Current Page: 7 of 204
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by: ephesians1:3 ()
Date: December 19, 2006 04:02PM

Orange -

First I apologize, in that I made an assumption that you were the source of the full body of the message in your previous post. I think I misread it and thought the "comment from a few years ago" was the next sentence, not the entire message. In rereading your post I see how you sectioned off your post. This is what happens when your brain is firing on about 2 cylinders at 3AM :)

Yes, most of those summary statements are misleading to say the least. Again, it's hard to take the time to pick through them, but some are just plain inacurate. One more I did want to focus on in particular is:

-[i:cbd441a407] “There’s only one right man or woman for everyone, and if you don’t marry him or her then your marriage will fail.”[/i:cbd441a407]

Thieme did teach this doctrine (called Right Man/Right Woman), and it's one of two major doctrines that have caused a huge uproar between Berachah and mainstream Christian circles, the other being Thieme's Blood of Christ doctrine. Right Man/Right Woman is a doctrine which states, in simple terms, that God has pre-designed a soul-mate for every Christian. The second part of that statement is the inacurate part. When Thieme first began teaching this doctrine (I believe, in the early '70's) all sorts of misapplications ensued. But Thieme always qualified the doctrine with a thorough review of Paul's teachings on "staying where you are" (re. 1 Corinthians 7). The synopsis became this... even if you marry your wrong man/woman, God can sanctify the marriage, and it's possible to have incredible happiness within that situation, whatever you do don't go looking for a divorce on the grounds you did not "marry your right partner". What Thieme always tried to teach was the importance of waiting on that right person...the seriousness of the message was directed to those who [i:cbd441a407]had not yet married [/i:cbd441a407]. Again, the problem here is people fail to discern the subtext and nuances of what is taught. The "far-stretched" part of things come into play when a person hears half the message (or only what they want to hear), reacts emotionally, then conveys a complete misrepresentation of that original message in an attempt to malign Thieme. I usually only post on here when I feel this kind of misrepresentation is going on (such as in the case of the person who made some kind of deduction that huge profit was made from sales of church materials).

Regarding the rest of your most recent post, I have to be careful here..because it's very easy to step into the area of maligning (even though we're anonymous on here, I'm sure it could potentially be easy for relatives to figure out who we are based on message content), so I'll just make a quick summary:

I have and have had, in my life, Thieme tapers who have been both among the most non-judgmental, level-headed, salt of the earth type people I have ever known, as well as some truly obnoxious people. I don't think it's fair to paint the whole congregation of Berachah as judgmental, holier-than-thou people. In one experience I had with a "taper group", I could not find one person in that small group of people who were not gracious, considerate, kind and non-judgmental.

My experience has been that the personality makeup of the individual tends to dictate how one adjusts to Berachah, not the other way around. And this is not directed towards your family, orange, it isn't my intention to analyze them, just convey my experiences. I've seen in some instances, an overbearing husband make judgments and criticisms about the lack of "doctrinal intake" of his wife and children, and it was sickening. I don't see how anyone in their right minds could adopt this attitude. Plus...anyone who knows the first thing about women knows that if you really want to make your wife/girlfriend despise you, start nitpicking and judging and adopting a holier-than-thou attitude. It's a sure fire way to make certain that her love is going to gradually start declining..and she'll be the one who starts nagging (and maybe even leaving) before long. It's the exact opposite of what we are commanded to do, which is love our wives.

So why does this kind of thing happen in some people who we assume are normally sane people? I think some people just get new information and get a little too overzealous. Or maybe some people's arrogance just can't be restrained and they have to start yapping. I think some people all of the sudden, via Thieme, have answers they didn't have before. They maybe kind of half-believed, then somebody like Thieme comes along and exegetes Genesis and shows them where the geologic ages fit in, or some such thing, and it does indeed become a situation where some people adopt a know-it-all attitude and want to assert themselves over others. I don't think this is healthy in the least bit, and I've never heard Thieme excuse this kind of arrogance. Usually this kind of thing gets checked hard, which I've seen happen as well.

