Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
radaph
()
Date: May 15, 2008 11:20PM
Quote
TruthtestyQuote
Truthtesty
Truthtesty:
You shouldn't be surprised. You think I am going about this all wrong? Seriously radaph, then prove what I am saying is wrong. It's not. Bring the facts. Bring your best logic.
Just because it's the truth (though I am not implying that everything you are saying is true) doesn't mean that saying it is a good idea. For example, if you are witnessing to an unbeliever. And you start out by telling them "YOU'RE GOING TO HELL, IF YOU DON'T ACCEPT JESUS CHRIST!!" That is a true statement, but not very tactful, and not a good approach if you really want to win this person for Christ.
If you malign a person, you may in fact be speaking the truth, but maligning is still sinful.I really don't have time for that. I thought I had said it before. If I didn't, well then I've said it now.Quote
I never saw where you said "I respect you as a person". Would you point that out?I am not denying that Jesus Christ had to die physically for God's plan of salvation to be completed. I am just saying that if we are truly going to pick it apart and determine what the moment was that salvation was accomplished, I think it was when Jesus said "It is finished." Or more specifically, it was in progress when He said "My God, My God, why have You forsaken me?" And both of those things happened before He physically died. To make His literal blood the object of worship, is in my opinion, idolatry. You have only proven that RBT-Jr. taught contrary to what DTS teaches. Who ever said DTS is always right? I do believe in the power of the blood. But what I mean when I say those words is not a literal thing. Just like, I'll sing the old hymn "power in the blood" without missing a note. But I don't mean it literally. Just like the bible says that the wine taken in communion is somehow transubstantiated into Christ's real blood. But the overwhelming majority of protestant churches teach that this is symbolic as well, and not literal. But what did Jesus literally say? "This is my blood." But the disciples got the point he was making, and benefitted from the experience without turning it into an idolatrous ritual.Quote
Doctrinal statement of Dallas Theological Seminary:
Quote:
We believe that Satan is the originator of sin, and that, under the permission of God, he, through subtlety, led our first parents into transgression, thereby accomplishing their moral fall and subjecting them and their posterity to his own power; that he is the enemy of God and the people of God, opposing and exalting himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped; and that he who in the beginning said, “I will be like the most High,” in his warfare appears as an angel of light, even counterfeiting the works of God by fostering religious movements and systems of doctrine, which systems in every case are characterized by a denial of the efficacy of the blood of Christ and of salvation by grace alone (Gen. 3:1–19; Rom. 5:12–14; 2 Cor. 4:3–4; 11:13–15; Eph. 6:10–12; 2 Thess. 2:4; 1 Tim. 4:1–3).You don't need to keep making this point. I am not arguing with this fact. And for the record, in the doctrinal statement you quoted, the word "literal" is not found. So you are assuming something that is not really stated.Quote
Thieme denies the efficacy of literal Shed Blood of Christ, Chafer does not.I have no problem with everyone reading my posts, and even commenting on them. You are the only one here with a bad attitude that I've seen so far. To keep this in PM's would exclude all the many mature, intelligent forum members who's opinions I actually do care about. But keep in mind thought this forum is open to you, just because I post here doesn't mean I am specifically addressing you. So try not to take my statements so personally, unless (like this one) it is addressed to you, specifically.Quote
You brought me in on this PUBLIC FORUM when you said Thieme wasn't evil. He is. I said I take issue with some of your statements which by the way you made public to everyone on this forum. If you just wanted to talk to Mile2 then why didn't you PM him? You shouldn't be surprised. Other than making excuses for Thieme are thier any errors of Thieme's that you would like to point out? For correcting the Word?I've never told Thieme anything other than "hello." He is pretty unaccessable to most of his congregation. Which I certainly disagree with, but again, publically maligning him for that is not the correct response, in my opinion. Thieme does not misrepresent the gospel. I have heard countless versions of the gospel, and Thieme is in agreement with every other I've ever heard, with one exception, his is more clearly presented, which is a very good thing, and not clouded by metaphors and lofty speaking which often overcomplicates what God intended be a very simple message. Think about it, saving-faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ is the very first baby-step you will take in your spiritual life as a newborn believer. At that point, you probably know very little to nothing about the plan of God for you, or any deep theological principles or doctrines. Many are small children when they accept Jesus Christ. And if God truly wants everyone to be saved (which scripture clearly states that He does), wouldn't that include people with learning disabilities, mental retardation, etc.. Therefore, wouldn't a gracious God make the salvation message as clear and simple as possible? He would, and He did. But most pastors overcomplicate the heck out of it, by using poetic phrases like "you must ask Jesus into your heart" or "invite Him to be lord of your life" or "he is knocking, you must just open the door." or they use biblical words like "repent" but they don't explain them. How do you invite someone into your heart? That sounds lovely, but most people have no clue what it means. And since you are wanting them do be saved, shouldn't you make it easier for them by making the message clear and simple. Thieme did this. He put away the frivalities, and cut the message down to five very simple words "faith alone, in Christ alone." Very simple, yet very profound, which is not surprising since it straight out of the bible. He cut to the chase, and many thousands I'm sure have eternal life as a result. Don't cheapen that just because you have a personal vedetta.Quote
radaph quote "and I don't respect your attitude, because I think there is no justification for it"
