Quote
orangeperuviscacha
thereporter,

"Electro shock therapy like the Colonel received for his schizophrenia". Really? Hmmn.

orange,

Where is this stated? What evidence is there?

Truthtesty

Quote
zeebrook
Since when have I been banned and why? I have said nothing offensive, have offered information, have been accused, vilified etc and now you say I am banned. First I know of it.

To zeebrook: hold on before your claiming all this being abused and victimized. First take a look at what you have done. Answer the "less than honest" statement you said to me. I have asked you this once before.

Also for everyone who would claim I get special allowances from the moderator then note the moderator said nothing about you calling me a liar, even though you had no way of knowing the truth one way or another. You joined forces with sister in your combined lying attack on me.

Quote
Truthtesty

Quote
zeebrook
I am with you Sistersoap on Truthtesty's less that honest responses...Well done Sistersoap, and keep it up.

To Zeebrook: Would you explain your personal attack to me? And about me? You stated my responses were "less than honest" You said "I am with you Sistersoap on Truthtesty's less that honest responses." It seems that saying someone being "less than honest" is the same as calling them a liar.

Are you calling me a liar or are you trying to suggest that I am a liar and no one should give me creedance?

Are you here to try to discredit me?

Truthtesty

Truthtesty



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/29/2009 10:49PM by Truthtesty.

To the Forum:

To those who would say that I receive special allowances, be it noted that sistersoap told me that she thought " I had lost it" and she made fun the way I annotate the symbol for -od." And the moderator said nothing to her. This seems to be a special allowance, from another long time member of this forum.



Truthtesty



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/29/2009 11:00PM by Truthtesty.

To thereporter:

thereporter: "Upon several readings of ?The Integrity of God? I warned and warned applying heavy pressure years prior, of this dangerous pseudoscience and its ramifications but a small Church with little influence why bother?"

Truthtesty: do you actually have any examples of this "dangerous pseudoscience" in the booklet "integrity of -od"? Are you here to gain the attention of this forum by mentioning the booklet "the inntegrity of -od." Because it was what Sodini was reading before he massacred 3 innocent women?

I usually offer specific examples of Thieme's psuedoscience, like I did when I exposed Thieme on EEGs.

Truthtesty

thereporter: "John?s response was that what the readers were taught under the Spirit?s ministry through the apostles not only was adequate but was the only reliable truth. teaches you. The teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit (what is commonly called illumination) does not involve revelation of new truth or the explanation of all difficult passages of Scripture to our satisfaction. (that be arrogance) "

Truthtesty: I don't have an NASB. It would be helpful if you seperate and clarify your comments and the NASB's(NASB was highly recommended by Thieme by the way.)

I disagree with this commentary, because 1 John 2:27 says 3 times "didasko" "teach" and it is specifically because of the teaching annointing that you know(unction)and not a "certain one". It is the annointing chrisma( [www.antioch.com.sg] ) which teaches, not man. IT IS NOT NECESSARY to be taught by man(a certain one", that is CLEARLY the dynamic at work. There is no mentiong of a need for a corrupt human teacher at all, Christian or gnostic, in 1 John 2:27. It simply says the annointing teaches you all things. It does not restrict all things to what has already been (limitedly revealed in comparison to infinite knowledge of -od or even limited by what was differently revealed in different Christian communities at the time) revealed by -od. And what of the Corinthians did they already know everything as the Christians who heard the gospel of John? And vice versa? What of what the Bereans and other Christian communities? They could not email each other back then. But there was more to learn than what they had revealed to them.

chrisma the corresponding noun to chrio, signifies "an unguent, or an anointing." It was prepared from oil and aromatic herbs. It is used only metaphorically in the NT; by metonymy, of the Holy Spirit, 1_John_2:20,27, twice.

[www.antioch.com.sg]

To say the anointing with Holy Spirit is insufficient(seems to be greiving the Spirit to me) and to say it is required that a human teacher teach you is the same as saying a corrupt human "high priest" is necessary for learning. Wrong. Jesus is the only High Priest NECESSARY for Christians.