As far as the vocabulary, again, Thieme's terminology is derived from doctrinal concepts; it's nothing that isn't found in the Bible. "Sin unto death" is a Biblical concept, right off the top of my head, it can be found in 1 Cor. 11:30, but there are many others. "Rebound" is simply 1 John 1:9. Instead of Thieme having to explain the mechanics of confession of sin to regain fellowship with the Lord, etc. etc., he can just say "rebound" and its known what is meant. My experience, personally, has been that this specialized vocabulary has helped me immensely. Granted, when I first began listening to Thieme I had some problems, but the end result was that these things really ended up helping me. When I talk to other Christians I don't use Thieme's terms, but rather, I take my thinking and translate it back into simple, Biblical terms so I can converse. But in my own thought process I think in Thieme's vocabulary, and it's almost indispensable at this point because I can progress through so many concepts at a faster rate and keep up. I know this is really troubling to many people, but, you know, Thieme isn't for everyone, and there are plenty of great Baptist or other non-denominational pastors I have heard in my lifetime who do a great job of teaching in plain language.

As far as checks and balances, many of the taper groups actually have their own deacons for the local assemblies, though I realize this doesn't always happen, especially with smaller congregations. I know of many believers who attend local churches for fellowship, but get their doctrine from Thieme. A lot of the rest, in my opinion, is up to the justice of the Lord.

Thieme's role during WWII was that of eventually rising to a position of being in charge of all cadet training at Luke Field, which I believe was about 30,000 men. This is to the best of my knowledge.

As to your last statement, I've seen this analyzed from just about every angle. I even did a semester research paper on it for a college class. I know we can't, as you've pointed out, enter into a Bible class type discussion here, but here are some interesting things to think about, and they are all extra-Biblical. Frozen embryos (removed, frozen, and then later implanted in a mother), also.... the number of still-born births worldwide each year. Just something to think about.

Options: ReplyQuote
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by: Truthtesty ()
Date: January 14, 2007 12:17AM


This following website is inspired by the pioneering work of the Institute for Propaganda Analysis (IPA). In 1937, the IPA was created to educate the American public about the widespread nature of political propaganda. Composed of social scientists and journalists, the IPA published a series of books, including:
The Fine Art of Propaganda
Propaganda Analysis
Group Leader's Guide to Propaganda Analysis
Propaganda: How To Recognize and Deal With It
The IPA is best-known for identifying the seven basic propaganda devices: [b:0fc6d8c98c]Name-Calling, Glittering Generality, Transfer, Testimonial, Plain Folks, Card Stacking, and Band Wagon.[/b:0fc6d8c98c] According to the authors of a recent book on propaganda, "these seven devices have been repeated so frequently in lectures, articles, and textbooks ever since that they have become virtually synonymous with the practice and analysis of propaganda in all of its aspects." (Combs and Nimmo, 1993)


How strange is it that a pastor who has a supposed "equiping gift" tells you "you can study the bible for yourself... but you won't get much out of it"? My reaction is "show me proof that the holy spirit prioitizes the holy spirits knowledge AND DISPERSES THAT KNOWLEDGE based on Thieme's opinion and not the individual christian's PRAYER - christian by christian" SHOW ME! ALSO SHOW ME IN GREEK HOW THE HOLY SPIRITS POWER AND CAPABILITY IS LIMITED BY THIEME'S OPINING "you can study the bible for yourself... but you won't get much out of it". [__THIEME IS SAYING THAT YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD IS INFERIOR WHEN YOU HAVE INDEPENDENT FAITH AND PRAY TO GOD AND READ THE BIBLE FOR YOURSELF IN CONTRAST TO THIEME&]

Options: ReplyQuote
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by: Truthtesty ()
Date: January 14, 2007 09:36AM


I AM A NEW NEW MEMEBR AND I AM NOT ALLOWED TO SEND PRIVATE MESSAGES, BUT SISTERSOAP SAID "There is lots of talk about "GRACE" but the practice is very legalistic and there is no explanation of or dealing with the FLESH in daily life. "



Options: ReplyQuote
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by: HappyAndFree ()
Date: January 20, 2007 04:26AM


I agree.