Is that what you told Thieme about his disrespectful attitude? When Thieme called people "dummies" from the pulpit? when Thieme called black people "melanoderms" from the pulpit? When Thieme invalidated people's personal study of the Word of God from the pulpit? etc... I respect what is respect worthy, so far you and Thieme don't fit the bill. For Thieme to misrepresent the gospel for years on end is evil. For Thieme to misrepresent the truth that he had the support of Bauer Ardnt Gingrich and Dr. Walvoord, FOR YEARS and yet? Thieme misrepresented thier words as support for his "junk theology". If Thieme would misrepresent the words of MEN for his "junk theology" then what makes you think Thieme would not misrepresent the Word of GOD to support his "junk theology"?So you and dr. Wall have both seen it? So 2 people, out of how many thousands? I am not denying that there may be people who attend Berachah who suffer from these psychosis (though in my 30 years, I've never seen it), but no rational person could blame the Col. for this. This is so ridiculous that I am done discussing this point with you. And don't quote Wall's comments about it either. If he believes this rubbish, then he is ridiculous too.Quote
Emotional problems and schizophrenia? It's true I have seen it. Dr. Wall who has a doctorate degree from Dallas Theological Seminary withnessed it. Quit trying to act like thier is not a huge problem with that church when thier is a HUGE PROBLEM.Are you now, or have you ever been a church elder at Berachah church? Did you take your concern to an elder? Was any Berachah church elder ever involved in this process that you've started?Quote
No. Exactly not. What part of the following do you not understand? 1 Timothy 5:19 Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. 20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. 21 I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.Read my above statement.Quote
It doesn't say in private. It says REBUKE BEFORE ALL. That's public. Thieme liked to keep the truth from getting out like all cult leaders by keeping falsehoods "private".I trusted Thieme as a child, because my parents trusted him. Had you been in my sitation, you would've done the same, that is assuming you had a good relationship with your parents, and respected them. Once I became aware that I had been misled, I took responsibility for my own mistakes, confessed them to God, and moved on. Never once did I malign anyone for my unfortunate circumstances. You are doing a heck of a lot more than just "exposing the facts." According to you Dr. Wall has already exposed the facts, and you apparently think he did an exceptional job of this. So if it's been done, why are you still doing it? From little exerts that you've posted from Dr. Wall, he seems to have somewhat of an axe to grind as well, but even he doesn't resort to tasteless insults, and maligning slander as you have. He kept it professional (though I admit I have only read exerts). You would do well, to follow his example. Or better yet, instead of just parroting him, maybe you should just promote his book instead. Why repeat what's already been said?Quote
You need to learn to check sources and facts. You trusted Thieme before your checked out Thieme's sources. That's your fault. Thieme is in trouble because of Thieme. That is the reason Thieme is in trouble, BECAUSE THIEME MISREPRESENTED THE FACTS HIMSELF. I JUST EXPOSE THE FACTS. I DIDN'T MAKE THIEME MISREPRESENT THE TRUTH. THIEME DID THAT ALL ON HIS OWN.Well, I didn't convert for your benefit, so quite frankly I don't give a rat's buttock what you think of my "so-called" conversion. I have already explained in great detail what I take issue with about Thieme's ministry. If you didn't read it, that is your problem. Go back 4 or 5 pages, and you'll see it. What you won't see is me attacking a fellow brother in Christ, whom Jesus Christ himself commanded me to "love as myself." Criticism does not have to exclude love. But your's seems to. What do you want to happen? What would make you happy? Do you honestly care that RBT would see his errors, and get right with God about the issues you keep mentioning. Do you have any concern at all for his spiritual well-being? If you do, you hide it well.Quote
I am highly skeptical of your so-called "conversion". You are highly critical here, but what have you to be critical of Thieme about? The 1st part in dealing with a problem is admitting there is a problem.
Truthtesty
I have no problem with the fact that you feel you were misled for a time, and that you want to keep others from being misled. I just think your methods are not loving, and certainly not biblical. You can't justify hate. Jesus Christ died for His enemies. We should have grace for our enemies, let alone misguided brothers in Christ (who according to scripture are not enemies at all). Surely you won't argue that scriptural fact.
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
rrmoderator
()
Date: May 16, 2008 12:03AM
To whom it may concern:
Again, let's dial it back a bit, i.e. the personal attacks.
Everyone on this thread should stay focused on the topic and not personal observations about members here.
Again, let's dial it back a bit, i.e. the personal attacks.
Everyone on this thread should stay focused on the topic and not personal observations about members here.
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: May 16, 2008 09:23AM
radaph qoute (May 14, 2008 03:03PM) Why does that not surprise me? Seriously Truth, I've said it before and I'll say it again. I respect you as a person, and I understand on a very small level where you are coming from. But I think you are going about this all wrong, and I don't respect your attitude, because I think there is no justification for it. That is why I have not addressed you in any of my posts. And the only reason I am now is because I wish to defend myself, since you've taken it upon yourself to "correct" me.
Truthtesty: You really are not coming across as credible. The casual observer can see the hypocrisy in your statements.
1st you say:
radaph quote (May 14, 2008 03:03PM) Why does that not surprise me? Seriously Truth, I've said it before and I'll say it again. I respect you as a person, and I understand on a very small level where you are coming from.
Then just 1 brief sentence away is this statement:
radaph quote (May 14, 2008 03:03PM) That is why I have not addressed you in any of my posts.
Hello?
Then I questioned you about it, because you didn't say that before, becuase according to your own witness testimony there was no previous post addressed to me BEFORE the current one.:
Truthtesty(May 15, 2008 06:36AM): I never saw where you said "I respect you as a person". Would you point that out?
radaph quote (May 15, 2008 05:20PM): I really don't have time for that. I thought I had said it before. If I didn't, well then I've said it now.
You thought you said it before? When not more than 1 sentence away you said"
radaph quote:(May 14, 2008 03:03PM) That is why I have not addressed you in any of my posts.
