Quote
Truthtesty
brainout quote

Quote

But of course, he must be wrong, for YOU didn't learn anything! LOLOL!

This is just a cold callous statement. It shows your true nature.

Truthtesty

Cold and callous?


This is cold and calloused:


[tinyurl.com]

Quote

[b:c85fd34043]There is no hope in christianity becuase it does not exist. It was a virgin-saviour bedtime story that went from Egypt to Persia and throughout the regions of that time. The Gnostic christians were persecuted in the 1st century becuase the knew christianity was a myth. The Literalist christians - Roman orthodox christians were stupid enough to take it literally. The Romans caught on that it was a religious way to subjugate and persecute people by getting them to do it to themselves - self-persecution - through thier own faith. Wow what a slick way to control people! The Romans were the 1st fanatics of christianity. Just look at the blood lust of the Coliseum. And now the modern day fanatics easily slip in and control.

Christianity is for people afraid of going to hell. PERIOD! Look at the History Channel special on Hell. hell has existed since before Judaism let alone chrisitianty. [/size:c85fd34043][/b:c85fd34043]

You want to see more cold and calloused?

[tinyurl.com]

Quote

[b:c85fd34043]Assuming your christian which from you words you appear to be, then there is a part of you that corrupting away at yourself. It is a fact of nature when you go against you nature and leave your senses to have faith in jesus who is against your nature. You are choosing to be someone your not and your real identity is left behind. Your real life is left behind. To make it more clear for you if you never confused yourself with idea of jesus you would not be the subhuman you are today.[/size:c85fd34043] [/b:c85fd34043]

Your words are not cold and calloused? Your words are Christian?

Folks? Who can see what this persons thinks like? And? He is one to tell us which Christian leader is no good???


In Christ, GeneZ


[/url]

Quote
Truthtesty

Yes it was how it was. The Deacons were gutless cowards and allowed Thieme's abuse.

Per Dr. Wall:
Thieme was called to the pastorate in May, 1950. His first Sunday may have been a preview of what was to come. Thieme met with the Board of Deacons at the close of his first morning service and demanded their immediate resignation with the threat of his resignation if his demand was not met. The dumbfounded deacons acceded to Thieme's demand, and the pastor became the dominant leader who brooked no challenge to his authority from that time forward.

Truthtesty

You are not even good at twisting the facts. The deacons that resigned were deacons before he got there. He wanted to start with a clean slate. A new ministry thrust.

The deacons that folowed were men quite often with authority of their own. Some were CEO's if I am not mistaken. And, one does not push around members of Special Forces and Seals. And, Airborne officers.

He had high ranking officers of all branches of the service in the ministry. I was at a good number of the Memorial Day conferences held in DC. High ranking officers were everywhere to be seen. Pentagon ranking men were in the seats listening. These types one does not push around and be like you claim Thieme to be. Colonels, majors and captains were to be found everywhere. Your typical push over types?


TT? You can only try and paint a picture for those who do not know what happened. And, in every major ministry there are always misfits and casualties emotionally. So you will always find some to back you up. But, if anyone took the time to examine what really took place? You would be laughed at.

Trouble for you, there are those here who do know. You can not twist the truth with us and have us believe it. For, we too, were there.

I have known several people on the inside of the ministry. They were the farthest things from being cowards and push overs. I feel sorry for you.

In Christ, GeneZ

Ephesian quote

Quote

Regarding the pastor-teacher issue, I have already posted the link to brainout's quite excellent and extremely lengthy discussion of this, but those in this forum want a "show me the verse" type proof.

NO DOUBLE-TALK! SHOW ME THE VERSE OR VERSES. YOU CAN'T. Your so proud of your EXEGESIS and holier than thou art intelligence. Cut the 1/2 stepping and prove it. I am saying Thieme is a cult because of this false doctrine of right-pastor, but no thiemite has proven otherwise.


Ephesians quote

Quote

There are multiple doctrines that you can't prove by playing "show me the verse". How about a "one verse proof" of the Trinity? IT DOESN'T EXIST! (and please don't give me 1 John 5:7, a late Vulgate addition) Yet this is the very nature and being of God we're talking about. The doctrine must be derived, just like thousands of other doctrines. This is what systematic theology is all about.

I am not playing. Show me the verse. It's funny you could say the same thing about Thieme, when it suited his convenience. So how many times did Thieme play "show you the verse"? and played "show you the verse in Greek" and played "show you the verse from a special text" Thousands. "Played you can't believe Catholics because of that verse..." I think it's funny, you arrogant people think you know so much but when it comes down to proving it. Well, uh, I don't have it... it's over there... You have to get this special lexicon.... uh yeah it's not propaganda it's symantic theology... I knew it when my bible teacher said it, but now I don't know.... Biblical theology what's that? Arrogance and "appearing intelligent" are just cover-ups.


