R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
SynergyCon
()
Date: September 27, 2007 11:09PM
Truthtesty:
Lets make it really really simple:
Answer the following two questions with either a YES or a NO
1. Did Thieme teach that believing Jesus Christ is the son of God, and by accepting Him as your personal savior, and confessing and believing this in your heart that one is saved?
2. Are the people who attend Berachah Church believers?
Remember YES, or NO only
Thanks
Lets make it really really simple:
Answer the following two questions with either a YES or a NO
1. Did Thieme teach that believing Jesus Christ is the son of God, and by accepting Him as your personal savior, and confessing and believing this in your heart that one is saved?
2. Are the people who attend Berachah Church believers?
Remember YES, or NO only
Thanks
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
kcjones
()
Date: September 28, 2007 02:15AM
Quote
SynergyCon
Truthtesty:
Lets make it really really simple:
Answer the following two questions with either a YES or a NO
1. Did Thieme teach that believing Jesus Christ is the son of God, and by accepting Him as your personal savior, and confessing and believing this in your heart that one is saved?
2. Are the people who attend Berachah Church believers?
Remember YES, or NO only
Thanks
1.Yes, he did/past tense before 'Rebound'. Now it's NO - He did not die for your Post Salvation Sins - Not so good limiting the ultimate gift.
2.Unknown, this can not be used as a criteria, we can never know another man's heart, thus can not judge a body if people are 'believers'. Now if you ask, do they produce 'fruit', which can be one of the tests, then I would say no.
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
zams
()
Date: September 28, 2007 02:58AM
Quote
kcjonesQuote
SynergyCon
Truthtesty:
Lets make it really really simple:
Answer the following two questions with either a YES or a NO
1. Did Thieme teach that believing Jesus Christ is the son of God, and by accepting Him as your personal savior, and confessing and believing this in your heart that one is saved?
2. Are the people who attend Berachah Church believers?
Remember YES, or NO only
Thanks
1.Yes, he did/past tense before 'Rebound'. Now it's NO - He did not die for your Post Salvation Sins - Not so good limiting the ultimate gift.
kcjones,
This is not true, and you are distorting Thieme's position, which has always been his position. Which is that salvation was accomplished by Christ's atoning death on the cross, which was efficacious for any member of the human race who believes, regardless of any other factor. Even if they fall into serious sin and refuse to confess (rebound). This is the doctrine of eternal security, and a doctrine Thieme always adhered to throughout his entire ministry.
What Thieme came to teach was that the Christian is not forgiven for his sins after salvation only in the temporal sense. That means that if a Christian sins after salvation and he refuses to confess, that he is out of fellowship with God, and his spiritual life ceases. However, this is only relative to as long as the believer is alive. At death, the believer is still saved and still going to heaven.
We can argue back and forth over if this is what the Bible really teaches, but this is what Thieme taught, and it needs to be clarified.
In Christ,
Zams
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
kcjones
()
Date: September 28, 2007 03:04AM
Well just color me a confused 'Loser Believer' out picking berries for you ultra super gracers... :roll:
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
SynergyCon
()
Date: September 28, 2007 03:15AM
Thanks for the input KC
I agree question #2 should was too vague. Thanks for making it a better question. However, at the same time you are making my point and Galiban’s that it is not up to a believer to determine if members of other churches are believers.
If we agree that one cannot lose their salvation, then what you are saying is that the members of Berachah lost their salvation when Thieme started preaching about rebound? Or did the saved believers up to the point of that sermon remain saved, but all new believers since are not really believers?
I didn’t realize “rebound” was considered heresy too. Or should I say cultic?
Since Truthtesty always likes to bring up Hitler let me do it this time. Martin Luther didn’t have many good things to say about Jews in his day. Hitler, and other nazi’s did a good job of pointing out Luther’s writings regarding Jews in their day. Thieme on the other hand is, and was about as Pro-Semitic as a Christian could be. So was Martin Luther a cult leader? How about Lutherans? Are they cultists?
I don’t think you guys realize how simple minded you appear on your witch-hunt for Thieme.
