Truthtesty: Well would this be an insentive to accept Thieme as a source on the Shed Blood of Christ? What did Dr. Chafer say about the Blood of Christ?pss quote
OK TT, Thieme and Chafer did not see eye to eye on that subject.Truthtesty: They did not see eye to eye? CHAFER WOULD SEE THIEME'S FALSE TEACHING AS A SATANIC CULT. Not eye to eye? Also, you convieniently bypass my evidence from Bauer "Ardnt and Gingrich". Bauer "Ardnt and Gingrich " did not see "eye to eye" with Thieme either. Neither did Leon Morris see "eye to eye with" Thieme. Neither does historic ORTHODOX christianity see "eye to eye" with Thieme. Is this as Thieme would say "a satanic plot"? Everyone else is a satanic liar? Only Thieme is telling the truth?
Thieme BOC 1979:
"Christ anticipated that Satan would attack the Cross by perverting the meaning of the blood in an attempt to obscure the importance of spiritual death."Truthtesty: The walls are closing in on Thieme. This is Thieme's paranoid delusion. Thieme is divorced from reality. This is simply not true. Satan did not write the scirptures. The Holy Spirit wrote the scriptures.
The Holy Spirit simply does not mention the spiritual suffering aspect of Jesus' total death that much.Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol 2 pg 298
: Spiritual death is implied in Romans 5:12–21 (yet to be attended), but beginning with Romans 6:1, where the sin nature is seen to be in conflict with spiritual living and sanctification, spiritual death is altogether in view. Naturally, the sin nature and spiritual death are closely related here as always. To bear fruit unto that nature is to be in the way, or on the side, of spiritual death, whereas to be empowered unto good by the Spirit is to be in the way, or on the side, of life and peace (cf. Rom. 6:16, 21, 23; 7:5; 8:2, 6, 13). Of the hundreds of references in the Bible to death, but the merest fraction concern spiritual death. So great is the preponderance of texts which relate to physical death that multitudes of people are not aware of the truth as pertains to spiritual death. The central passage bearing upon physical death—which passage is intensely theological—is Romans 5:12–21.pss quote
I agree with Chafer up to a point but I also agree with Thieme when he says that it's the spiritual death of Christ that is represented by the statement The Blood of Christ. Why? do I believe it ? Well because what I've learned about spiritual death and many other categorical doctrines about God and Christ.Truthtesty: Have you even read all of Chafer? Do you think Dr. Chafer did not understand categorical doctrines? When it was Dr. Chafer who wrote LS Chafer's "Systematic Theology", When Systematic Theology is about organizing the teachings of the Bible into categorical systems? When it was Dr. Chafer who taught Thieme? When it was Dr. Chafer who founded Dallas Theological Seminary (where Thieme earned a masters degree)?
What part of LMorris do you not understand? I just
proved from Thieme's own reference "William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, trans, and adapt.,A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, by Walter Bauer (Cambridge: The University Press and Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 22. " (see above) that Leon Morris said the "Blood of Christ" in 1 Peter 1:19 was the
literal sacrificial Blood of Christ.
What do you have to say to the clear evidence of Ardnt and Gingrich?
Thieme's own reference Ardnt and Gingrich stated by Leon Morris clearly states above:
The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood...The
precious Blood of Christ is clearly sacrificial blood in 1 Pet 1:19, stated by Leon Morris, Morris was referenced by Ardnt and Gingrich (actually Bauer Ardnt Gingrich), and Ardnt and Gingrich was referenced by Thieme.