Testy said:

I was wondering if brainout, Ephesians, and Genez, would like to explain Thieme's teachings about "A wife is obligated(by scripture) to do anything, AND THAT MEANS ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING that her husand wants from her in the bedroom" How's that for Thieme's emotional disturbance? Would you like to explain?

Quote

I'd be very interested to know if this is an actual quote, or just someone's paraphrase, but I can guarantee you one thing, if it is accurate it's very old. You know, I have Thieme's 1964 marriage series, and there are so many things on there that I disagree with (and some things down right ridiculous) that I don't know where to begin (oh, wait, I'm in a cult, I'm not suppossed to think like that).

Oh WOW! SO who cares about all the wives who were sexually abused in the 60's and 70's, Thieme got it right by the 80s. Oh wow that was close. Gee maybe if he wasn't such an arrogant control freak and he IF HE WOULD HAVE TALKED TO OTHER THEOLOGIANS, maybe he would have changed his mind by the 60's or 70's

Thiemites do not use thier own discernment, unless it's an emergency. Thier own morailty and judgement is placed (by self-perversion therfore destroyed) at a lower priority than thier higher priority of learning with Thieme. This is so they can "know", regardless of morality. They just have to "know"This line between morality and immorality, discernment or lack thier of, generally known as right and wrong, is further dysfunctionalized by Thieme's attacking was natural about them and attacking thier confidence in thier own biblical logic. Leading to an inferiority complex about studying the bible for themselves. To me this does not appear to be equipping the saints. Equip the saints means euip them and move out. Like basic training in the service. You are equipped and you move out. You don't fight wars by constantly attending basic training. Although, Thieme did spend all of WWII training.

They don't know how they know they just know. I say if you have to pervert yourself by submission to a corrupt control freak to "know", then what you "know" is not worth "knowing".

I knew of a lady who attended Berachah for 30 or 40 years and sat on the front row. She had an episode about 3 years ago where she thought everyone was out to get her. She said she thought there tiny cameras in the walls and "they" were watching her. I hear she is doing fine now after medicine and moving to Colorado Springs.

Ephesians quote

Quote

But I tell you what, Thieme's marriage series from 1987 (Marriage and Divorce, 1989, lessons 1038-1119 from Ephesians series) is one of the most brilliant works on the subject I've ever heard. It's almost a work of art.

Oh WOWY! and not a word about the sexually abused wives in the 60s and 70s

Ephesians quote

Quote

The series is simply amazing, I would recommend it to any Christian in a state of marriage.

WOWY! Still not a word. What was that famous saying y'all had? "Ignorance is bliss"?

Ephesians quote

Quote

Testy - Yes, information is always great. But you missed my entire point.

Yes. Ok what was your point? Lot's of info here.

Ephesians quote

Quote

By the way, if you don't believe the Bible (as per your statements about Paul) then how can you use disserations by believing Christians to show that another Christians is "wrong". I'm still not getting that. You elevate Jesus' statements above Paul's, but the Bible itself (most of NT written by Paul) is the evidence of Jesus' statements. There is scant extra-Biblical evidence that Jesus even walked the earth. At this point your logic is completely crumbling.

You wish! lol
My personal beliefs are my own. I have said before that if Paul's words contradict Jesus's words then Paul's words are "out the window". Pauline christians would like to give the appearance that all words in the bible are equal, but they are not. That's just common sense. I didn't need a special lexicon or a pastor to tell me that. The books of the bible were put together by a bloodthirsty murderous Caeser named Constantine, who worshipped Mithras (Sun-god worshipper at the time and did so for political unity) He was the one who said "By this sign conquer", not Jesus. So pardon me or don't pardon me for being very skeptical of Paul who was a self-confessed Roman citizen, murdered other christians, never met Jesus in the flesh, was not an orignal apostle, had a huge confrontation with Peter(rock) and James and ran(cheesed) to his Roman buddies to save his skin.

By the way if Jesus's words in the bible were the only words actually true, would that be good enough for you?

A lot of Dr. Wall's dissertation shows[u:037f2b93bd][b:037f2b93bd] approach [/b:037f2b93bd][/u:037f2b93bd]of learning. I said before 1 doesn't need to form a cult around arrogant opinions because of being a narcissitic control freak, then 10 or 20 years learn something new and change it, to learn the Truth. In the mean time hundreds maybe thousands are abused. The Truth stands on it's own, it doesn't need a cult to protect it.