Options: ReplyQuote
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by: Truthtesty ()
Date: January 20, 2007 12:27PM

Thieme belittles and minimizes anyone else trying to translate and learn the word for themselves. Not just the individual christian of modern day, but Thieme attacks the authority of the Christian teachers and leaders for over 2000 years: the Roman Catholics authority, the Protestant King James version authority, the Christian non-denominational authority of Dallas Theological Seminary, and other Universities. Thieme tries to arrogate himself as the only legitmate authority of the christian bible IN WORLD HISTORY! What arrogance and hypocrasy! Not only that, but Thieme goes further and attacks the authority of the original biblical authors by detracting from thier thought forms and reducing thier message into Thieme's loaded language.

Per Dr. Wall's dissertation "Nevertheless, there are a few real problems that develop from the use of such new terminology. It tends to set the students of Thieme apart from other Christians, and to hinder spiritually related communication between them and other believers and pastors -- thus, becoming a basis in some cases for arrogance and division. Also, the new terminology, being a product of extensive categorical or systematic thinking, [b:0e226aabde]tends to produce exegesis that is forced into Thieme's thought forms rather than being [u:0e226aabde]subservient [/u:0e226aabde]to the theological thought forms of the biblical writers.[/b:0e226aabde]

Options: ReplyQuote
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by: SpiritualLiberty ()
Date: January 20, 2007 04:46PM


I'm brand new to this forum--in fact I've never posted on an interent forum before. But after coming across this webpage, and seeing what some of you have shared about your experience with Thieme-ism, I felt compelled to share some things...

I was a diligent student of Thieme's teachings for eleven years. I did not attend Berachah, but I did attend a church that taught Thieme's doctrines almost word-for-word. The name of the church was Grace Bible, and appears to be the same church that Bluefire once attended. I started in 1993. I learned the "doctrinal terminology" forwards and backwards, and before long, I was sitting on my high doctrinal horse, firmly convinced that I was a "winner," as I looked down my nose at all the Christian "losers" around me--those losers whose prayers "went no higher than the ceiling" because they didn't know how to "rebound." Eventually, I became heavily involved in the church, volunteering in many different "ministries," especially the publications, with my grammar and editing skills. The pastor liked my work, and the church hired me full-time as the publications director. I was now on top of the world--not only was I one of the special, elite "winner believers," but now I was working side-by-side with the pastor himself (whom the people idolized). But, after attending the church for nine years, and working full-time with the pastor for a year, the Lord began to intervene in my life. And thankfully, He began to deliver me from this path of religious elitism and legalistic bondage that I had pursued for so long.

I began to study a lot of Christian history. I became more and more fascinated by the old, inspiring stories of the martyrs, the great Protestant Reformation, and the great history of the Church, with the all the suffering and persecution that God's people have endured throughout history. I was amazed by the faithfulness and fortitude of these ancient Christians as they were willing to sacrifice everything for their faith in Jesus Christ, and how the power of His Spirit sustained them. But then something began to trouble me. None of them ever talked about the "edification complex of the soul" or the "portfolio of invidible assets." They knew nothing about this practice of constant, mechanical "rebound." They didn't go to six doctrine classes a week like I did. Most of them never even saw a Greek lexicon, never mind hearing a sermon from the "original languages." All they had was a Bible in their own language. So how could they have glorified God in such a wonderful, inspiring manner? And now questions that had lingered in the back of my mind for years began to resurface. "Why is there no scripture that actually says, 'Confess your sins to be restored to fellowship'?" "How could a believer actually suffer shame at the resurrection and be branded a 'loser' for all eternity? Is this really what heaven is like?" "Are all these 'corrected translations' really 'correct' or even necessary?" This created an intense conflict in my heart for the next two years, as I struggled to reconcile what I was learning with the teachings of Thieme. Perhaps I wasn't such a high-and-mighty "winner" after all.