Truthtesty: Hello? This is not competent. You call into question my testimony and Dr. Wall's? You say that my witness and Dr. Wall's witness is rubbish and ridiculous? What are you smoking? Someone would have to insult thier own intelligence to take your witness seriously.
Truthtesty
Truthtesty: You really are not coming across as credible. The casual observer can see the hypocrisy in your statements.
1st you say:
radaph quote (May 14, 2008 03:03PM) Why does that not surprise me? Seriously Truth, I've said it before and I'll say it again. I respect you as a person, and I understand on a very small level where you are coming from.
Then just 1 brief sentence away is this statement:
radaph quote (May 14, 2008 03:03PM) That is why I have not addressed you in any of my posts.
Hello?
Then I questioned you about it, because you didn't say that before, becuase according to your own witness testimony there was no previous post addressed to me BEFORE the current one.:
Truthtesty(May 15, 2008 06:36AM): I never saw where you said "I respect you as a person". Would you point that out?
radaph quote (May 15, 2008 05:20PM): I really don't have time for that. I thought I had said it before. If I didn't, well then I've said it now.
You thought you said it before? When not more than 1 sentence away you said"
radaph quote:(May 14, 2008 03:03PM) That is why I have not addressed you in any of my posts.
Truthtesty: Hello? This is not competent. You call into question my testimony and Dr. Wall's? You say that my witness and Dr. Wall's witness is rubbish and ridiculous? What are you smoking? Someone would have to insult thier own intelligence to take your witness seriously.
Truthtesty
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: May 16, 2008 10:16AM
psssThe statement "Blood of Christ" represents to "me" the work of Christ on the cross when he was judged for the sins of the world. I believe that the Blood of Christ is apart of the gospel describing the work of Christ on the cross relating back to the OT types and shadows taught in the age of Israel. What work did he do ? He died a spiritual death so that we who believe the Good News about him could have a spiritual life by being born again. He also died a physical death so that he could be raised as King of Kings and Lord of Lords and fulfill the prophycies of the Old testament as well as being the head of the Church, his Royal Family. But he did not die from bleeding to death like the OT lambs on the altar bled to death from their shed blood.
Truthtesty: Prove it. Prove Jesus did not die by bleeding to death. You can't. In any case Jesus still Shed Blood. And if you believe in the Virgin Birth, then it was the Blood of God. The scientists in the documentary "crucifixtion" from the History Channel International said Jesus Shed his blood through a hole in his heart into the pericardial sac. Dr. Chafer also mentions a theory very close to this, in Systematic Theology. Thus the term "Bleeding heart".
And as Chafer said:
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Blood Vol. VII, Page 52
1. Sacrificial. The all-inclusive declaration on this point which sums up the Old Testament order and the New avers that “without shedding of blood is no remission” (Heb. 9:22). It is shed blood which has always been required for deliverance, and thus it was in the type and the antitype, Christ in His crucifixion. The mystery of all that enters into the required blood sacrifice for sin cannot be traced through to its end. It traverses more of unknown realms than it does this realm. The truth of God’s requiring a blood sacrifice as the righteous ground for the remission of sin was established beyond all dispute in Old Testament times. Though the many offerings sustained no efficacy in themselves to take away sin, they did speak of the immutable necessity of a ransom or redemption by blood as a cure for sin. To challenge this fact is not only to overlook the teaching set forth in the types and the New Testament’s direct explanation of Christ’s death, but it is to assume that the human valuation of sin may be equivalent to the divine evaluation. What authority, indeed, has a mortal—a mere creature—to arrogate 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? The glorious message is, indeed, that efficacious blood has been shed and that men are invited to receive the value of it, that Christ’s blood was shed as a sacrifice which God Himself provided to meet His demands against sin, and that this way of dealing with sin, from Abel’s lamb to the day of Christ’s death, is the only interpretation which fully and rightly construes all that the Bible presents on this its central theme of salvation.
You can believe what you want, but most of Protestant Christianity would say your denying part of the Work of Jesus. Perhaps you would be happier as an Ayran Christian who does not believe in Jesus' Divine Blood.
I have no evidence one way or another whether Kittle and Behm were Aryan or not. I do have evidence they were both German Nazis that supported Hitler. And that Dr. Kittle was imprisoned as a war criminal for 17 months, by Allied Forces after WWII, for trying to justify through greek exegesis a "christan moral reason" to terminate the Jews.
Do your own study.
Truthtesty
Truthtesty: Prove it. Prove Jesus did not die by bleeding to death. You can't. In any case Jesus still Shed Blood. And if you believe in the Virgin Birth, then it was the Blood of God. The scientists in the documentary "crucifixtion" from the History Channel International said Jesus Shed his blood through a hole in his heart into the pericardial sac. Dr. Chafer also mentions a theory very close to this, in Systematic Theology. Thus the term "Bleeding heart".
And as Chafer said:
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Blood Vol. VII, Page 52
1. Sacrificial. The all-inclusive declaration on this point which sums up the Old Testament order and the New avers that “without shedding of blood is no remission” (Heb. 9:22). It is shed blood which has always been required for deliverance, and thus it was in the type and the antitype, Christ in His crucifixion. The mystery of all that enters into the required blood sacrifice for sin cannot be traced through to its end. It traverses more of unknown realms than it does this realm. The truth of God’s requiring a blood sacrifice as the righteous ground for the remission of sin was established beyond all dispute in Old Testament times. Though the many offerings sustained no efficacy in themselves to take away sin, they did speak of the immutable necessity of a ransom or redemption by blood as a cure for sin. To challenge this fact is not only to overlook the teaching set forth in the types and the New Testament’s direct explanation of Christ’s death, but it is to assume that the human valuation of sin may be equivalent to the divine evaluation. What authority, indeed, has a mortal—a mere creature—to arrogate 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? The glorious message is, indeed, that efficacious blood has been shed and that men are invited to receive the value of it, that Christ’s blood was shed as a sacrifice which God Himself provided to meet His demands against sin, and that this way of dealing with sin, from Abel’s lamb to the day of Christ’s death, is the only interpretation which fully and rightly construes all that the Bible presents on this its central theme of salvation.