Ephesians quote

Quote

And again, because a pastor has a doctrine one (or even many) doesn't agree with, that does not make him a cult.

I can agree with that.


Truthtesty

Quote
Truthtesty
NO DOUBLE-TALK! SHOW ME THE VERSE OR VERSES. YOU CAN'T. Your so proud of your EXEGESIS and holier than thou art intelligence. Cut the 1/2 stepping and prove it. I am saying Thieme is a cult because of this false doctrine of right-pastor, but no thiemite has proven otherwise.

How does that make him a cult, even if it were false doctrine?

Many independent churches place the authority of the church in the pastor.

I think you are really creating a straw man in attempts to squeeze RBT into a box. It does not matter if its a true doctrine or not. It does not make anyone a cult in itself.

Even if it were not a true doctrine? It still does not make him a cult. For he also used to tell everyone that many do not belong under him. That he was not the right pastor for them.

You missed those messages? You did not attended very often if you did.

He said [b:bc79d0fa60]on numerous occasions[/b:bc79d0fa60] that he was not the right pastor for them. That they may learn a few things from him, but they should find another church where they could feel comfortable.

But? For the irate ones who were self righteous? He had more choice words for them. For he did not take any guff. That always shocked the self righteous types. Here is one that we can not intimidate and bully!

I have been around that kind and they were downright nasty to be around when they did not agree with your thinking. They were kind of like how you are here towards those who do not agree with you. Like how you treated those in the History Channel forum who you perceived as being Christian.

Oh well. One day at a time.


In Christ, GeneZ

Quote
Truthtesty
You wish! lol
My personal beliefs are my own. I have said before that if Paul's words contradict Jesus's words then Paul's words are "out the window". Pauline christians would like to give the appearance that all words in the bible are equal, but they are not. That's just common sense. I didn't need a special lexicon or a pastor to tell me that. The books of the bible were put together by a bloodthirsty murderous Caeser named Constantine, who worshipped Mithras (Sun-god worshipper at the time and did so for political unity) He was the one who said "By this sign conquer", not Jesus. So pardon me or don't pardon me for being very skeptical of Paul who was a self-confessed Roman citizen, murdered other christians, never met Jesus in the flesh, was not an orignal apostle, had a huge confrontation with Peter(rock) and James and ran(cheesed) to his Roman buddies to save his skin.

By the way if Jesus's words in the bible were the only words actually true, would that be good enough for you?

A lot of Dr. Wall's dissertation shows[u:c7c9d4a0a3][b:c7c9d4a0a3] approach [/b:c7c9d4a0a3][/u:c7c9d4a0a3]of learning. I said before 1 doesn't need to form a cult around arrogant opinions because of being a narcissitic control freak, then 10 or 20 years learn something new and change it, to learn the Truth. In the mean time hundreds maybe thousands are abused. The Truth stands on it's own, it doesn't need a cult to protect it.

You just lost it, sir.

For, if Dr Wall used the same Scriptures which you claim are nonsense? To make his points? He must really be an idiot to have any confidence in such Scriptures that you just condemned.

How can we have cults then? If the Bible is not even a real book? To assume there are groups that are not cults? Would be saying the Bible is legit in all its words, and some groups which are not cults, get it right!

In other words? If the Bible is what you just claimed it is? Then all of Christianity is a cult!

Want to make up your mind what you really believe, sir? If the Bible is not legit? How can one determine what is legit, and what is not on the basis of using the Bible?


Enjoy your oscillation into irrationality.

In Christ, GeneZ

I think I need to leave this forum. So here's the first of three parting posts: people get too anthropocentric about other people in the same or another church; they focus on their ethnicity, customs, special religious vocabulary or even alleged prowess with the Hebrew and Greek -- whatever -- as a kind of 'club'. [i:0aff28689c]So it stops being about GOD when it starts being about people and things.[/i:0aff28689c] I've spent a lot of time at RRI noticing the [b:0aff28689c]commonalities of the arguments people have when they leave or defend "x", and excepting here the name is "Thieme", I find no difference. So what's wrong is that people are stuck on people.[/b:0aff28689c]

Do we want to know GOD, or not? If so, then this preoccupation with people must eventually give way to that desire. Ain't gonna happen, with the pro- folks defending and the anti- folks prosecuting. So I'm outta this forum.