On top of this, the Lord began to convict me of all the rampant carnality among the other members of the church. Many of those whom I considered friends were consistently indulging in partying, drunkenness, and extra-marital sex. Apparently, they were the "liberated" Christians, who had the right to live as they pleased since they were the special "winner believers." And anyone who tried to warn them about their lifestyle was a "legalist." I had known in my heart that it was wrong for me to be around such carnality, but it was hard to give up my social life, being as popular as I was in the church. But as I studied the lives of faithful Christians from ages past, the Lord laid such a conviction upon my heart that I finally had to start distancing myself from a lot of these people.

To make a long story short (I apologize for being long-winded as it is), I was becoming more and more confused and doubtful about this whole "doctrinal system" that I had invested eleven years of my life in. I began to beg the Lord for answers. And he sent me a Christian brother named John to help me. John had traveled a similar path to mine, and he was teaching at a small church about 40 minutes drive away. He had also studied Thieme for years, but had seen the errors and changed is view on several major doctrines, including "winner" and "loser" believers. John and I began studying the Scriptures together, and I began attending his church. And I now have a great peace in my heart, as I have been delivered from the legalistic bondage of constantly "rebounding," and I have a far greater love for my Christian brethren from other churches (I will never call them "losers" again). John and I have also published several books in which we thoroughly refute some of Thieme's more destructive errors, such as "rebound" and his extreme modern textual criticsm and Bible correcting.

It's been over two years since I left Grace Bible, and I am still shunned by the pastor, the staff, and the majority of the congregation. But I never cease to pray for them, that one day our gracious Lord will deliver them as He delivered me.

Options: ReplyQuote
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by: Truthtesty ()
Date: January 20, 2007 10:01PM


Would you describe getting over legalistically rebounding?

Also, I am not familiar with the winner and loser so-called doctrines (sounds like the lotto), it must have been taught after I was no longer forced to go.

Also, what books have you published? I would be interested in reading them.


Options: ReplyQuote
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by: SpiritualLiberty ()
Date: January 23, 2007 01:53AM

Dear Truthtesty,

The doctrine of so-called “rebound,” the way it is taught by Thieme and his followers, is actually a legalistic deception left over from the Roman Catholic tradition of the confessional booth.

As you may know already, the doctrine consists of the following points:
1) Every time a Christian sins, he “loses fellowship” with God.
2) In order to “recover fellowship,” we must “confess” our sin to God.
3) If we don’t confess our sins (“rebound”), then we remain “out of fellowship,” with the following disastrous results: (a) God will not even hear our prayers. (b) We can not learn any more “Bible doctrine” until we “rebound.” (c) All spiritual growth immediately comes to a screeching halt. (d) Everything we do in God’s service (studying the Bible, witnessing, praying, helping others, etc.) is all completely meaningless to God because we were “out of fellowship” the whole time.

This teaching, when it is followed and practiced consistently, creates a paranoid fear in the person’s heart, as they must constantly worry about being out of fellowship with God, and they can never really know if their Christian service actually meant anything, or if God even heard their prayer, because the slightest little mental attitude sin instantly severs your connection with God. Our access to our Heavenly Father becomes totally dependent on our never-ending, exhausting efforts to make sure we perform our little “rebound” ritual EVERY TIME WE SIN—what an impossible burden! (And Thieme is the self-proclaimed champion of grace.) The utter absurdity and complete lack of Biblical support for such a fallacy is covered in detail in the books that John and I have written. And this doctrine bears a striking (and disturbing) resemblance to the Romanist tradition of the confessional booth—the heresy that when we sin, we actually lose our salvation and we have to confess our sins to a priest to receive absolution and “recover” our salvation. Thieme, at least, relates it to the idea of “fellowship,” rather than salvation, and he doesn’t require a priest. But the similarities are obvious, and it is clear that this is one of the Romanist traditions that carried over to Protestantism in a modified form.

The doctrine of “winner and loser believers” is the bread-and-butter doctrine of the Thiemite camp. This is the primary means by which they intimidate, frighten, and enforce their cult-like control over the people. The teaching, in a nutshell, is this: There are superior Christians who are the only ones who know the truth (this of course would be Thieme and his followers), and there are inferior Christians who are “out of fellowship,” in “reversionism,” and doomed to the miserable fate of the sin unto death, and the label of “LOSER” for all eternity (this would be everybody outside the Thieme camp). It is this doctrine that is primarily responsible for the blind submission of the people in Thiemite churches, as well as the guilt and fear that people who leave still struggle with years later (as some of our friends on this forum have already testified).