You can believe what you want, but most of Protestant Christianity would say your denying part of the Work of Jesus. Perhaps you would be happier as an Ayran Christian who does not believe in Jesus' Divine Blood.
I have no evidence one way or another whether Kittle and Behm were Aryan or not. I do have evidence they were both German Nazis that supported Hitler. And that Dr. Kittle was imprisoned as a war criminal for 17 months, by Allied Forces after WWII, for trying to justify through greek exegesis a "christan moral reason" to terminate the Jews.
Do your own study.
Truthtesty
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: May 16, 2008 10:57AM
psss quote Like I said, God my Heavenly Father led me to Pastor Thieme and NO one else led me there, period. So ergo leave it at that.
Truthtesty: Believe what you want. Thieme deceitfully handled the Word of God.
psss quote He helped me gather the tools for my own personal study as well and also with his teachings of RBT I've come to an understanding of the Bible.
Truthtesty: Thieme invalidated personal study. Thieme did not encorage it. Thieme said "Like it or not you are dependent on me" Cultic.
psss quote Even after listening to 50 -100 ministers on the radio and TV and books before Thieme, where none of them answered the questions I had and wondered about but Pastor Thieme answered most of them through ICE teaching I knew God answered my prayer for wisdom.
Truthtesty: Thieme's ICE teaching is errored.
psss quote Dr Wall's and LS Chafer did not answer the questions , Pastor Thieme did or helped me to find the answers. I give credit where credit is due and that means I will be honest with everyone about my happiness from learning God's wisdom from his word and the teachings of RBT. Is Dr Wall's a Pastor, is LS Chafer a Pastor?
Truthtesty: I question the answers you received but again, do what you want. Dr. Wall is a pastor with East-West ministries. Dr. Wall earned his doctorate degree from Dallas Theological Seminary. Dr. Chafer was one of Thieme's professors. Dr. Chafer also founded Dallas Theological Seminary, the same seminary where Thieme earned Thieme's masters. The same class that Thieme claimed to be valedictorian of. It's true, Thieme was valedictorian of his class, but with so many things like Thieme, he just forgot to mention that there were only 6 other people in his class at Dallas Theological Seminary. Also, if you included the doctorates in the same year of graduation as the masters then Dr. Ryrie bested Thieme for valedictorian. What may be a more accurate measure of Thieme's intelligence is that he was at best 4th and worst 21st in a class of 444 at the University of Arizona (1939-1940).
Truthtesty
Truthtesty: Believe what you want. Thieme deceitfully handled the Word of God.
psss quote He helped me gather the tools for my own personal study as well and also with his teachings of RBT I've come to an understanding of the Bible.
Truthtesty: Thieme invalidated personal study. Thieme did not encorage it. Thieme said "Like it or not you are dependent on me" Cultic.
psss quote Even after listening to 50 -100 ministers on the radio and TV and books before Thieme, where none of them answered the questions I had and wondered about but Pastor Thieme answered most of them through ICE teaching I knew God answered my prayer for wisdom.
Truthtesty: Thieme's ICE teaching is errored.
psss quote Dr Wall's and LS Chafer did not answer the questions , Pastor Thieme did or helped me to find the answers. I give credit where credit is due and that means I will be honest with everyone about my happiness from learning God's wisdom from his word and the teachings of RBT. Is Dr Wall's a Pastor, is LS Chafer a Pastor?
Truthtesty: I question the answers you received but again, do what you want. Dr. Wall is a pastor with East-West ministries. Dr. Wall earned his doctorate degree from Dallas Theological Seminary. Dr. Chafer was one of Thieme's professors. Dr. Chafer also founded Dallas Theological Seminary, the same seminary where Thieme earned Thieme's masters. The same class that Thieme claimed to be valedictorian of. It's true, Thieme was valedictorian of his class, but with so many things like Thieme, he just forgot to mention that there were only 6 other people in his class at Dallas Theological Seminary. Also, if you included the doctorates in the same year of graduation as the masters then Dr. Ryrie bested Thieme for valedictorian. What may be a more accurate measure of Thieme's intelligence is that he was at best 4th and worst 21st in a class of 444 at the University of Arizona (1939-1940).
Truthtesty
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
mile2
()
Date: May 16, 2008 01:48PM
mile2
PastorThiemeisGreat2me:
I am curious to know how you explain the selection of Bobby Thieme as pastor of Berachah, when this clearly violates scripture. (I Tim. 3:2--" A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife." Are you aware that Bobby has been married and divorced 3 times? Yet Col. Thieme supported the choice of his son to succeed him.
I have asked this question of 3 others who spoke in favor of Thieme on this forum and each one was unable to defend him, and shortly afterward left the forum. How do you address this blatant disregard for God's Word by Thieme and his congregation?
mile2 (
I think 1Timothy 3:2 is saying that a pastor should not be a polygamist, more than anything. I don't think it's saying he should'nt be divorced or remarried. Scripture makes it clear that there sometimes biblical justification for divorce. Do you know why Bobby got divorced, whether or not it was biblical? I don't.