If you, family members, or friends of yours have gone over the deep end for Thieme, Thieme’s son, or any other Thieme clone pastor then do something about it other than calling it a cult. You are going down a dangerous slippery slope when you may be calling fellow believers, members of the body, brothers and sisters in Christ, fellow Christians, and Gods children cult members. Not to mention calling a pastor teacher a cult leader.
There is not a pastor or church on this planet where if we recorded all the sermons, that someone somewhere that heard one of them wouldn’t point a finger and say “that’s heresy”, “that church is a cult.”
I 100% acknowledge that Thieme’s teachings, his church, and some of his books are questionable. He even comes across as a lunatic. I have witnessed first hand the division of my own family due to Thieme’s teachings. BUT, even as Dr Wall himself said: “Thieme is a man who loves God”, and (I’m paraphrasing), “One can learn a great deal about God from Thieme’s teachings”
If Thieme is who you guys say he is then God will take care of it. God doesn’t need you guys to do His persecuting for him.
Truthtesty, you never responded to my post re: your brother. You had mentioned “justice is being served.” Is that what this is about? Justice for your deceased brother?
If Thieme has sinned, remember, the war against sin has already been won. It was won at the cross. There is no need to fight a war against sin, it is over. However there is an ongoing war against evil. This war will not end until satan, the fallen angels, and the humans who choose not to believe are cast into the lake of fire. Until then be careful in this war, and may God bless all of you with knowledge of His word, and the power to discern what is good and what is evil.
Thanks
I agree question #2 should was too vague. Thanks for making it a better question. However, at the same time you are making my point and Galiban’s that it is not up to a believer to determine if members of other churches are believers.
If we agree that one cannot lose their salvation, then what you are saying is that the members of Berachah lost their salvation when Thieme started preaching about rebound? Or did the saved believers up to the point of that sermon remain saved, but all new believers since are not really believers?
I didn’t realize “rebound” was considered heresy too. Or should I say cultic?
Since Truthtesty always likes to bring up Hitler let me do it this time. Martin Luther didn’t have many good things to say about Jews in his day. Hitler, and other nazi’s did a good job of pointing out Luther’s writings regarding Jews in their day. Thieme on the other hand is, and was about as Pro-Semitic as a Christian could be. So was Martin Luther a cult leader? How about Lutherans? Are they cultists?
I don’t think you guys realize how simple minded you appear on your witch-hunt for Thieme.
If you, family members, or friends of yours have gone over the deep end for Thieme, Thieme’s son, or any other Thieme clone pastor then do something about it other than calling it a cult. You are going down a dangerous slippery slope when you may be calling fellow believers, members of the body, brothers and sisters in Christ, fellow Christians, and Gods children cult members. Not to mention calling a pastor teacher a cult leader.
There is not a pastor or church on this planet where if we recorded all the sermons, that someone somewhere that heard one of them wouldn’t point a finger and say “that’s heresy”, “that church is a cult.”
I 100% acknowledge that Thieme’s teachings, his church, and some of his books are questionable. He even comes across as a lunatic. I have witnessed first hand the division of my own family due to Thieme’s teachings. BUT, even as Dr Wall himself said: “Thieme is a man who loves God”, and (I’m paraphrasing), “One can learn a great deal about God from Thieme’s teachings”
If Thieme is who you guys say he is then God will take care of it. God doesn’t need you guys to do His persecuting for him.
Truthtesty, you never responded to my post re: your brother. You had mentioned “justice is being served.” Is that what this is about? Justice for your deceased brother?
If Thieme has sinned, remember, the war against sin has already been won. It was won at the cross. There is no need to fight a war against sin, it is over. However there is an ongoing war against evil. This war will not end until satan, the fallen angels, and the humans who choose not to believe are cast into the lake of fire. Until then be careful in this war, and may God bless all of you with knowledge of His word, and the power to discern what is good and what is evil.
