Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Date: May 18, 2008 02:33AM
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).
pss/Thieme: 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)
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY Vol I pg 378
"With prophetic vision He said, even before His death, “I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do” (John 17:4), and when He reached the moment of death He said, “It is finished” (John 19:30)"
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY Vol. III pg 87
"...the finished work of Christ. This term is derived from the words of Christ on the cross, namely, “It is finished” (John 19:30). There was no reference on Christ’s part by these words to the truth that His own life, service, or sufferings were coming to an end. It is rather that a specific undertaking committed to Him by His Father, which could not have begun until He was on the cross, was consummated. It is true that the Father had given Him a work to do in His three and a half years of service. To this reference is made in the words, “Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work” (John 4:34); “But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me” (John 5:36). In contradistinction to this, a specific work was committed to the Savior which began with His cross sufferings and ended with His death. It is to this that His words “It is finished” refer. Of this same saving work of the cross the Savior in His priestly prayer spoke when He said, “I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do” (John 17:4). That He could speak thus of a work which had not at that time even begun is explained by the fact that the whole of the Upper Room Discourse, including the priestly prayer, was dated by Christ in relation to the cross, the resurrection, the ascension, and the advent of the Spirit as though these momentous events were accomplished. What was wrought on the cross and finished when He died will be discovered only through an investigation into that which was included in His redemption, His reconciliation, and His propitiation."
Truthtesty: So therefore "it is finished" does not refer to spiritual death only.
pss/Thieme: 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.
Truthtesty: Jesus let himself be killed. Still you have no proof that Jesus did not bleed out into the pericardial sac, at the exact moment His Spirit left or that Jesus did not sense was nearing death.
Lewis Sperry Chafer Christology Vol. 7, Page 80 3. The Efficacious Sufferings, Death, and Burial of the Son of God. Considering these three events separately:
a. HIS SUFFERINGS. The evidence presented in John 19:28 intimates that the actual bearing of the judgments of sin fell upon Christ in the hours of His suffering which terminated in death. It was just before He said “It is finished” that John declares of Him, “Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst.” What was actually experienced by Christ in those six hours upon the cross cannot be known in this world by any man; yet the value of it is received by those who believe.
b. HIS DEATH. It was required of any efficacious sacrifice that it should be delivered unto death and the shedding of blood. The death of Christ is the antitype of every typical sacrifice and determined the nature of that particular type. Typical sacrificial deaths through bloodshedding were such as God required because of the truth that Christ would thus be sacrificed. The range of Biblical testimony respecting Christ’s death may be examined in seven divisions, namely: (1) types, (2) prophecies, (3) historical declarations of the Synoptic Gospels, (4) declarations of the Apostle John in his Gospel, Epistles, and Revelation, (5) declarations of the Apostle Paul, (6) of the Apostle Peter, and (7) of the Letter to the Hebrews.
If it be inquired, as constantly it is, Who put Christ to death? it may be pointed out that He was offered by the Father (Ps. 22:15; John 3:16; Rom. 3:25), of His own free will (John 10:17; Heb. 7:27; 9:14; 10:12), by the Spirit (Heb. 9:14), and by men—Herod, Pilate, the Gentiles, and Israel (Acts 2:23; 4:27). To this may be added that part in His death which was contributed by Satan (cf. Gen. 3:15). The death of Christ achieved a vast array of objectives. At least fourteen of these are indicated in this work under Soteriology (Vol. III).
c. HIS BURIAL. As the scapegoat type anticipated, Christ carried away the burden of sin into oblivion. He went into the grave a sin-bearer and He came out the Lord of glory.
pss/Thieme: 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...
Truthtesty: That is straight from Thieme's propaganda pamphlet. "Initiative" is not used. Initiative is a commonly used military term. Thieme frequently made military references ie "taking the initiative" "taking the objective". Jesus was following the Will of the Father.
