GeneZ:

You have been warned repeatedly not to engage in personal attacks or "flaming," which is prohibited by the rules you agreed to before posting here.

Personal attacks have been edited from your posts.

Repeated rants have been edited from your posts.

Please stay within the rules.

You have said repeatedly that you wish to leave this thread and go elsewhere.

Please feel free to do so and post go wherever you wish.

But if you continue to post here abide by the rules.

Robert Thieme never demanded money. He never tried to run your life, outside of demanding the following of strict rules for manners while sitting in church. Even if he were old fashioned and too demanding to some? That did not make him a cult. It did make for a very unpleasant time for restless teens not wanting Bible teaching, who's parents made them attend.

The next thing I am about to say is very important to make note of. Please do.

You were told by Robert Thieme that you were free to accept or reject anything he had to say. But you were to do so after the service... not during.

Truthtesty will tell you that was the case. Its on tape many times. I do not know how he could miss it.




GeneZ



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/06/2007 04:42AM by rrmoderator.

Truthtesty.....


In case you are wondering. I am not asking you to stop here, and take this elsewhere. This stays right where it is.

I am asking to take elsewhere this one teaching you keep condemning here, to see how Christians will receive and will understand it.


If you are interested let me know.

To gene:

Once again you ramble on and on, but you evade answering the question.

Which Blood of Christ manual? Thieme wrote 5 manuals.

Thieme BOC 1972
There is no efficacy in the actual, literal, physical blood of Christ. The efficacy is in His SPIRITUAL DEATH - bearing our sins as our substitute.

November 17, 2007 03:25PMTruthtesty
Date Added: 01/13/2007
Posts: 384 Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.To the Forum:

Simply, if SPIRITUAL DEATH were the only aspect requirement, then why didn't Jesus just spiritually die (separate from the Father) as the Angel of Jehovah and resurrect?

Truthtesty: I asked gene this question many times. gene was evasive. Finally gene PM'd this to me in a "private message"

gene "If he died as the Angel of Jehovah? It could not work. For the sins of our human flesh could not be imputed to the body of an angel who is a different substance."

What's the different substance, gene? Could that "different substance" be "flesh and BLOOD"? Answer this: "if sins could only be imputed through Jesus' "flesh and BLOOD" Would not that make "flesh and BLOOD" efficacious?"

This is very simple subject. These are very simple questions.


Truthtesty

Truthesty....


I decided I will debate you here on this one subject.

Under one condition.

That the moderators have to agree not to edit my posts. I want all what I say to be posted. And, when I send something, I want it to be posted. Not denied to be posted as too many of my posts have been denied seeing the light of day here.


GeneZ



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/06/2007 09:11PM by rrmoderator.

Quote
mile2


Gene:

You recently posted:
"It those here did not have their parents make them attend church when they did not want to go, you would not be getting these complaints. Notice how all who are complaining here were children or teenagers when they were made to attend church.

The church was an open door. You could attend if you wanted. If you desired to remain anonymous? No visitors cards were ever handed out for follow up. Its some of the children that hated it that are complaining here. Go back and see who they are. They did not attend out of free will. I would have hated it too if I were not wanting to attend and were made to."

I'm sure there are some young people who were forced to attend Thieme meetings and resented it. But that is NOT my case. So please stop using this false assumption to dismiss everyone's objection to Thieme.

mile2

If he was as bad as they claim? Why did you continue to attend?

For how long?


GeneZ

Quote
mile2


Gene:

You recently posted:
"It those here did not have their parents make them attend church when they did not want to go, you would not be getting these complaints. Notice how all who are complaining here were children or teenagers when they were made to attend church.

The church was an open door. You could attend if you wanted. If you desired to remain anonymous? No visitors cards were ever handed out for follow up. Its some of the children that hated it that are complaining here. Go back and see who they are. They did not attend out of free will. I would have hated it too if I were not wanting to attend and were made to."

