pss quote:
You are the one not really listenning and still unable to tell us one of the most basic Biblical truths that exist for the new or baby Christian or GROWING Christian and that is "HOW are you Filled with the Holy Spirit of God?"Truthtesty: What? I have heard everything Thieme had to say. But? I don't irresponsibly submit to Thieme's words. How? I already have shown HOW, on this forum.
pss quote:
Has any of your Pastors or teachers told you how it's done and have you done it? Your use of those other teachers quotes is fine but what have you learned to grow spiritually. GAP is a concept from the Word of God that works if you apply it but if you don't believe it you can't apply it you will remain ignorant to the truth and I'm referring to truth you can apply to your life i.e. wisdom.Truthtesty: It is you who is ignorant of the truth and GAP results in schizophrenia.
pss quote:
Those who can write about what Pastor Thieme taught have not benefitted because they did not believe it and there spiritual growth systems may not have been cracked up to what Thieme taughtTruthtesty: Thieme never attained the knowledge of Dr. Chafer. Dr. Wall easily surpassed Thieme and GAP results in schizophrenia.
pss quote:
or maybe did not give the mechanics which Thieme's has and has worked for me and many others.Truthtesty: Maybe? may? maybe? Here we deal with the facts. You in your cult follower defense of Thieme are making up possibilities with no facts to back them up. Don't try to make this personal bring and deal with the objective facts. And GAP results in schizophrenia.
I have already stated HOW on this forum. Thieme has not yet told you HOW. And because of the arrogant refusal to change to revealed truth and arrogant failure of his word study Thieme has created another a "false
absolute" cultic doctrine, which has caused schizophrenia.
Per Dr. Wall's doctoral dissertation: [www.texaswalls.org]
Since Thieme's analysis of the biblical terminology is incomplete, he has deduced the misconception that spirituality is an absolute. Some problems in his system immediately arise, of which he himself is already aware. If spirituality is an absolute, and if one enters into absolute control of the Holy Spirit by confession of known sins, then how is it that a believer can ever break fellowship with God; for, as Thieme puts it, "it is impossible for a person to sin who is under the control of the Holy Spirit." Thieme's only answer to this dilemma is that a Spirit-controlled believer, by an act of his volition, decides to stop being controlled by the Holy Spirit; then he sins. This, however, does not seem to answer the problem; for rebellion against the Holy Spirit is disobedience to the Scriptures and is therefore sin.
...
This evaluation of some of the ramifications of Thieme's absolute description of spirituality underscores the need for a careful analysis of the biblical terms, fellowship, spirituality and filling of the Spirit. Fellowship is
relational; spirituality has to do with life-style and mental attitude; and filling of the Spirit can refer either to a description of a life-style in relative terms or to a special filling for power in ministering God's Word. Thieme also has a far too limited view of the means of appropriation of the power of the Holy Spirit in the believer's life. To some degree, Thieme points his students in the right direction. The Holy Spirit cannot act through a life of a person who refuses to confess his sins. However, Thieme would do well to reread and take seriously Chafer's entire discussion of spirituality. Although Thieme refers to the issues of grieving and quenching the Spirit, as Chafer does, he has made some critical changes in Chafer's explanation of their meaning. Chafer taught that there were three conditions for true spirituality. First, the Christian is not to grieve the Holy Spirit (Eph.4:30), meaning that he should avoid sin and confess it when he does commit sin. Second, the Christian is not to quench the Holy Spirit (I Thess. 5:19); that is, he is to yield to the Holy Spirit's leading in his life. Finally, Chafer taught that one is spiritual as he walks in the Spirit (Gal. 5:16), living in "an unbroken reliance upon the Spirit." Obviously, there is more to being empowered by the Holy Spirit than just confession of sin. Confession makes the believer a usable vessel, but the yielded, dependent life enjoys greater and greater spiritual direction and power. Chafer's approach is much more in keeping with the statements of Scripture when considered in their contexts. For those careful students intrested in Chafer's discussion of spirituality and not protecting Thieme's errors:
Lewis Sperry Chafer's Systematic Theology
Chapter XV
CONDITIONS PREREQUISITE TO FILLING Vol. 6, Page 230
I. “GRIEVE NOT THE HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD” Vol. 6, Page 232
II. “QUENCH NOT THE SPIRIT” Vol. 6, Page 249
III. “WALK IN THE SPIRIT” Vol. 6, Page 260
Per Dr. Wall's doctoral dissertation: [www.texaswalls.org]
...However, there are two major weaknesses in Thieme's approach. First, his interpretation of 1 John 1 makes fellowship absolute and mechanical instead of relative and relational. Second, he fails to guard his definition of confession against practical abuse. Thieme's interpretation of 1 John 1 says that John is describing an absolute state into which one immediately enters at the moment he confesses known sins. However, when one examines the New Testament use of the word koinonia and the tenses which John uses in 1 John 1:7, one is struck with a different emphasis. Except in 1 Corinthians 1:9 (where one's eternal positional relationship with God is referred to), the normal connotation of koinonia is one of active, experiential, relational participation between two or more individuals involving something that they have in common.11 When John, therefore, speaks of having fellowship with one another and with God, he is describing a continuing, personal, experiential relationship. In this context he also states something that is frequently overlooked. He says that the people who are continually being cleansed (present tense of katharizo) are also the ones who are continually in fellowship with one another. To use Thieme's diagram, John is saying that the cleansing by the blood of Christ in the life of the believer is a continuing process for those who are continuing to be in the "bottom circle." 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 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."13The 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 In some cases it can even result in a rationalization of the continuing existence of sin16 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.Truthtesty: Thieme teaches a type of "Cult of Confession"
[
www.culteducation.com]
Closely related to the demand for absolute purity is an obsession with personal confession. Confession is carried beyond its ordinary religious, legal, and therapeutic expressions to the point of becoming a cult in itself. There is the demand that one confess to crimes one has not committed, to sinfulness that is artificially induced, in the name of a cure that is arbitrarily imposed. Such demands are made possible not only by the ubiquitous human tendencies toward guilt and shame but also by the need to give expression to these tendencies. In totalist hands, confession becomes a means of exploiting, rather than offering solace for, these vulnerabilities...Truthtesty