Still the verse that keeps coming to my mind is this one:
"Judge not lest ye be judged" and also "he who is without sin, cast the first stone."
Pastors are gifted, but they are still just men. They sin too.
God forgave him, so should we.
Enough said about that.
Radaph:
I am wondering why you conclude that this verse refers to polygamy. Are you basing your opinion on Thieme's explanation? I find it strange that God would warn against polygamy here, when I can't think of any other passage in the epistles that deals with that subject. Thieme's teaching on this passage of 4 words then is that polygamy disqualifies someone from entering the ministry, but divorce does not. So logically if a polygamist wanted to be a church leader, all he would have to do is divorce all but one wife. In God's eyes he would now qualify. Does this make any sense at all?
Many Bible scholars discount the idea of polygamy in this verse, and in fact the Jerusalem Bible reads, "He must not have been married more than once.
Every time I ask a Thiemite to comment on this issue, the verse "Judge not lest ye be judged" is brought up. But logically speaking, if God does not expect us to examine the marital status of a potential pastor, then why would He make marital status a qualification for leadership in the church? The judgement we are expected to make is whether or not a man is qualified for the position of pastor.
God is not saying here that divorce is not allowed for a Christian. You assumed that I was taking that position. He is saying that having more than 1 wife disqualifies a candidate for the position of pastor. And why Bobby got divorced 3 times, or whether the divorces were due to his sin or not is certainly of no consequence. God is giving a list of qualifications for a man seeking a leadership position. We are to follow His instructions here, obeying His Word when it comes to the extremely important decision regarding the leadership of the body of believers.
This Word was violated by Col. Thieme and his congregation when they chose Bobby as the new pastor of Berachah. Thieme's personal desires superseded God's command.
Just an additional thought-- I find that every Thiemite on this forum has trouble looking at scripture in a logical way, as evidenced by your reference to the " Judge not" verse, which makes no sense in the context of this scripture. I think this is probably due in large part to the fact that critical thinking is suspended when a person passively listens for many hours a week to Thieme's teachings.
Looking forward to your response,
mile2
PastorThiemeisGreat2me:
I am curious to know how you explain the selection of Bobby Thieme as pastor of Berachah, when this clearly violates scripture. (I Tim. 3:2--" A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife." Are you aware that Bobby has been married and divorced 3 times? Yet Col. Thieme supported the choice of his son to succeed him.
I have asked this question of 3 others who spoke in favor of Thieme on this forum and each one was unable to defend him, and shortly afterward left the forum. How do you address this blatant disregard for God's Word by Thieme and his congregation?
mile2 (
I think 1Timothy 3:2 is saying that a pastor should not be a polygamist, more than anything. I don't think it's saying he should'nt be divorced or remarried. Scripture makes it clear that there sometimes biblical justification for divorce. Do you know why Bobby got divorced, whether or not it was biblical? I don't.
Still the verse that keeps coming to my mind is this one:
"Judge not lest ye be judged" and also "he who is without sin, cast the first stone."
Pastors are gifted, but they are still just men. They sin too.
God forgave him, so should we.
Enough said about that.
Radaph:
I am wondering why you conclude that this verse refers to polygamy. Are you basing your opinion on Thieme's explanation? I find it strange that God would warn against polygamy here, when I can't think of any other passage in the epistles that deals with that subject. Thieme's teaching on this passage of 4 words then is that polygamy disqualifies someone from entering the ministry, but divorce does not. So logically if a polygamist wanted to be a church leader, all he would have to do is divorce all but one wife. In God's eyes he would now qualify. Does this make any sense at all?
Many Bible scholars discount the idea of polygamy in this verse, and in fact the Jerusalem Bible reads, "He must not have been married more than once.
Every time I ask a Thiemite to comment on this issue, the verse "Judge not lest ye be judged" is brought up. But logically speaking, if God does not expect us to examine the marital status of a potential pastor, then why would He make marital status a qualification for leadership in the church? The judgement we are expected to make is whether or not a man is qualified for the position of pastor.
God is not saying here that divorce is not allowed for a Christian. You assumed that I was taking that position. He is saying that having more than 1 wife disqualifies a candidate for the position of pastor. And why Bobby got divorced 3 times, or whether the divorces were due to his sin or not is certainly of no consequence. God is giving a list of qualifications for a man seeking a leadership position. We are to follow His instructions here, obeying His Word when it comes to the extremely important decision regarding the leadership of the body of believers.
This Word was violated by Col. Thieme and his congregation when they chose Bobby as the new pastor of Berachah. Thieme's personal desires superseded God's command.
Just an additional thought-- I find that every Thiemite on this forum has trouble looking at scripture in a logical way, as evidenced by your reference to the " Judge not" verse, which makes no sense in the context of this scripture. I think this is probably due in large part to the fact that critical thinking is suspended when a person passively listens for many hours a week to Thieme's teachings.
Looking forward to your response,
mile2
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
mile2
()
Date: May 17, 2008 12:11AM
PastorThiemeisGreat2me:
I originally asked you the question about Bobby being selected as pastor of Berachah. Do you intend to respond, or will you be the 4th Thiemite who leaves the forum, unable to defend Thieme?
mile2
I originally asked you the question about Bobby being selected as pastor of Berachah. Do you intend to respond, or will you be the 4th Thiemite who leaves the forum, unable to defend Thieme?
mile2
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: May 17, 2008 12:39PM
radaph quoteVery few if any gospel verses in the bible even bring up the subject of Christ's blood, thus proving that it isn't necessary to understand all about that subject to be saved.
Truthtesty: Oh? 1 Peter 1:19? Proving? Well so your criteria is "Very few if any gospel verses in the bible even bring up the subject"? Oh ok so from your criteria are you aware? that would exclude spiritual death?