Thanks
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
voltaic
()
Date: September 28, 2007 03:51AM
It isn't about that, KC. If you are going to discuss the doctrines of any church or teacher or anything, whether you agree or not, you should at least know what those doctrines are.Quote
kcjones
Well just color me a confused 'Loser Believer' out picking berries for you ultra super gracers... :roll:
Thieme always taught that the eternal/judicial penalty for sin was paid for at the cross, but that personal sin in the life was a barrier to spiritual living. "Rebound" is only his term for what most people knows as "confession" or confessing sins or what have you. Chafer discussed confessing personal sin in his book [u:e0b20d172b]He That Is Spiritual[/u:e0b20d172b].
From [www.rbthieme.org]
[i:e0b20d172b]After salvation the sin nature remains a relentless adversary, tempting the believer to sin and live in carnality. When the believer sins, fellowship with God is broken, the filling of the Holy Spirit is temporarily lost, and spiritual progress ceases. Rebound is the most simple yet most incredible concept in the spiritual life. Rebound defeats sin. Guilt, anguish, remorse over past failures vanish when we know that God forgives and forgets all past sins.
Rebound is our access to intimacy with the Lord, the gateway to divine power in our lives, our license to serve the Lord. Rebound opens the door to the wonderful freedom the grace of God offers to every believer in Jesus Christ.[/i:e0b20d172b]
and from [www.rbthieme.org]
[i:e0b20d172b]When rebound is neglected, carnality is perpetuated and the spiritual life self-destructs. Without rebound the filling of the Holy Spirit is grieved and quenched, the Christian way of life disintegrates.
[...]
The unbeliever has but one divine solution for spiritual death—faith in Christ. The believer has but one divine solution for personal sins—rebound. [/i:e0b20d172b]
The big differences between Thieme's teachings and others is two-fold: 1) Thieme gave it a new term, "rebound", which may be confusing (Wall covers this in his thesis) and 2) Thieme taught that only confession was needed to "be" spiritual whereas other theologians teach about a yielded walk in life, etc. The second of these is an important theological difference, but it doesn't make "Rebound" itself some evil teaching.
No sir, [u:e0b20d172b]thank you[/u:e0b20d172b]. And amen to what you said that I quoted. You certainly presented it better than I did.Quote
SynergyCon
I don’t think you guys realize how simple minded you appear on your witch-hunt for Thieme.
[...]
If Thieme is who you guys say he is then God will take care of it. God doesn’t need you guys to do His persecuting for him.
[...]
Until then be careful in this war, and may God bless all of you with knowledge of His word, and the power to discern what is good and what is evil.
Thanks
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
SynergyCon
()
Date: September 28, 2007 04:02AM
KC
Please don’t refer to yourself as a loser believer. Also, I, nor anyone else should refer to themselves as ultra-super-gracers. We are all part of the body, and no part of the body is more important, or better than any other part. We all serve a particular function as a living organism, the bride of Christ.
This may shock some of you, but it is one of the reasons why I no longer attend a church pastured by a Thieme clone. The biggest thing for me was the hierarchy that seemed to be taught. Loser-believer is just one example. To me it is an oxymoron. Just as ultra-super-gracer is not something one should go around saying they are.
When Paul wrote to the Corinthians in 59AD he called himself the “least of the apostles.” (1 Cor 15:9) Four years later he had grown to the point that he saw himself “the least of the saints.” (Eph 3:8) A few years and many tribulations-later, writing his last letters to the young pastor Timothy, Paul declared himself to be the worst sinner in the world. (1 Tim 1:15)
If Paul would have had a choice I think he would have chose “loser-believer” instead of ultra-super-gracer” to describe himself.
While we are all sinners saved by grace, and in a sense “loser-believers” we are not loser-believers the way Thieme defines loser-believer. All of us are believers in the body. The believer that was saved 2 minutes ago, along with the believer that is as mature as some of the great believers in the Bible are all on a level field. This also includes the believers who attend Berachah church, and the believers who think Thieme is a cultist. Even the believers who are in the 167th stage of reversionism, and about to suffer the sin unto death (I read that on someone’s post, made me laugh) are all equal parts of the body.
Don’t let Thieme, or anyone else say otherwise. Every believer has a bestowed gift that they contribute to the body.