John and I have published four books so far refuting Thieme’s false doctrines. Since I have a great desire to see my fellow Christians delivered from Thieme’s legalism, and it only costs a few dollars (or cents) to publish our books, I would be happy to send them to anyone who asks without charge.

Options: ReplyQuote
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by: ephesians1:3 ()
Date: January 24, 2007 03:51AM

Some important points:

1. Thieme/ Berachah is/was not involved [i:4751f7e657]in any way[/i:4751f7e657] with what is commonly referred to as Dominion Theology. This is the theology that Christians must get involved with the political process to the extent that they are attempting to change the legislative landscape to prepare for "God's government" sort of conditions. Any one who implies that Thieme supports this theology is misrepresenting Thieme by 180 degrees. Berachah has always stood for complete separation of Church and State, and Thieme himself has [i:4751f7e657]extensively[/i:4751f7e657] taught that such things as prayer in public schools and bombing of abortion clinics are a complete and total violation of this principle (re: several tapes in the Protocol Plan of God series (1984); I cannot recall specific lesson numbers)

2. That having been said, Berachah has always been heavily involved in support for the U.S. military. Thieme himself is a WWII Colonel, and his son, who is now pastor, is a Major who was an Airborne Ranger. In my opinion it is almost impossible to divorce themes of freedom through military victory from Biblical teachings, and Berachah has always reflected this same philosophy, and yes, in some cases, in very strong and dogmatic terms. For those that disagree, I really don't know what to say. Watch Schindler's List? Read some Solzhenitysyn? Read the Old Testament?

3. I think the idea that since Theime's job during WWII was to train soldiers on a U.S. base, this role must then be belittled since other men were in harm's way overseas, or that since Thieme did not attain doctoral status (by the way...he was accepted to DTS's doctoral program, but did not complete his work because of his call to Berachah), his teachings do not mean as much as those who have achieved doctoral status are straw-
men type logical fallacies that most people can see through as completely transparent.

4. Dr. Wall's thesis is actually very well written, though obviously, I don't agree with the conclusions of most of the topics. What is interesting to note, however, is that many people have apparently not even read the thesis, but enjoy using it in reference as a means of discrediting Thieme. For instance, the Blood of Christ section of the thesis simply outlines what Wall feels is a difference between what Wall feels is the correct view (that the term "Blood"should encompass all of Christ's work on the cross), and Thieme's view (the Blood should refer to only to the spiritual death of Christ during the last three hours of his crucifixion). I think it would come as a shock to many to discover that Wall actually agrees with Thieme in that Wall believes that 1. there was a spiritual death of Christ and 2. The term "The Blood" has been elevated to heretical status, and Christ's blood itself has no mystical properties. I think some people would be rather shocked if they actually [i:4751f7e657]read[/i:4751f7e657] this dissertation, and realized that they might not be able to use it to attack Thieme as they have in the past.

(I tried to find the link to the thesis, to insert it here, but apprently, the host, has removed it).

5. Liberty, while I agree with your description of what Thieme's teaching of rebound represent, some might get the wrong impression on your synopsis of his "winners and losers" doctrine. While I see what you are implying, the uninitiated might think that Thieme actually does teach a dogmatic "Berachah is right, we are the winners, everyone else are losers" rhetoric. That would indeed be cultish. However, the real meat of this teaching might be represented by another phrase "doctrine of rewards". This is hardly unique to Berachah, though it's certainly a main emphasis. You can find this topic taught in numerous churches, especially those of a dispensational bent. Here is a synopsis of the doctrine, by the very well known Zane Hodges (by the way, I don't agree with much of Hodges' teachings, but for this topic, it is a good outline):



6. The idea was raised in a post above, that Thieme is somehow hiding something by not posting certain teachings on his website. First, Thieme is in the latter stages of Alzheimer's, and is hardly able to post anything. Second, neither Thieme, nor Berachah has ever hidden anything. They disclose a periodic financial record detailing where every penny goes (along with amounts in reserves). As far as teachings, webmasters to the site have gradually been adding sample publications for all to read:


Anyone reading this can hear Thieme's teaching for themselves via the sample recordings that have been posted at:


There are 5 recordings there from 1972, 1990, 1992, 1997 and 2000. (Thieme retired in early 2003, at the age of 85, due to the onset of Alzheimer's)

Additional lessons covering over 10,000 hours of messages are also available free of charge at the website, via phone or mail order.