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.
And? it was not a "satanic plot" to "attempt to obscure the importance of spiritual death" as Thieme fictionalized.
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: COMPLETE THIEME FALSEHOOD AND CONTRADICTION. The Bible simply doesn't mention spiritual death that much. PERIOD.
But? what has Thieme done? Thieme has convinced you that you are the only set of christians who know the "real christian truth". Thieme said spiritual death is being attacked by satan. And Thieme convinced you that it was up to you to save the United States of America. Ride Paul Revere ride! Save America from satan's lie! The truth is the Bible simply doesn't mention spiritual death that much.
Cultic.
Also radaph I question your whole premise of "proof by frequency of revelation". If God said some thing ONCE, then that means GOD meant it. 1 Peter 1:19. Just because it takes repetitive programming from Thieme for what Thieme says to "seem real" to you, doesn't mean that "repetition" is the truth.
Joseph Gerbles (sic), the Nazi propaganda minister said, 'Repeat anything enough times loudly enough, no matter how untrue it is, and people will begin to believe it...."
Also the "spiritual death" of Christ is just as "mystical" as His Shed Blood:
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 3, Page 53 : The Son cries, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Ps. 22:1; Matt. 27:46), yet it is affirmed that it was the very God to whom He cried that was, at that precise moment, “in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself” (2 Cor. 5:19).
In Christ? but separated from Christ? Spiritual Death is quite a "mystery". Much like the "mystery" of the Shed Blood of Christ.
Truthtesty
Truthtesty: Oh? 1 Peter 1:19? Proving? Well so your criteria is "Very few if any gospel verses in the bible even bring up the subject"? Oh ok so from your criteria are you aware? that would exclude spiritual death?
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.
And? it was not a "satanic plot" to "attempt to obscure the importance of spiritual death" as Thieme fictionalized.
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: COMPLETE THIEME FALSEHOOD AND CONTRADICTION. The Bible simply doesn't mention spiritual death that much. PERIOD.
But? what has Thieme done? Thieme has convinced you that you are the only set of christians who know the "real christian truth". Thieme said spiritual death is being attacked by satan. And Thieme convinced you that it was up to you to save the United States of America. Ride Paul Revere ride! Save America from satan's lie! The truth is the Bible simply doesn't mention spiritual death that much.
Cultic.
Also radaph I question your whole premise of "proof by frequency of revelation". If God said some thing ONCE, then that means GOD meant it. 1 Peter 1:19. Just because it takes repetitive programming from Thieme for what Thieme says to "seem real" to you, doesn't mean that "repetition" is the truth.
Joseph Gerbles (sic), the Nazi propaganda minister said, 'Repeat anything enough times loudly enough, no matter how untrue it is, and people will begin to believe it...."
Also the "spiritual death" of Christ is just as "mystical" as His Shed Blood:
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 3, Page 53 : The Son cries, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Ps. 22:1; Matt. 27:46), yet it is affirmed that it was the very God to whom He cried that was, at that precise moment, “in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself” (2 Cor. 5:19).
In Christ? but separated from Christ? Spiritual Death is quite a "mystery". Much like the "mystery" of the Shed Blood of Christ.
Truthtesty
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
PastorThiemeisGreat2me
()
Date: May 17, 2008 05:15PM
Mr. Moderator if you edit out what I'm trying to say how will I get my point across? Please leave my explainations and rebuttals unedited.
Also the "spiritual death" of Christ is just as "mystical" as His Shed Blood:
Truthtesty
Pastor Thieme is Great 2 me: The Spiritual Death of Christ is NOT "Mystical" if you have enough correct Bible Doctrine in your soul to understand it as God the Holy Spirit reveals it to you. I understand it because the Holy Spirit has given me the understanding of it through categorical and exegetical truths from the word. But I believe understanding will increase as the wisdom of God increases and only God can measure how much of an undersatnding anyone has. It is the job of the Pastor to teach us so that it will increase. So do all believers have the Holy Spirit to be able to understand all doctrines? Yes. CULTS do not make such a claim. But will all understand it? No, but the more you study, listen and learn, the more wisdom one accumilitates and the mysteries will become revealed. (Eph 1:9 and 3:3-9) But those who reject authority of the Pastor-teacher will not come to a full understanding because they neither have the gift of Pastor-teacher or the tools to acquire that understanding resulting from exegesis. What is more real, what one sees with his eyes or the Truth that comes from the intake of his word. Answer: The truth from the Word. If you DO NOT understand it and want to make that statement then of course you are SPEEKING FOR YOURSELF. I can only speek for myself not ANYONE ELSE. Did Paul understand it? He wrote it did he not? He even had doctrine that he could not tell the Church on earth or write about.(2Cor 12:1-21).
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 3, Page 53 : The Son cries, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Ps. 22:1; Matt. 27:46), yet it is affirmed that it was the very God to whom He cried that was, at that precise moment, “in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself” (2 Cor. 5:19).
In Christ? but separated from Christ? Spiritual Death is quite a "mystery". Much like the "mystery" of the Shed Blood of Christ.
Truthtesty[/color]
PTIG2Me: God is a Trinity and God the Father and God the Son are individuals who function and have different roles in God's plan. How do I know that when I've never seen God before? The Just shall live by Faith (John 20:29; Gal 3:11) and categorical Bible Doctrine reveals that to me through the Holy Spirit.. (Do we take this under consideration when we approach those scriptures and the SPIRITUAL DEATH of Christ? Do Pastors exegete those passages with the doctrine of the Trinity in mind?).