Sincerely:
One nasty filthy rag of a human being saved by grace. A.k.a. SynergyCon
Please don’t refer to yourself as a loser believer. Also, I, nor anyone else should refer to themselves as ultra-super-gracers. We are all part of the body, and no part of the body is more important, or better than any other part. We all serve a particular function as a living organism, the bride of Christ.
This may shock some of you, but it is one of the reasons why I no longer attend a church pastured by a Thieme clone. The biggest thing for me was the hierarchy that seemed to be taught. Loser-believer is just one example. To me it is an oxymoron. Just as ultra-super-gracer is not something one should go around saying they are.
When Paul wrote to the Corinthians in 59AD he called himself the “least of the apostles.” (1 Cor 15:9) Four years later he had grown to the point that he saw himself “the least of the saints.” (Eph 3:8) A few years and many tribulations-later, writing his last letters to the young pastor Timothy, Paul declared himself to be the worst sinner in the world. (1 Tim 1:15)
If Paul would have had a choice I think he would have chose “loser-believer” instead of ultra-super-gracer” to describe himself.
While we are all sinners saved by grace, and in a sense “loser-believers” we are not loser-believers the way Thieme defines loser-believer. All of us are believers in the body. The believer that was saved 2 minutes ago, along with the believer that is as mature as some of the great believers in the Bible are all on a level field. This also includes the believers who attend Berachah church, and the believers who think Thieme is a cultist. Even the believers who are in the 167th stage of reversionism, and about to suffer the sin unto death (I read that on someone’s post, made me laugh) are all equal parts of the body.
Don’t let Thieme, or anyone else say otherwise. Every believer has a bestowed gift that they contribute to the body.
Sincerely:
One nasty filthy rag of a human being saved by grace. A.k.a. SynergyCon
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: September 28, 2007 08:06AM
Voltaic quote
Truthtesty: Thieme never taught that sins were paid for by the literal shed blood of Christ, and that according to Chafer is a christian cult.
Truthtesty
Quote
Thieme always taught that the eternal/judicial penalty for sin was paid for at the cross, but that personal sin in the life was a barrier to spiritual living.
Truthtesty: Thieme never taught that sins were paid for by the literal shed blood of Christ, and that according to Chafer is a christian cult.
Truthtesty
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: September 28, 2007 08:38AM
SynergyCon:
SynergyCon
Dr. Wall's dissertation:
Dr. Wall's dissertation:
Truthtesty:
What difference does it make to you, that we think Thieme is a cult leader? We are gathering evidence and facts. We are not making anything up. We are looking for the truth. We also sharing information and experiences. If you have facts, then we are glad to look at them. On the flip-side of that token, you should be glad to look at our facts. If you have already made up your mind that they are not cult leaders, then I ask: are [b:5c25ee3c20]you[/b:5c25ee3c20] really open-minded?
Truthtesty
SynergyCon
Quote
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, [u:5c25ee3c20]but nowhere in his book do I remember seeing the word “[b:5c25ee3c20]cult[/b:5c25ee3c20]” [/u:5c25ee3c20]
Dr. Wall's dissertation:
Quote
Finally, his differentiation between the "message" and the "man" is not completely a biblical view. It is true that honoring the teacher is not appropriate. However, God desires that the vessel he uses to communicate his message be one that does not detract from the message. The argument that the life of the teacher is irrelevant is one also used by some [b:5c25ee3c20]cult[/b:5c25ee3c20] leaders to excuse their life styles. For example, the leaders of the Children of God teach that their people are to ignore their blatant immorality and submit to their authoritative teaching because they are God's appointed authoritative teachers.
Dr. Wall's dissertation:
Quote
Seventh, an extensive emphasis on the doctrine of right pastor can produce a fear of leaving a local church. If Bible doctrine is defined in terms of that which one's pastor-teacher communicates, then leaving his authority, in the minds of many, is tantamount to leaving God or moving into reversionism. [u:5c25ee3c20]This is similar to the emotional slavery developed by the authoritative leaders of some of the newer, false [b:5c25ee3c20]cults[/u:5c25ee3c20][/b:5c25ee3c20].