Options: ReplyQuote
R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by: SpiritualLiberty ()
Date: January 26, 2007 12:10AM

Dear ephesians,

Thank-you for your response. I would like to respond to your statement:

[i:14fcf0a745]“...some might get the wrong impression on your synopsis of his [/i:14fcf0a745][Thieme’s] [i:14fcf0a745]‘winners and losers’ doctrine. While I see what you are implying, the uninitiated might think that Thieme actually does teach a dogmatic ‘Berachah is right, we are the winners, everyone else are losers’ rhetoric. That would indeed be cultish. However, the real meat of this teaching might be represented by another phrase ‘doctrine of rewards’. This is hardly unique to Berachah, though it's certainly a main emphasis. You can find this topic taught in numerous churches, especially those of a dispensational bent.” [/i:14fcf0a745]

While I appreciate you taking the time to address my comments, there are some important issues here that you have not answered. In order to form our conclusions on this issue, we must consider all of Thieme’s teachings related to this doctrine, and their overall ramifications. As I go through the following points, I would ask you to keep in mind your own statement that if Thieme teaches [i:14fcf0a745]“a dogmatic ‘Berachah is right, we are the winners, everyone else are losers’ rhetoric. That would indeed be cultish.” [/i:14fcf0a745]Let us consider the following dogmatic teachings of Thieme and his followers (I know at least half a dozen Thiemite pastors who teach the exact same doctrine):

So what exactly is required to be a “winner”? There's a lot that could be said here, but the two most basic requirements are these:

1) [b:14fcf0a745]Rebound:[/b:14fcf0a745] As noted previously, this doctrine is taught as an essential of the spiritual life of the Christian. This is an absolute requirement for becoming a “winner believer.” Any Christian who dares to disagree with Thieme and doesn’t constantly confess his sins to stay “in fellowship” can not even pray, study, witness, etc., will be under severe divine discipline, and will eventually die a miserable death as “loser believer.”

2) [b:14fcf0a745]Right Pastor-Teacher: [/b:14fcf0a745]Another set-in-stone requirement for the “winner” is to submit to “the authority of your right pastor-teacher.” Only the pastor-teacher is qualified to interpret the Bible, and you are not qualified to read the Bible for yourself. If you dare to step outside the “authority of your right P/T,” and read the Bible on your own, you are surely doomed to be a “loser.” As my former Thiemite pastor says, “No believer can read the Bible daily for himself and discover and learn the mystery doctrine for the Church-age.” Thieme himself made nearly identical statements on a regular basis. Under Thieme’s “Grace Apparatus for Perception” (another useless term from his technical mumbo-jumbo), the pastor becomes the link between God’s truth and God’s people. The people become helplessly dependent on him. Like the “rebound” doctrine, this doctrine is dangerously close to Romanism. This is exactly what the pope tells his people: “You can’t understand the Bible, I’ll tell you what it means.” This was a vital issue of the great Protestant Reformation of the 16th century. The people rebelled against the tyranny of the Romanist clergy, and claimed their right to search the Scriptures for themselves. And thousands of our Christian brethren from the 16th century gave their lives for this great principle. To a large extent, Thieme and his followers have betrayed the Reformation.

What are the consequences for the “loser” who dares to disagree with Thieme?

1) [b:14fcf0a745]The “loser believer” is under a curse. [/b:14fcf0a745]Thieme emphasized the principle that to love God is to love His Word. This is indeed true, but what Thieme really meant by loving the Word of God was listening to “the Bible doctrine taught by your right pastor-teacher.” If you don’t submit to your right pastor’s teaching, you don’t love God, and therefore you are under a curse.

