all day long seven days a week. She goes to church Sunday morning, Sunday night, Thursday night, and Tuesday night (oh by the way Tetelestai church is about 40 miles each way from her house) She has a bible study at her house on Fridays (with a different pastor who was ordained by the pastor who was ordained by Thieme) My aunt can quote any scripture in the Bible in the KJ, NIV, or NASB. She also knows Greek. She only was able to get this way spending many hours each day seven days a week.

My point is that everyone is different. I have a responsibility to my wife, kids, work, family, etc. If I were to spend as much time as my aunt on tapes, going to church, going to bible study, and reading, everything else would fall apart.

My theory is this: Barachah, Tetelestai, and all other Thieme based churches are for people like my aunt, and who I think Paul was talking about. If you wish to not marry, become celibate, not have kids, live modestly, and devote all of your time to God that is great. Listen to tapes ten hours a day, everyday if you like. Go to church everyday, and dig deep into theology as much as you can. I have the utmost respect for you. However for those of us who have a house, spouse, kids, family, careers, etc. we can’t be like Paul. Paul says that it is ok if we are not like him. Paul says that it is ok to marry. I’m am in no way saying that this means that we just go to church once a week for an hour and then that’s it. I do believe Thieme and Knapp on their teaching of taking in God’s word everyday. My belief is that on some days it may only be for 10 or 15 minutes right before I go to bed. I’m saying that we can’t do what Thieme and Knapp say to do. My kids play football, soccer, field hockey, cross country, baseball, lacrosse, and track. There are nights when I don’t even get to go home until 10:00 at night. I can’t listen to tapes at work. I can’t read the Bible at work. So when one of my kids has a soccer game I go to it. I don’t lock myself in my den and listen to tapes all evening. (I do have a cupboard full of Knapp’s tapes) In the old days and even today there are monks, and even hermits. That is what they did, there is nothing wrong with this according to Paul. Paul even calls it a blessing. Paul also includes celibacy with being like this, again part of the blessing. So unless you are celibate, and have no career goals, or plan on ever having any kind of family, then go ahead and may God be with you.

To summarize: I do not believe that Thieme’s or Knapp’s churches are cults. I question lots of their theology. I believe that their teachings are based on sound Bible doctrine. I believe that their theology, philosophy, and pastoral styles are not for everyone. If you are neglecting your family, you are not serving God the way He wants you to.
Also, since I have never been to Berachah I cannot comment on what happens or has happened there. Obviously if one person says black and the other white, one is right and one is wrong. I believe that many people have been hurt by family members who, after having families and responsibilities, then somehow think they can become like Paul. They cannot do it. God decides whom He blesses with this gift. If you don’t understand this, just look at the Catholic Church. Forced celibacy results in sexual abuse of alter boys. All of the priests that have done all of this abusing were obviously not blessed with celibacy. You cannot decide on your own to be like Paul was, God decides. I think Thieme never understood this concept. In Thieme’s teachings he eludes to the fact that unless you reach spiritual maturity (plaeroma I believe) you will not receive all of your escrowed gifts in eternity, and be somehow less than those blessed with the gift that Paul had. Paul never said that if we weren’t blessed like him that we would be less in eternity. If everyone was blessed like Paul it would be the end of the human race because everyone would be celibate. God said many times to multiply, but He also blessed some with a gift like Paul received.

Look forward to comments.
Thanks

SynergyCon,

SynergyCon

Quote

Their styles and theology are questionable to say the least, BUT they are NOT running cults

I think you have to deny all whole lot of facts to conclude with that statement. If your going to make that statement then follow it up with facts.

How many cult characteristics do you need? No cult encompasses every characteristic, but each cult does include a majority of the characteristics. Thieme encompasses the main characteristics of a cult.

Here's another cult fact I will offer:

Thieme stated that he was an extension of Chafer. Lewis Sperry Chafer refered to cults no less than 14 times in his 8 volumes of Systematic Theology(1952).


Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol 2 p 110
Chafer

Quote

As has been observed, cults are now multiplying and their appearance is restricted to very recent times. These cults cover a variety of ideas all the way from Christian Science to Buchmanism. The latter as completely ignores the blood redemption of Christ as the former. While the former substitutes bodily health for the salvation of the soul, the latter substitutes consecration to God for a new birth by the Spirit. No less misleading is the modern doctrine that salvation is through faith plus consecration. Probably no religious movement is more bold than the I AM cult of recent months. It unblushingly announces by its blasphemous name that it freely embraces all that belongs to the original lie. Its title would have been equally appropriate had it been, I will be like the most High. [b:7480355033]Space cannot be claimed for an enumeration and analysis of all these systems, ancient and modern. No one can anticipate the number that will yet appear or the confusion of doctrine they will engender; but for each and all there is but one acid test, namely, What place does it give to the redeeming grace of God made possible only through the death and shed blood of Christ?[/b:7480355033]

Chafer believed that the literal Blood of Christ as efficacious. Chafer also recognized the "Blood of Christ" was also a metaphor (therefore with endless meaning). Thieme does not believe the literal Blood of Christ is efficacious. According to Chafer's acid test, Chafer would consider Thieme a cult, because without faith in pure shed blood of Jesus, there is no salvation. Disagreement on the Blood of Christ is not just as "minor theological difference", Chafer would consider Thieme's teaching on the Blood of Christ as satanic.

You seem to be more familiar with this site than you have led us to believe. You remember as far back as Galiban, but can you tell me what Dr. Wall said of Thieme's cultic behaviour?




Truthtesty

Hi Truthtesty:

Again, thanks for the reply

A few things:

I downloaded Dr. Wall’s book about Thieme and had it printed at Kinko’s FIVE years ago. It has been five years since I read it. From what I remember he like myself, Galiban, and others question Thieme’s theology and pastoral practices, but nowhere in his book do I remember seeing the word “cult”

I’m not going to do what Galiban, and others have done and continue to do. That is to sling Bible verses at each other to prove one’s point. I don’t find this method to work very often. All one has to do is look at any trial in any courtroom. There are laws that are written in English, yet you will have at least two attorneys who know the English language very well argue back and forth, each with contrary views on what the law states, what the law means, and how the law is to be interpreted. They both will reference previous cases, previous rulings, and even bring in expert witnesses to try and prove their point.

This is what happens here. Truthtesty makes a statement (Thieme is a cult leader), references a scripture, and then brings in his expert witness (Dr. Wall, Chafer, etc.) Then someone like Galiban makes a counterpoint, references a scripture, and quotes some other human. Back and forth, and back and forth.

I believe that there is nothing wrong with this, as long as it is done to glorify God, and help each believer with his or her path to God.

What the danger is that it turns into a personal, emotional “I’m right, your wrong” forum.
If this is what you want Truthtesty I suggest you go to a sports forum. They are easy to find. They basically go like this:

Guy from Boston: Yankees Suck!
Guy from New York: Red Sox Suck!
Guy from Boston: Jeter sucks!
Guy from New York: Red Sox Suck!
Guy from New York: Ramirez Sucks
Guy from Boston: Yankees Suck!
Guy from New York: Red Sox Suck
Guy from Boston: Yankees Suck!
Guy from New York: Red Sox Suck!

No matter who wins a game between the two teams, who wins the division, who wins a playoff series, or who wins the World Series neither guy changes what they say.

Do you get my point? While a Yankee fan will in all likelihood never become a Red Sox fan, a vice versa, Christian theology, liberties, and personal walks with God should not be treated like a Yankee – Red Sox debate. Neither of these hypothetical guys will ever agree with the other even if the others team would win the World Series 10 years in a row the other guy would still say that that team sucks.

I believe as a Christian one should wake and tell God the following: Lord, I am open to the possibility that everything I know and have learned to date may be completely wrong. Lord guide me and bless me with wisdom, and teach me discernment as I strive to grow in your grace, and here your word each day. (it doesn’t have to be exactly like this, but you get my point)

I have offered my theories about Thieme and Knapp on this forum. I believe they are very controversial, but not cult leaders. CARM.org believes the same thing. So does Dr. Wall. I believe it should come down to one simple question. Did Thieme teach salvation through Jesus Christ? If yes, then it is not a cult. Are the people who attend Berachah believers? If yes then it is not a cult.

Again Truthtesty I completely understand your bitterness re: Thieme. You can disagree all you want on his teaching style, his theology, his personal life, and pretty much everything about the man, but it is not fair of you to call him a cult leader when he is not a cult leader

Thanks again Truthtesty and all others.