Thank God I found RRI, though. Folks were horrified I liked RRI due to the founder's 'past' -- yeah, eyes on people again, just buying unfounded allegations, misstatements and gossip not CONTENT, sigh. Funny, though: as you read through the forums and articles and sites you realize poor Mr. Ross must never have time for sleep. Same, with Thieme: his stuff is all out there for people to see. If they choose the gossip instead (or even if a bad past) -- that's their prerogative. CONTENT should matter. God loves Truth, and if he puts it in someone's mouth -- He'll defend it.

For that, I'm grateful.

Thank you, HenryL, for your comments. I never could understand why beginning in 1999 the Colonel kept on chiding the congregation for being negative to Bible. It gets boring that he has to go back to basics when he's covering the highest stuff, re the way the Attribute of the Love of God works -- only to stop, remind everyone of how salvation is procured by John 3:16, and the need of 1Jn1:9. I was baffled how they could be so dumb.

Now I know, thanks to you: they didn't TURN OVER what he said in class, OUTSIDE of class to learn it. Really helped me put the pieces together, what you posted. Thanks.

Testy, don't fall over now -- I'm going to AGREE with you on two things.

1. Did Thieme teach Love is the Integrity of God back in the late 1970's? Yes. He just didn't say it in quite the same fashion as he later came to say. Ephesians 1:3 and you had a go-round about that, but you're right -- he did talk about the subjective and objective genitive back in the 77Romans tapes, beginning about Romans 5:5 (where that construction exists). So you are vindicated. I already explained this to Ephesians 1:3.

2. Did Thieme say "anything goes" in the bedroom? Yes. What you mis-remembered was that he always taught that in that bedroom, the usual man-is-husband authority is OFF. It's the vacation, the exception. You'll find the "anything goes" remark in nearly every marriage series, i.e., beginning with "Right Man Right Woman". The context is always to counter the idea that some forms of sex between a couple should be shunned. NO: it's for the COUPLE to decide. Hence the "anything goes" remark is repeated every time he revisits and revises prior marriage teaching.

Hope you don't keel over, Testy, from my agreeing with you.

You are all Royal Priests in Christ here in this forum, because you are all believers. World needs prayers. Please don't reject 1Jn1:9, and pray like crazy. Religion is garbage. I can't believe what suckers we are for it. So the world needs prayer, bigtime, to be freed from Genesis 3 tactics which today dupe the world as much as Satan duped Eve with magic fruit.

RRI demonstrates with its research, how much that religious garbage is, really wacky stuff -- so we should be praying. However much we differ among ourselves, one thing we all know is that we are each Royal Priests under Our King-Priest. Pray above all for the peace of Jerusalem, because anti-semitism is at an all time high?

Thanks for your time!

To brain out:

brainout quote

Quote

Please, will you and Testy stop treating Thieme as if he WROTE the Bible, rather than merely quoting it?

When did I ever say Thieme wrote the bible? How did I ever in the slightest way treat Thieme as if wrote the bible? This is just a lie.

Truthtesty

HenryL,

Welcome to the forum and the debate. ex-Thiemites have much information to share. Ex-Thiemites have not really had a unified forum in which to speak to each other, before the internet. Like all cults, Thiemites turn on ex-Thiemites, like savage beasts. Thieme's cult certainly meets most of the critieria that rrmoderator posted on cults.

rrmoderator quote

Quote

Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.

No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.

No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.

Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.

There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.

Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.

There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.

Followers feel they can never be "good enough".

The group/leader is always right.

The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.

Here are some additional "warning signs" concerning those who become involved with potentially unsafe groups and leaders:

Extreme obsessiveness regarding the group/leader resulting in the exclusion of almost every practical consideration.

Individual identity, the group, the leader and/or God as distinct and separate categories of existence become increasingly blurred. Instead, in the follower's mind these identities become substantially and increasingly fused--as that person's involvement with the group/leader continues and deepens.

Whenever the group/leader is criticized or questioned it is characterized as "persecution".

Uncharacteristically stilted and seemingly programmed conversation and mannerisms, cloning of the group/leader in personal behavior.

Dependency upon the group/leader for problem solving, solutions, and definitions without meaningful reflective thought. A seeming inability to think independently or analyze situations without group/leader involvement.

Hyperactivity centered on the group/leader agenda, which seems to supercede any personal goals or individual interests.

A dramatic loss of spontaneity and sense of humor.

Increasing isolation from family and old friends unless they demonstrate an interest in the group/leader.

Anything the group/leader does can be justified no matter how harsh or harmful.

Former followers are at best-considered negative or worse evil and under bad influences. They can not be trusted and personal contact is avoided

Truthtesty