2) [b:14fcf0a745]The “loser believer” is out of the “PPOG” and outside the “wall of fire.” [/b:14fcf0a745]The “loser” believer has departed from the “Predesigned Plan of God” (God’s will) and the “wall of fire” (God’s protection). God only protects the “winners.” A great fear tactic.

3) [b:14fcf0a745]The “loser believer” is in “reversionism” and headed straight for the sin unto death.[/b:14fcf0a745] The believer who dares to disagree with Thieme and reject his doctrinal system is in continual “reversionism” (apparently the Biblical vocabulary like “backsliding” wasn’t good enough for Thieme) and will inevitably die a miserable death. Once you’ve heard this, you don’t dare to depart from Thieme-ism.

4) [b:14fcf0a745]The “loser believer” will carry the label of LOSER for all eternity, even in heaven. [/b:14fcf0a745]This is one of the most terribly legalistic doctrines I have ever heard taught in any church. Thieme is not content to restrict his fear tactics to this present life—he has to extend it to eternity as well. When you have this eternal sword of Damocles hanging over your head, it is the utmost of legalistic bondage.

5) [b:14fcf0a745]The “loser believer” will lose his eternal inheritance. [/b:14fcf0a745]The “loser” forfeits the inheritance that is promised to all God’s people in numerous scriptures (under Thieme’s false doctrine of an “escrow” inheritance). And it gets even worse. That forfeited inheritance remains “on deposit” as a “memorial to lost opportunity,” dangling in front of the loser for all eternity, always reminding him of what he could’ve had if he'd been a Thiemite. And only the winners get invited to the special “parties” in the heavenly “Gazebo.” The rest of us lowly losers are left outside waiting for one of the Thiemite Christians to invite us in. A very disturbing (and completely unscriptural) concept of heaven.

This is indeed “the spirit of bondage and fear.” And when Thiemite pastors tell the people they’re free to leave and learn from someone else, what they’re really saying is that you’re only free to go to another Thiemite pastor. Because if you dare to depart from their doctrinal system, you will surely end up a “loser.” It is quite hypocritical to tell the people they have the “freedom” to leave, after you’ve already convinced them that they cannot understand the Bible, that they’re helplessly dependent on you, and that they’ll suffer the miserable fate of the “loser” without your doctrinal system. You’ve already taken their freedom away from them.

Thieme’s doctrine of “winner and loser believers” is far removed from the Biblical doctrine of rewards. There are numerous scriptural promises that all God’s people, regardless of their failure on earth, have an eternal inheritance reserved for them that can never be lost, and that all God’s people will be reining with Christ in His kingdom. And all God’s people will receive a measure of reward at the Judgment Seat of Christ, for we are promised that “whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward,” and that when Christ comes for His people, “then shall every man have praise of God.” And every single scripture that talks about our Lord’s return (and there are many) describes only eager anticipation, happiness, and joy for God’s people—never fear and apprehension of being branded a loser in front of all the saints. It is one thing to recognize the rewards of believers’ works; it is quite another to split the Body of Christ into “winner” and “loser.” Once again, we see the leftovers of a heresy that began in Romanism, with the concept of splitting Christians into the elite and the lower-class—the Roman Catholic “Saints,” whose good works were enough to get them into heaven, and the rest of Christendom who had to spend a few thousand years in Purgatory first.

The doctrine of rewards is indeed taught in many churches, in various forms and with varying degrees of emphasis. Some use it as a means to elevate themselves as the elite, and some do not. But Thieme and many Thiemite pastors are dogmatically clear on this issue. Their doctrinal system is the [i:14fcf0a745]only [/i:14fcf0a745]way to be a “winner.” Without them, you will suffer the terrible fate of the “loser.” There is no getting around it, ephesians… Thieme does indeed teach “a dogmatic ‘Berachah is right, we are the winners, everyone else are losers’ rhetoric.” And, in your own words, “That would indeed be cultish.”

Options: ReplyQuote
Current Page: 7 of 204

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.