1 Pet. 1:19 But with the precious Blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:The Literal sacrificial Blood from LMorrris from "Ardnt and Gingrich". Haima p. 23
As I stated before:
From "THE BIBLICAL USE OF THE TERM 'BLOOD" by Leon Morris
...The remaining passages seem to point to sacrificial blood. Six times there is reference to covenant blood, which calls for no comment to show the sacrificial reference; in Rom. 3:25 God is said to have set forth Christ as hilasterion ... en to autou haimati , where the word hilasterion points us to the sacrifices. In Heb. 9 the whole context with its mention of the blood of sacrificial victims shows that verses 12 and 14 carry a reference to the sacrificial system when they speak of the blood of Christ, and the same is true of 10:19. The unusual phrase 'blood of sprinkling' (Heb. 12:24) points to a sacrificial action, and the context shows that in Heb. 13:12 the sin offering is in mind. The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood, and the same is probably true of 'the blood of the Lamb' in Rev. 7:14, 12:11. Finally, the thought of cleansing associated with the blood in 1 John 17 seems to be an allusion to sacrifice.
1 Pet. 1:19 (KJV) But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Leon Morris clearly states above: The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood,
(In Rom 3:25 I used transliterated "hilasterion dia (tes) pisteos en to autou haimati" because the Greek font does not appear to work on Rick Ross, Morris uses the actual Greek and associated fonts.)
Differentiated context.
As Barr said ""illegitimate totality transfer," i.e. the whole range of meanings that a word could have in its various semantic contexts is thought to be present in each individual case. According to Barr, it is much more appropriate to look for theology not in a word but in a sentence or combination of words, a principle that most subsequent scholarly efforts to produce a "theological dictionary" have tried to follow.pss quote
He did that on the cross when all the sins of the world wee judged on Christ. We as humans are born physically aine and spiritual dead but our personal sins have to be judged and were on Christ where he died a spiritual death on the cross, the gospel is the solution to spiritual death and the second death as well.This is a part of Thieme's pathetic logic. Thieme has not not framed "seat of life" arguement correctly. You say:
pss quote "
We as humans are born physically aine and spiritual dead but our personal sins have to be judged and were on Christ where he died a spiritual death on the cross, the gospel is the solution to spiritual death and the second death as well.Truthtesty: But? Adam wasn't born that way was he? No.
Adam was created spiritually alive and physically alive. This is a standard "framing" failure of Thieme's illogic. The
seat of the life of Adam was Adam's
physical eternal blood and
physical eternal body and
eternal soul.
All united in spiritual connection with God. That is right there in Genesis and that's was God's intention from the start. The theophany of God/Man Jesus was the same potential -
physical eternal Blood and
physical eternal Body and the
eternal Soul All united in spiritual connection with God. Thieme starts his false arguement with corrupt man and uses corrupt man as a basis to frame his false 1/2 salvatory argument, NOT starting with God intended Perfect man progressing to corrupt man progressing then again to Perfect man, as basis for a full salvatory arguement.
When Jesus Shed His eternal Blood (which Blood was spiritually connected with God) that was at the GREAT cost of His son Jesus' eternal Blood on earth. It was God's willing eternal Blood sacrificial gift, along with total death of eternal life on earth. This is clearly described in Old Testament archetypes.
Dr. Waite, Dr. Wall, Dr. Chafer, and most of Thieme's critics do not deny that Jesus did suffer spiritual efficacious separation (yet God was still in him 2 Cor. 5:19) aspect of total death, but there is simply no archetype for "spiritual death only" in the Old Testament. The archetype (or God's lexicon) is Shed Blood and Total death. Apparently, that's why Dr. Chafer says to men who deny the efficacy of the literal Shed Blood by twisting and denying meaning by means of arrogant academic wordplay metaphors to deny original meaning, as arrogating
"to himself the right to sit in judgment upon God and declare unnecessary the principle which God has established and to which He at infinite cost unto Himself has conformed in all ages."Archetype.
Also where do you think Thieme got this notion "humans are born physically alive and spiritual dead"?
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 2, Page 222
Those that in this life are spiritually dead are alive physically, while those that have died physically are alive spiritually, in the sense that they cannot cease to exist. In the end, spiritual death of this life, if not healed by redeeming grace, merges into unending second death, while physical death will yet be rebuked for all—saved and unsaved. “There shall be no more death” (Rev. 21:4), and “the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death” (1 Cor. 15:26).Truthtesty: From divine revelation we see that Jesus' physical aspect of total death was substitutionary for the judgement aspect of sin.