I'm sure there are some young people who were forced to attend Thieme meetings and resented it. But that is NOT my case. So please stop using this false assumption to dismiss everyone's objection to Thieme.

mile2

Gene:

This is also NOT TRUE in my case. I attended Berachah as an adult of my own free will. In fact, I moved to Houston to attend. So you are wrong.

Yes, I was free to leave, but only did so after much damage had already been done. Brainwashing by Col. Thieme was a big factor. I was deceived and believed his teaching. It's taken many years to deprogram from all the false teaching (and one man's opinion) that was drilled into my head. Through God's infinite grace I finally escaped and He has led me into truth.

Truthlover

Quote
mile2

Gene:

You recently posted:
"It those here did not have their parents make them attend church when they did not want to go, you would not be getting these complaints. Notice how all who are complaining here were children or teenagers when they were made to attend church.

The church was an open door. You could attend if you wanted. If you desired to remain anonymous? No visitors cards were ever handed out for follow up. Its some of the children that hated it that are complaining here. Go back and see who they are. They did not attend out of free will. I would have hated it too if I were not wanting to attend and were made to."

I'm sure there are some young people who were forced to attend Thieme meetings and resented it. But that is NOT my case. So please stop using this false assumption to dismiss everyone's objection to Thieme.

mile2

In their case, I said it explains their emotional reaction. With the exception of you? They all spoke of how they attended as teens or children, and because of family they attended. Why have you kept quiet all this time about what I have been saying? You have been here since September.

For clarification.. Thieme did not have "meetings." That can be read the wrong way. It was church services.

I would never expect everyone to like being there. There were churches I did not want to attend. I simply did not go back.

My question to you would be (for your comment leaves me curious about something)

Were you free to attend, and not return if you wished?

Did anyone try to coerce you into not leaving?

Did anyone contact you afterwards and ask you why you no longer attend?

Were you pressured by others in any way?

And, most of all. Were you free to remain anonymous if you wanted no one to know you, or anything about you?

Again, I must ask...

If he was as horrendous as some here make him out to be? How long did it take for you to decide it was not for you?

If he was anything like they say? I would have been there once, and gone forever.

GeneZ

Quote
mile2
tonyatl:

I just had a brief comment on your post at the top of p.84 where you mentioned Thieme's claims of "doctrinal breakthroughs" and uncovering a lost truth about the blood of Christ. I would discount any supposed "breakthroughs" of Thieme based on the reasons in my posts at the bottom of p.62 and the top of p.65. But recently I came across a quote I found very interesting.

"The material blood of Jesus was no more efficacious to cleanse from sin when it was shed upon "the accursed tree" than when it was flowing in his veins." If someone had told me this was a quote from Thieme I probably would not have doubted it. But in fact it is a quote from Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of Christian Science., found in "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures", written in 1910.

So it appears this "breakthrough" concept wasn't as cutting edge as Thieme proposed it to be.

mile2

They were not even working in the same context of thinking.

"Christian Scientists hold that the reality of being and of all existence is spiritual, not material."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Science


As you can see in that quote, Christian Science teaches that the material counts for nothing. Therefore, the material blood of Jesus could not hold any significance for them.

In contrast..

Robert Thieme taught that physical blood was not what the term "blood of Christ" refers to in reference to the Cross. For, as I showed earlier. To the ancients? The term "blood" held various meanings that we do not use today.


Example?

Ezekiel 23:37 (New American Standard Bible)
"For they have committed adultery, and blood is on their hands. Thus they have committed adultery with their idols and even caused their sons, whom they bore to Me, to pass through the fire to them as food."


In Ezekiel 23:37? Those children were burned to death.

They did not bleed to death. Yet? How is it worded? That their blood was on the hands of those who sacrificed them to idols.

If we did not know the means to the childrens death? One today could easily assume that the children were somehow slashed and then bled to death. Yet? They were thrown into a fire alive and burned to death. Blood on their hands was the term. Yet, it was not the means of the childrens' death.


Matthew 27:24 (New American Standard Bible)
"When Pilate saw that he was accomplishing nothing, but rather that a riot was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd, saying, "I am innocent of this Man's blood; see to that yourselves."





That's the point.


GeneZ