John 10:18 (KJV) No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. Emautou
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY Vol. 3, Page 141
It is clearly taught in the New Testament that Christ’s death was wholly voluntary. The words of Christ are a final refutation of the Marturial theory: “From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day” (Matt. 16:21); “No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father” (John 10:18). It is also recorded that when He died He, as the Sovereign of life, dismissed His own spirit: “And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost” (Luke 23:46).
pss/Thieme: 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).
Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 7, Page 203 INTERPRETATION
The doctrine of interpretation contemplates the science of discovering the exact meaning of the Spirit Author as this is set forth in a given Scripture passage. Such a science may be described theologically as hermeneutics. To fathom this doctrine it is necessary to know and follow the recognized rules of Scripture interpretation...
Truthtesty: Notice Thieme makes no mention of his drastic violent twist of the scriptures away from his professor Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer. The "problem" as Thieme describes it is that it a pastoral problem of not learning enough isagogics or learning enough about Hebrew customs. How far out in left field is someone left to use thier discriminatory faculties? Thieme drives way out into the desert and says "accept what I say or get out of the car". Although, Thieme does quote Dr. Chafer many times in other places throughout his propaganda pamphlets, never once mentioning that Dr. Chafer completely and totally disagreed with Thieme on the subject of the efficacy of the literal Shed Blood. Thieme never once mentioned that Dr. Chafer would consider Thieme's teaching on this satanic. This leaves people in a very bad way.
pss: His Spiritual death does not deminish the importance of the physical death of Christ, 1Cor 15:14-17.
Truthtesty: That's not what Thieme taught back in the 1970s. Thieme taught that Jesus physically died for himself and not us. Easily refuteable. Thieme later changed it after a huge public uproar. But a pathetic false preaching at the time. Thieme should have been ashamed especially having a Masters degree.
One cannot look upon what Thieme preached on the Blood of Jesus, without realizing one thing is consistent about Thieme from 1969 onward regardless of how or what Thieme said he "learned more", Thieme attacked the Blood of Jesus. ATTACKING THE BLOOD OF JESUS IS THE ONE THING THAT THIEME HAS NOT CHANGED THROUGHOUT THE YEARS SINCE 1969. Thieme attacked the Blood of Jesus because of Catholics. Catholic democrats and liberal "bleeding hearts". Ultra-neoconservative Thieme attacked the beliefs of Catholics and threw the Blood of Jesus under the bus along with throwing Dr. Chafer and other Protestants under the bus. And Thieme did it with extreme predjudice, a "seared conscience". Society was out of control from all the war protests. Thieme's friend Senator Barry Goldwater was recently defeated by "bleeding heart" liberal Democrats. Thieme had to do something. What better way to politically attack "bleeding heart" liberals (other than direct attacks from the pulpit which Thieme did very often) than to attack and change thier faith in the literal efficacious Blood and thus convert them into neoconservatives? One cannot look upon what Thieme preached without realizing that Thieme misrepresented the Words of Walvoord and Ardnt and Ginrich. WITH EXTREME PREDJUDICE! WITH NAMECALLING PEOPLE "DUMMIES!" And leaving people in a desert nowhere no information land except Thieme's information.
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY Vol. 1, Page 117
V. CONSIDERATION OF ALL SCRIPTURE BEARING ON ANY GIVEN THEME
A right interpretation will also depend very largely on an induction being made of all that the Bible presents on a given subject. The conclusion must be no less than the consensus of that full testimony.
Thieme's false gospel is not harmonius with all scripture. You (and Thieme which you are copying) still have not proven that Jesus did not let His Blood drain out into the pericardial sac resulting in the physical aspect of death.
Intresting pss, I clearly distinguish what is Dr. Chafer's words and my words, Yet? You do not distinguish what is Thieme's words and your own. Have you no words of your own? Has Thieme ever made an error that you have noticed? Can you tell me a few things you just don't like about Thieme?
Truthtesty