Truthtesty:
What difference does it make to you, that we think Thieme is a cult leader? We are gathering evidence and facts. We are not making anything up. We are looking for the truth. We also sharing information and experiences. If you have facts, then we are glad to look at them. On the flip-side of that token, you should be glad to look at our facts. If you have already made up your mind that they are not cult leaders, then I ask: are [b:5c25ee3c20]you[/b:5c25ee3c20] really open-minded?
Truthtesty
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: September 28, 2007 09:04AM
Voltaic:
You are joke. Enough of your pretentious intelligence.
Voltaic
Truthtesty:
Wrong again (buzzer) If it causes schizophrenia - it's evil.
Dr. Wall dissertation:
Truthtesty
You are joke. Enough of your pretentious intelligence.
Voltaic
Quote
The big differences between Thieme's teachings and others is two-fold: 1) Thieme gave it a new term, "rebound", which may be confusing (Wall covers this in his thesis) and 2) Thieme taught that only confession was needed to "be" spiritual whereas other theologians teach about a yielded walk in life, etc. The second of these is an important theological difference, [u:4d0512e145]but it doesn't make "Rebound" itself some evil teaching[/u:4d0512e145].
Truthtesty:
Wrong again (buzzer) If it causes schizophrenia - it's evil.
Dr. Wall dissertation:
Quote
In other words, one can be walking in a fellowship relationship and have sin in his life, but he is promised that Christ's blood will continually cleanse him. That fellowship relationship is characterized by honesty with 10 Thieme, Spirituality, p. 33. 11 See Acts 2:42; 11 Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 2:9; Philippians 1:5; 2:1; 3:10. Also see Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, s.v. "koinonia, " pp. 439, 40. 87 God or confession of sins to God, but John's concept of fellowship is not one of a hop-scotch, in-and out, absolute spiritual status. For John, the issue is one of an honest walk versus a dishonest, rebellious non-acceptance of the reality of sin in our lives. Temporal fellowship is broken, not by an act of sin, but by a rebellious rationalization of the sin which the Holy Spirit is pointing out to the believer through the Word of God. This means that fellowship is more than the absence of unconfessed sins. It is a positive, personal, responsive relationship with God, openly lived in the light of His revelation-the Scriptures. At times in his books Thieme moves somewhat close to a relational definition of fellowship.12 He would be wise to expand this aspect of his teaching, for teaching the doctrine of fellowship as a technique to enter an absolute state can produce in some a "mechanical spirituality" and can become a form of "legalism" or "dead orthodoxy."13
The second weakness of Thieme's teaching on the subject of fellowship involves a failure to guard his definition of confession against practical abuse. The root meaning of homologeo is "to speak the same thing," and normal translations of it include "acknowledge," “confess,” “agree," “admit," and "declare.”14 Thieme does recognize that the word can be translated "acknowledge." However, he also says that it means "to name" or "to cite," and
these last two translations fall short of the basic meaning of the term. Not only does Thieme fail to translate properly homologeo consistently, but he fails to emphasize the normal implications of agreeing with God about specific sins in one's life. Normally, if one truly admits to God that what he has done is sin, he is sorry that he has sinned against his Father, and he desires to see a change in his own life (Lk. 15:21). It is true that forgiveness is based on the work of Christ, and that all that is needed to appropriate Christ's provision for cleansing is to confess (or agree with God about) one's sins. It is also true that this does not require sorrow for sins or promises to do better; but neither does it rule out the normal
expressions of one who truly takes God's attitude toward sin in his life. Unless the full ramifications of true agreement about (or acknowledgement of) sins are taught, there can be practical abuses of the doctrine of confession. Without these clarifications the teaching of confession and forgiveness can possible produce in the carnal mind a "license mentality."15 [b:4d0512e145]In some cases it can even result in a rationalization of the continuing existence of sin 16 and the repression of guilt, and this can produce emotional problems and even schizophrenia. The author has personally counseled people with such problems stemming from their abuse of Thieme's teaching on confession and fellowship[/b:4d0512e145].12 He seems to contradict himself at this point; for, after describing fellowship in absolute terms, he equates fellowship with the relative stages of maturity.
Truthtesty
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.