Nave's Topical Bible
...
OF SAINTS
...
Taught by God - Isaiah_54:13 ; 1_John_2:27

[www.antioch.com.sg]

1 John 2:27 You have no need that a "certain one" teach you.

[www.biblestudytools.com]

Christian human teachers have there place in the church community, but they are NOT NECESSARY for the HOLY SPIRIT to teach the Christian "all things".

Take note 1 john 2:20 says because of the anointing you KNOW all things. NOT because everything has already been written down(which everything had not yet been written down), and now you have human teachers to teach so you can learn all things NO it says YOU ALREADY KNOW specifically because of the annointing with the Holy Spirit.


[www.biblestudytools.com]

As some appear to be insinuating, If John had meant that all revelation was completed and corrupt humans teachers can now act as your high priest instead of Jesus as your high priest, to teach you or that corrupt human teachers had already taught you, then why was 2nd John and 3rd John written? That would be after 1 John 2:27. If all revelation had been already been revealed and was ready for teachers to teach it? If it had all not been revealed how could they know "all things". Lol

Also, Why does John refer to the anointing/unction teaching you, instead of the written revelation for teachers to teach you? Could it be the Christian knows all things spiritual through the Spirit of the Holy Spirit? It was because of the anointing they already knew, not that even all revelation was even complete then.

To limit -od is arrogant on its face and roots.

Truthtesty



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/2009 04:42AM by Truthtesty.

To thereporter:

No brainer - "If it had all not been revealed how could they know "all things". 1 John 2:20.

Truthtesty

Prebound opined: "Hey Truthtesty, I responded to your earlier message several days ago, but it didn't seem to go through. I was going to let things be, but since you've addressed me again I will give this another shot.

Regarding the incorrect info in the obituary, I think you are right; Pastor Thieme was not a Lt. Col. during the war."

Truthtesty: Ok let me stop you right there. That's not what the Berachah obit said though was it?

That was the point. This is not about spitballs into the void as you view it. I have no idea who you are or what stage of thiemite exthiemite or whatever view you have. I am not a mind reader nor do I know the perfect approach to every person. However, there are a lot of thiemites who "hit and run" through here with false Thieme info to try to subvert this forum. If someone doesn't correct the info then it is often "assumed" to be true. You showed me false info from the Berachah obit. I corrected the false info with CG hunt's public research. Some would complain of my approach and opine that I run people off for good. Which those people can clearly see prebound returned and thier opining was unfounded a waste of this forum's time. I tried to warn you(despite the possibilty that you might still be a thiemite and may hate my guts) and also it was another example to all of how Berachah still puts out false info.
This is to help people that they cannot "auto-trust" Thieme's teachings and Berachah's info and expect to be "spoonfed the truth" without being poisoned. Also, so that they can begin to develop skeptisim when hearing Thieme info. And to encourage them that they should not be lazy and that they should learn to begin to investigate Thieme's info carefully and if not? Then go to a different church.

I am not intrested in lying to protect Thieme, so if that is why you are here we don't any Thieme lies to agree on.

I never said Thieme lied about everything. Thieme was deeply deceptive about true things. Things in which apparently he thought he would never get caught or if he did get caught he felt he could successfully silence the debunking info from being presented at Berachah and thus not make it to the tapes and thus not make it to the world
and thus not make it to his cult followers ears.

It must have been a freak moment to witness Thieme admitting he made a mistake. I never saw him do it or speak of it.

It's difficult to say what percentage was lies/truth. Should we give it an even split? 50/50? CG Hunt's research was based on public record. People will decide for themselves. Hopefully, they will just decide to read a good version of greek to english translation of the bible for themselves and focus on Jesus and forget Thieme.


Truthtesty



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/2009 07:40AM by Truthtesty.

TO THE FORUM:

Is there any more news on Sodini and the Thieme connection?

Sistersop

Sister quote: August 27, 2009 02:01PM "It beats me how the moderator considers what I have said as a PERSONAL ATTACK. That is something I would like to have explained to me. To question someone is not an attack. Sistersoap"

Truthtesty: Does it beat you? Gee you just don't have a clue? I'd be glad to explain it to you sister. I don't believe the moderator said questioning someone is an attack. Is not this your summarized assumption of what the moderator said? You did make a PERSONAL ATTACK and you are incapable(in at least thisa case) of directly admitting you made an attack, even though "somehow" you realize that you could have "better worded" your false allegation to me in an indirect admission. Gee how could that "somehow" of realizing you could have better worded your false allegation to me be? Could it be your own realization that what you said was a false allegation? therefore an attack on me?
I think so. Clarify would you?