God the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ came into the world as a perfect man to be the Last Adam and to purchase our salvation. Adam and the woman died spiritually when they disobeyed God so spiritual death was passed on to all mankind. But as many as received Christ by faith in the Gospel would be saved or born again becoming spiritually alive. (John 1:12)
That is accomplished NOT by asking but by TRUSTING and or BELIEVING in the Good News ie. the GOSPEL (Romans1:16). Since One can ask for something and not believe or trust one will recieve it (James 1:6 and 4:2) one can ask and not receive salvation. Therefore ruling out the FALSE way of Salvation of "ASKING Christ into one's heart. (Ephesians 2:8-10). Please State what the BIBLE says and do not follow the false way of Salvation. Paul NEVER stated that "Asking" is a way or means of Salvation but in (Acts 16:31) he stated the way, So Please follow the correct way. (John 3:36 and 5:24).
People trying to explain the Bible should be looking deeper into the way people are saved, if they agree that Asking Christ to come into their heart to be correct or a means of salvation. SHOW me that Scripture and prove that it is a way. Those who say RBT is a CULT might want to reconsider that position because he is correct in his teachings of SALVATION. So if one does not have the primary and elementary doctrines of salvation correct, How can ANYONE claim they are so knowlegable about more advanced doctrines from God's word. Also if you don't have salvation correct how can you claim spiritual awareness of or have understanding of the Mystery doctrines of Christ (Eph 3:3-9) ie including the Shed Blood Of Christ and what it represents. To me that would be more an insentive to accept other doctrine from that source than not. Therefore the accusation of Cultism toward those who do know and understand the truth, is false, PERIOD.
Research how many times the word BELIEVE is used in the Bible VS. how many times the word ASK is used, with reference to salvation. Asking comes after salvation and only believers can ask God for whatever.
Also concerning personal study, that is a limited function and we all need a Pastor because they should have acquired tools to help our understanding of God's word like:
Example: The words translated "IF" in the KJV or other English translations have 4 different Greek meanings, but all are translated using the one word "IF". Therefore unless you know which one is being used you can not end up with an accurate translation or meaning or understanding or application. Well your chances are 25%.So with a thorough evaluation of scriptures with the help of a qualified Pastor whom you trust we all can come to a unity of the Faith and doctrine in which God intended.
Truthtesty: Prove it. Prove Jesus did not die by bleeding to death. You can't. In any case Jesus still Shed Blood. And if you believe in the Virgin Birth, then it was the Blood of God. The scientists in the documentary "crucifixtion" from the History Channel International said Jesus Shed his blood through a hole in his heart into the pericardial sac. Dr. Chafer also mentions a theory very close to this, in Systematic Theology. Thus the term "Bleeding heart".
PastorThiemeIsGreat2Me: The Lord Jesus Christ, the God-man was on the cross for 6 hours but suffered spiritual death from 12:00 noon to 3 pm when the sins of the world were poured out on him (Mk 15:33-34 and 1Peter 2:24). As the Lord Jesus Christ paid the penalty for every sin, he revealed his spiritual death to the world by screaming "MY God MY God why have you forsaken me? (Matt 27:46 Mk 15:34 Ps 22:1). He was forsaken because He the Father made him Christ who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf.( 2Cor 5:21).
After the judgement of sin was complete Jesus Christ shouted (TETELESTAI) "IT IS fINISHED" in the perfect tense = finished in the past with the results that it goes on forever. The work for salvation (John19:30)
He did not bleed to death for if that were the case it would mean that the Jews and/or the Romans killed him and caused his death or took his life.
But Christ stated in (John 10:17-18), I lay down my life that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from me, but I lay it down on my own initiative...
Christ released his soul and spirit in physical death but not through bleeding to death or shedding his physical blood. (Jn19:30-37, to understand this passage fully you have to have some isagogics and understanding of Hebrew customs, something Pastors should be teaching; Matt27:50; Mk15:37; Lk 23:46; Ps31:5; Zech 12:10). Then his soul departed for Hades(Ps16:10; Lk23:43; Acts2:27; Eph 4:9) His Human Spirit went into the presence of the Father (Lk 23:46 Ps 31:5) and his Body went into the grave (Lk 23:53).
His Spiritual death does not deminish the importance of the physical death of Christ, 1Cor 15:14-17.
Also the "spiritual death" of Christ is just as "mystical" as His Shed Blood:
Truthtesty
Pastor Thieme is Great 2 me: The Spiritual Death of Christ is NOT "Mystical" if you have enough correct Bible Doctrine in your soul to understand it as God the Holy Spirit reveals it to you. I understand it because the Holy Spirit has given me the understanding of it through categorical and exegetical truths from the word. But I believe understanding will increase as the wisdom of God increases and only God can measure how much of an undersatnding anyone has. It is the job of the Pastor to teach us so that it will increase. So do all believers have the Holy Spirit to be able to understand all doctrines? Yes. CULTS do not make such a claim. But will all understand it? No, but the more you study, listen and learn, the more wisdom one accumilitates and the mysteries will become revealed. (Eph 1:9 and 3:3-9) But those who reject authority of the Pastor-teacher will not come to a full understanding because they neither have the gift of Pastor-teacher or the tools to acquire that understanding resulting from exegesis. What is more real, what one sees with his eyes or the Truth that comes from the intake of his word. Answer: The truth from the Word. If you DO NOT understand it and want to make that statement then of course you are SPEEKING FOR YOURSELF. I can only speek for myself not ANYONE ELSE. Did Paul understand it? He wrote it did he not? He even had doctrine that he could not tell the Church on earth or write about.(2Cor 12:1-21).