VII. THE CHRISTIAN’S RELATION TO IMPUTED SIN
Physical death, as has been observed, is the penalty of imputed sin, and though for the Christian its judgment aspect is wholly repealed, the experience of death as the only way of departure from this world is the portion of all believers until the return of Christ. The penalty or judgment feature of death has been so perfectly abrogated that it can be said of all believers, “There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1, R.V.; cf. John 3:18; Rom. 8:38–39; 1 Cor. 11:32). The Apostle also declares, “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 15:55–57). It is asserted that a mighty triumph has been gained over both death and the grave. “The sting of death is sin,” but death’s power to injure is canceled by the death of Christ. “The strength of sin is the law,” but the entire merit system is terminated by Christ in His death. He met the demands for merit by releasing His own perfect merit to all who believe. The strength of sin is seen in the truth that it is lawlessness; yet the strength of the law as a means of righteousness is turned to feebleness because of the weakness of the flesh (Rom. 8:3). Thanks, indeed, be unto God for this victory over the judgment aspect of death, which victory is gained by the Lord Jesus ChristDr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 7, Page 113
It is physical death which will later be destroyed (cf. 1 Cor. 15:26; Rev. 21:4). This “the last enemy” will be cancelled by a reversing of it; that is, all that have died will be raised to die no more (cf. John 5:25–28; 1 Cor. 15:22). The divine cure for physical death is resurrection. 1 Pet. 3:18
“For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit”.Truthtesty: Physical death is a
state to be entered and resolved. The question is how is it to be entered and resolved?
How many times does Thieme get to move the goal post around clear scriptural evidence? How many times does Thieme get to rewrite his "absolute truth" Blood of Christ manuals? Do you not endlessly excuse Thieme's errored theory and ignore clear evidence of the scriptures? When is it time for you to look at other possibilities? When someone offers you an incentive? a free DVR perhaps? Never?
Have you ever read "THE BIBLICAL USE OF THE TERM 'BLOOD" by Leon Morris?
Have you ever read " THE SOTERIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PHYSICAL SUFFERINGS AND DEATH OF CHRIST" By Philip J. Mitchell?
Mitchell goes into detail of Thieme's errors in Greek and Hebrew of Thieme's faulty argumentation therefore faulted conclusions.
If you think Thieme has surpassed Chafer, I disagree, but if you believe that why do you stop with Thieme? Both Dr. Wall and Mitchell have both surpassed Thieme. Why stop your indivdual personal study with Thieme?
I am totally in favor of new theories or new breakthroughs, however, Thieme has consistently shown error and deliberate misrepresentations (or colossal incompetence). Yet? Thieme is unwilling to acknowledge his errors. Thieme invalidated the christians personal study, and aggressively and dogmatically claimed an false gentile authority structure before the "heritage" or property of God - the body of Christ. (Thieme's false doctrine of right pastor) And in doing so has dysfunctionalized the discrimantory faculties of many christians who absolutely believed absolutely anything Thieme said absolutley. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Cult.
Jesus' authority structure:
Luke 22:25And he said unto them,
The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.
26But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. 27For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat?
but I am among you as he that serveth. 28Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations. 29And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; 30That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Pauls' authority sructure:
Ephesians 3:8
Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;Truthtesty: If Thieme can not be trusted in English, why should the average english speaking christian trust Thieme in Greek? They shouldn't. In any case the average christian should do thier own comparison and contrast of study, which would include a scientific verification of any evidence, OF ANY TEACHER.
By the way to date there have been 216 people in the United States exonerated through DNA evidence. [
www.innocenceproject.org]
Do not be so quick to dismiss the efficacious value of Divine Blood in Jesus' timeless act of efficacious Work, which undoubtedly had God's DNA and God knows what other spiritually connected Power. Do you think God's timeless DNA will be there to identify you and exxonerate you in when the trumpet sounds?:
1 Cor. 15:51–53
“Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality” Truthtesty