While it is true to question someone in nearly every case is not an attack, that is not all you did in what you "have said". You accused me of saying something wasn't true-you emphatically accused me of a lie. Of which you had no possible facts no way no how no why possible way of knowing. Yet? You called me a liar, because you were upset? I tested prebound. prebound? Who still hasn't left the forum, as you claim my approach scares people away. It doesn't. And? You would hold me to a fact based standard? To which I hold others? Your error here is that I hold to a fact based standard of proof. But? I never ONCE demanded anyone to tell me what went on in thier personal life even if it involved Thieme. That is a difference of information you need to undertsand. Yes you did question me which is ok right up until the point that I said I did not want to go into further details. Then you attacked me by saying that I had drank to much Lambrusco(paraphrasing)(funny from you who is always saying "cheers")
That I "boast too much", and that my claim was spurious, because I would not answer. Why not allow me the space to keep information private? Instead of callimg me a liar?
Have you never honestly wanted to or needed to keep information private? Without it being "spurious" or false?

But? Instead of looking at yourself and apologizing for the false attack you made on me what did you do? You continued and increased the tempo and intensity. You made a false outrageous "tin foil" conspiracy claim, you accused the moderator "Does he pay you guys to watch his back?" And you told the moderator "I don't trust you." Why? Because you can't admit you did something wrong? How many people have to get hurt because you can't admit you did something wrong?

Did you ask you "pals" to come to your aid?
It is quite coincidental and quite suspect that zeebrook is "new" to the forum and jumps "on your side" that zeebrook said that I was "less than honest"(zeebrook had no facts mind you to make a decision with) AND? thereporter new to the forum also jumps "on your side" from your personal assumption? Thereporter now questions the moderator? considering "questioning someone an attack?" As you would mislead people to believe? And thereporter is on your side? To support you? Even though thereporter is "new" to the forum?

Who should not trust who sister? You say you are not a thiemite troll so why are you making a personal attack on me? prebound? prebound hasn't run away. Thiemites are very thick skinned like "cage fighters" who take it to the wall or to the mat, as I will to teach them the truth. To test a thiemite is not going to make them cry and run away. And? I think you know that. So what is you agenda sister? To disrupt this forum for the KJV only crowd? To try to get me kicked out of here because you know I will expose any cult?

You may not be a thiemite troll, but you seek to subvert this forum with your outlandish claims, none the less. If you will not be truthful on the small issues, (which are clear to everyone) how are to people to believe you on the larger issues?

Does this help you understand?

Truthtesty



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/2009 01:38PM by Truthtesty.

Truthtesty,

No. Absolutely not. The evidence I used was his own analysis as it contradicts itself. I enjoy reading something written by someone and finding the holes within the parameters they themselves create or impress. I wrote all of this before I read or even knew about Sodoni. In my posts I simply quoted myself from old emails sent to Theimites. I can provide the dates but I provided the broad date before the quotes section.

I failed however in my Pseudoscience to reference The Integrity of God. First in his "analysis" he says God breaths life into us and defines God as Ultimate Perfection, Righteousness and Love, would breath life into humans, and yet we are spiritual dead and seperated from God because of our Sin Nature. Ergo my reference to Bad Breath. His "science" then necessitates the need for "Saving Grace" based on his formula he sets up not the truth. He sets up the equation and then after the fact requires "Saving Perfect Grace" dependent on Imperfection which negates Perfection on a flawed premise after defining God as Perfect Righteousness, Justice, and Love.

A - Perfect God breaths life into us + We are Spiritually Dead and Evil inheriting a Sin Nature from Adam and totally Seperated from God (dualism) (even though he breaths life into us) = Necessity of Salvation through God's Grace for God to be connected to us in a personal way, as spiritually dead matter.