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 3, Page 53 : The Son cries, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Ps. 22:1; Matt. 27:46), yet it is affirmed that it was the very God to whom He cried that was, at that precise moment, “in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself” (2 Cor. 5:19).
In Christ? but separated from Christ? Spiritual Death is quite a "mystery". Much like the "mystery" of the Shed Blood of Christ.
Truthtesty[/color]
PTIG2Me: God is a Trinity and God the Father and God the Son are individuals who function and have different roles in God's plan. How do I know that when I've never seen God before? The Just shall live by Faith (John 20:29; Gal 3:11) and categorical Bible Doctrine reveals that to me through the Holy Spirit.. (Do we take this under consideration when we approach those scriptures and the SPIRITUAL DEATH of Christ? Do Pastors exegete those passages with the doctrine of the Trinity in mind?).
God the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ came into the world as a perfect man to be the Last Adam and to purchase our salvation. Adam and the woman died spiritually when they disobeyed God so spiritual death was passed on to all mankind. But as many as received Christ by faith in the Gospel would be saved or born again becoming spiritually alive. (John 1:12)
That is accomplished NOT by asking but by TRUSTING and or BELIEVING in the Good News ie. the GOSPEL (Romans1:16). Since One can ask for something and not believe or trust one will recieve it (James 1:6 and 4:2) one can ask and not receive salvation. Therefore ruling out the FALSE way of Salvation of "ASKING Christ into one's heart. (Ephesians 2:8-10). Please State what the BIBLE says and do not follow the false way of Salvation. Paul NEVER stated that "Asking" is a way or means of Salvation but in (Acts 16:31) he stated the way, So Please follow the correct way. (John 3:36 and 5:24).
People trying to explain the Bible should be looking deeper into the way people are saved, if they agree that Asking Christ to come into their heart to be correct or a means of salvation. SHOW me that Scripture and prove that it is a way. Those who say RBT is a CULT might want to reconsider that position because he is correct in his teachings of SALVATION. So if one does not have the primary and elementary doctrines of salvation correct, How can ANYONE claim they are so knowlegable about more advanced doctrines from God's word. Also if you don't have salvation correct how can you claim spiritual awareness of or have understanding of the Mystery doctrines of Christ (Eph 3:3-9) ie including the Shed Blood Of Christ and what it represents. To me that would be more an insentive to accept other doctrine from that source than not. Therefore the accusation of Cultism toward those who do know and understand the truth, is false, PERIOD.
Research how many times the word BELIEVE is used in the Bible VS. how many times the word ASK is used, with reference to salvation. Asking comes after salvation and only believers can ask God for whatever.
Also concerning personal study, that is a limited function and we all need a Pastor because they should have acquired tools to help our understanding of God's word like:
Example: The words translated "IF" in the KJV or other English translations have 4 different Greek meanings, but all are translated using the one word "IF". Therefore unless you know which one is being used you can not end up with an accurate translation or meaning or understanding or application. Well your chances are 25%.So with a thorough evaluation of scriptures with the help of a qualified Pastor whom you trust we all can come to a unity of the Faith and doctrine in which God intended.
Truthtesty: Prove it. Prove Jesus did not die by bleeding to death. You can't. In any case Jesus still Shed Blood. And if you believe in the Virgin Birth, then it was the Blood of God. The scientists in the documentary "crucifixtion" from the History Channel International said Jesus Shed his blood through a hole in his heart into the pericardial sac. Dr. Chafer also mentions a theory very close to this, in Systematic Theology. Thus the term "Bleeding heart".
PastorThiemeIsGreat2Me: The Lord Jesus Christ, the God-man was on the cross for 6 hours but suffered spiritual death from 12:00 noon to 3 pm when the sins of the world were poured out on him (Mk 15:33-34 and 1Peter 2:24). As the Lord Jesus Christ paid the penalty for every sin, he revealed his spiritual death to the world by screaming "MY God MY God why have you forsaken me? (Matt 27:46 Mk 15:34 Ps 22:1). He was forsaken because He the Father made him Christ who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf.( 2Cor 5:21).
After the judgement of sin was complete Jesus Christ shouted (TETELESTAI) "IT IS fINISHED" in the perfect tense = finished in the past with the results that it goes on forever. The work for salvation (John19:30)
He did not bleed to death for if that were the case it would mean that the Jews and/or the Romans killed him and caused his death or took his life.
But Christ stated in (John 10:17-18), I lay down my life that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from me, but I lay it down on my own initiative...
Christ released his soul and spirit in physical death but not through bleeding to death or shedding his physical blood. (Jn19:30-37, to understand this passage fully you have to have some isagogics and understanding of Hebrew customs, something Pastors should be teaching; Matt27:50; Mk15:37; Lk 23:46; Ps31:5; Zech 12:10). Then his soul departed for Hades(Ps16:10; Lk23:43; Acts2:27; Eph 4:9) His Human Spirit went into the presence of the Father (Lk 23:46 Ps 31:5) and his Body went into the grave (Lk 23:53).
His Spiritual death does not deminish the importance of the physical death of Christ, 1Cor 15:14-17.
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
PastorThiemeisGreat2me
()
Date: May 17, 2008 05:32PM
Well Mile2 you have decided that RBT3 is not the correct person to teach you because you have verses that You consider disqualifies him. So did you come to yur conclusion through the exegesis and isagogics of that passage? You have also made accusations that I have no proof are correct but that really does not matter in this case because if he is not suppose to teach he will be removed, if what you state is true. But if you are not correct in your evaluation then you lose not myself. His teaching is very good and I appreciate them. I can see why Berechah chose him. So does that answer your question?
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.