God is not Perfect Benevolence, Righteous, Just, or Love based on the Colonel's Jr. High Linear Algebra which does not balance out. God is a "bumbling lab technician" doing damage control based on analysis of the first few chapters of the Integrity of God. And the diagram is scary, of the fetus and further diagrams falsely give the impressionable that he has "faith reduced to a simple science." Much like, a fictional with a few facts movie presented in black and white, to give the impressionable, it is a historical documentary.

Then I provide some personal commentary regarding my notion of God.

Then I further provided holes in the Colonel's analysis in the Integrity of God.

Then I insult him, using a 1 Corinthians 13:11 "When I was a child....I became a man." And, that includes your first chemistry set, proclivity for bad, and enough sinning and leisure time to gum up the works with bogus science and Jr. High linear algebra. This was a kidney punch maybe but I believe him to be a heretic. As, the scripture outlines in detail.

NASB

1 John page 1829

Gnosticism

One of the most dangerous heresies of the first two centuries of the church was Gnosticism. Its central teaching was that spirit is entirely good and matter is evil. From this unbiblical dualism flowed five important errors:

1. Man's body, which is matter, is therefore evil. It is to be contrasted with God who is wholly spirit and therefore good.

2. Salvation is the escape from the body ("Overcoming Sin Nature of our physical bodies" as the Colonel harped constantly and even wrote a hymn about it)

3. Christ's true humanity was denied in two ways (1) Some said that Christ only seemed to have a body, a view called Docetism, from the Greek word dokeo (to seem) and (2) others said that divine Christ joined the man Jesus at baptism and left him before he died, a view called Cerinthianism, after its most prominent spokesman, Cerinthus. This view is the background of much of 1 John

4. Since the body was considered evil (spiritually dead), it was to be treated harshly. This ascetic form of Gnosticism is the background of part of the letter to the Colossians (2:21-23) ("Constant Spiritual Testing for the mature believer from God was just to get the believer ready to receive blessings, God spanking was to get the immature believer back to the family, Constant Testing from God was punishment for a Nation not in line with God's pre-determined plan of making some Nations "most favored" like the USA. - Theime in several books and also in The Integrity of God. And, military tactical euphemisms constantly employed and military training/conscription and even showcasing helicopters from the military in the parking lot...I forget which source I got that helicopter fact from but I will find it... Most will say Basic Training in the Military is pretty tough and "ascetic" and just so happens to be the nameing of "The Colonel's intro tapes. "Basic Training" Military Strength was central to Theime and Berachah's thrust. Another book favored by Themeites was "Military Strength".....naturally. Military Strength and in a quick index look there are no specific scriptures regarding military strength...though their are many scriptures about might, strength, protection and "The battle is the Lord." Of course the Colonel used in his Christians at Ease, Faith Rest Drill to get ready for another miserable tacticle course....)

5. Paradoxically, this dualism also led to licentiousness. The reasoning was that, since matter--and not the breaking of God's laws (1 John 3:4) ---was considered evil, breaking the law was of no moral consequence.

(God's laws were not big with this crowd nor anything regarding works or righteousness as spiritually dead anyways and saved already by Grace alone. Not by works but grace alone. Not by works but grace alone. Not by works but grace alone LEST ANY MAN SHOULD BOAST. Ergo "Grace free-loaders" my term for those who take this scripture out of original context. That work done to boast or for show is not work or righteousness.) Though, completely ignoring THE BIBLE AND GOD MAN.

Matthew 16 - 20 - "Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven. Do not think that I came to abolish the Law of the Prophets, I did not come to abolish but fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches other to do the same, shall be called least in heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven." Jesus fulfilled this emphasizing its deep, underlying principles, and total commitment rather than just obedience.

6. The Gnosticism addressed in the NT was an early form of the heresy, not the intricately developed system of the second and third centuries. In addition to that seen in Colossians and in John's letters, acquaintance with early Gnosticism is refelcted in 1,2, Timothy, Titus, and 2 Peter and perhaps 1 Corinthians.

(And later forms and more complex horrific forms would spring up like the Shoah. And, though the Colonel's heresy is not a mirror, much more complex....It is close enough for me. And he even took it upon himself to write a book regarding The Shoah.....Simultaneously.....But I will get to that later and my RIP regarding that as I have strayed from answering your question.)

Occasions and Purpose

John's readers were confronted with an early form of Gnostic teaching of the Cerinthisan variety. This heresy was also libertine, throwing off moral restraints.

("Morality is not the way. I am not saying don't be moral but what I am saying is (Let me guess?!!!) Not by work but faith alone lest any man should boast...Bobby Theime III" Simultaneously a supporter of the Moral Majority except...when back peddaling but again I am straying and will get to that soon enough.)

Consequently, John wrote this letter with two basic purposes in mind (1) to expose false teachers (2:26) and (2) to give believers assurance of salvation (5:13). In keeping with his intention to combat Gnostic teacher, John specifically struck at their total lack of morality. (3:8-10); and by giving eyewitness testimony to the incarnation, he sought to confirm his readers' belief in the Christ incarnate (1:3) Success in this would give the writer joy (1:4)

NASB

1 John 26-29 These things I have written, to you concerning those who are trying to deceive you. As for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him. Now, little children, abide in Him, so that when He appears, we may have confidence and not shrink away from Him in shame at His coming. If you know He is righteous, you know that everyone also who practices righteousness is born of Him.

Pseudoscience - In The Integrity of God.

“The Colonel did get one thing right which totally refutes his "science" up to this point. At our birth God breathes life into us. God does not have bad breath. And along we go remarkable, unremarkable, tempted, fail, succeed, and believe. And Christ has us in the palm of his hand the whole time. We are not here because of Lucifer.

Our imperfection and proclivities to sin are what they are. When one, genetically back tracks linearly, breaking things down, and puts them back together, what they arrive at, is not what is was, as that is impossible, from the mind of one like the Colonel's, and any imperfect mind.

I feel sorry for his son having to read what the Colonel wrote about him, "An unremarkable infant".

With the Mind of Christ, Hobbsian pessimism is impossible. As Christ saved us from these dark, evil, dalliances in ourselves. Jesus Christ, the ultimate Optimist. Poor Colonel, he owed his entire life to the snake, Lucifer perched in the tree. Then, in his back tracking he left the heart, spirit, joy, celebration, and optimism of the Divine out of our very Creation. Poor, poor, Tin Man. Such a Dark conception and Such a Dark Lord he chose. His thesis: Humans were a mistake and allegiance is to their Sin Nature. Their father, Satan. That is where back tracking linear; piece by taking piece of whole context of scripture leads one. When you break down a pen. It is no longer a pen. His instructors not only have doctrine which refutes his thesis in details but the Infinite Perfection of God would never make a mistake. And in his arrogance going against Bible doctrine he sought to impress his quest for understanding, which is a nightmare. (The Bible is a double edge sword.) That concept is also a rationalization for literalists of Genesis who unfortunately in their literal interpretation or misinterpretation give authority of their human existence to Lucifer. I am all too familiar with the Colonel's "science." It has so many holes to it. One major one being Sin Nature authored it. However, it after the fact loops around the necessity of Perfection as the connection to God. It is also in its human sin nature logical extreme the rationalization Hitler arrived at and (Dick Cheney). What humans fail to do time and again in their "reasoning minds" is to admit in their arrogance that they just do not know everything. I am very familiar with the "Colonel's Science" and it is all his interpretation which linearly from the ends to the means “makes sense” for his agenda. It is not Biblical doctrine. The Colonel I gather would not be a fan of "Intelligent Design" but more along the lines of a bumbling Lab Technician God who screws up and then must constantly engage in damage control. Basically, the philosophy of many scientists who spend too much time breaking things down and tend to miss the whole picture until it blows up in their face. Keep me in your prayers because at least the Colonel has everyone praying to the right Lord to forgive them from being born and giving allegiance to the wrong one. Poor Colonel. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The road to hell is paved with hell intentions.

THE ROAD TO HEAVEN IS NOT PAVED WITH HELL.”

“His foundation is wrong as it starts with Perfection possessing negative volition towards Perfection and therefore negates his further appeals towards positive volition. Though, his analysis of parts of the Bible after this fallacy is good whether or not he, himself, is positive or negative. His character emulates the foundation, not the pith or message of Christ or analysis of some of the Bible. Many of his followers do the same. The result is many who do not embody the message or Mind of Christ. The running start provided, Negative Volition or Negative Incarnate as their origin.

The Colonel's flawed foundation furthers the mitigation of Perfect Grace, by making Perfect Grace dependent on Negative Volition, which negates Perfection as a constant without an end, or beginning and dependent on Imperfection. And, if human's purpose is within the context of winning the Angelic Conflict as Jesus as their Leader, then remaining in the Garden as two perfect individuals who fell from Grace by making a wrong choice, which is not consistent with perfection in and of itself, would mean no Angelic Conflict to win and no need for "dependent" Perfect Grace. Moreover, if humans were perfect in every way in the garden then there would be no need to test this perfection. Perfect in every way with free will never makes a choice other than perfection. And, if indeed, the Angelic Conflict is pre-human history then remaining in the garden was not the Plan of God. That is, unless, the Angelic Conflict was only born when perfect in every way made an imperfect choice, and therefore negates it as pre-history, and requires Perfect Grace and many followers to resolve it.

Do you see how many conflicts reside in the Colonel's linear thinking?”


“There are serious flaws to the Colonel's undertaking and it largely rests on the method he used. His attempt to balance the equation by starting with a linear conception, employing reductionism, back tracking linearly with the singular and reduced, then filling in the blanks to achieve a pre-determined solve. Only to further expose how his equation is not balanced nor sound by the theories he espouses. What appears to his followers is that he has faith reduced to a science. This man in all actuality has no concept of science. I would even say the very elementary basics he lacks. Then using different nomenclature to separate himself from other Pastor's, he presents something which appears unique although it merely is different verbiage. Though his whole cosmology is seriously flawed, if it is a method which is a catalyst for people to embody the solve, than this is positive. However, “a house built on sand” has many lasting problems.

Check your premise.”

“The "Colonel's Science" is very attractive to the sugar, spice, and everything nice, who love the bad boys through and through, snakes, snails, and puppy dog tails. It unfortunately leaves Christ out of the mix except to be the ultimate scapegoat and rationalization to keep up the bad work that feels so good.

Lies regarding the sexes and the complexity of both male and female under sovereign God.

Not to mention, all that discussion of Christ's life and that bit about growing up, "When I was a child I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, but when I became a man I put away childish things." 1 Corinthians 13:11

And that includes your first chemistry set, proclivity for bad, and enough sinning and leisure time to gum up the works with bogus science and Jr. High linear algebra.

Then, he trips himself up even further by stating anyone can be a believer even if they do not state it, and then draws line upon line regarding unbelievers and who they are. Then, he fills his diatribes with human viewpoint regarding politics of the time, and then makes claims that he is not political. Having the same effect as Bob Dylan had when he claimed he was not political to the Press after releasing his song, "War".

Then, he bites his own bullet regarding adultery as a Sin Unto Death so that the husband's of wives he may be interested in for himself, ...their husband's will keep to themselves so he can have free reign. And or have the congregation do a wife swap/husband swap swinging cult bonanza.

And then, what he failed to realize until too late is that the kernels of truth always usurp Colonels, Generals, Captains, and Majors. Jesus was a Carpenter's son and the battle is His.”

Truthtesty, "The Colonel" is/did not come out and say, "I am a heretic." He did not have to...He screamed it.

And, even if he did, he covered all his bases with his devotees....Maybe he is "Reverting" a bit but we can't surpass his spiritual maturity of our Pastor as he said.

He could have slit a baby's throat on the steps of his Church and his devoted followers would still be his followers. I believe even in The Integrity of God from reflection as I emailed this when I read it...."He's covered all his bases including his character. Because it says in this book that some of the greatest people serving God have awful and dislikeable personalities." I'd have to look up the exact quote but I bb'd it. So much for all the scriptures warning of anger, encouraging mercy, hositlity "A harsh word stirs up anger" or a common saying not Biblical "Fanatics are those who beat a dead horse." And we know in this quote who the Fanatic was and who were the dead horses.

thereporter