Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: May 19, 2008 05:10AM
pss quote 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,
Truthtesty: Well would this be an insentive to accept Thieme as a source on the Shed Blood of Christ? What did Dr. Chafer say about the Blood of Christ?
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. V pg 199
1 John 1:7 Quote:
"Those who have attained by His grace to the courts of glory are identified, not by their works, their sufferings, or their personal merit, but they are described as those whose robes have been washed in the blood of the Lamb. This is a figure calculated to represent purification as high as heaven in quality. It is termed a figure of speech, but it is not meaningless on that account; and so there is limitless reality in it. It may be understood only as Christ’s blood is seen to be the one divinely provided means whereby the soul and spirit of man may be purified. Cleansing so depends upon the blood of Christ that it may be said to be accomplished directly by that blood.
I don't have all Thieme's booklets, but Thieme quotes Chafer in no less than 12 of Thieme's booklets. But Thieme doesn't quote Chafer at all in Thieme's Blood of Christ booklets. You see because that would not be seen as "an insentive to accept" Thieme as a source on the Shed Blood of Christ. That would be a disinsentive to accept Thieme as a source. But as we have seen time and again, Thieme does not tell you the whole truth.
pss quote : 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.
Truthtesty: Would you mind showing me where in Ephesians 3:3-9 it references the Shed Blood of Christ?
Ephesians 3:3-9 (KJV)
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, 4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) 5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; 6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: 7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power. 8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; 9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
Truthtesty: You are saying that Dr. Chafer did not understand "salvation", the "mystery doctrines", and wasn't "spiritually aware"? When it was Dr. Chafer's Systematic Theology that Thieme reversioned with his crayon and corrupted? When Thieme has quoted Dr. Chafer in no less than 12 of Thieme's booklets?
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 5, Page 349 6. The Present Form. Since, as earlier defined, the kingdom of heaven is the rule of God in the earth, it follows that it is now present to the extent to which He is exercising authority over the affairs of the cosmos. Assuredly God is not at this time executing a preannounced Jewish program, nor is He extending Jewish blessings to Gentiles; rather He is calling out a heavenly people from both Jews and Gentiles on equal terms of privilege and to the heights of glory never extended to any people in past ages. In such unprecedented and momentous undertakings God, of necessity, must govern the affairs of men to an extended degree. This present exercise of divine authority is styled “the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven” (cf. Matt. 13:11). A New Testament mystery is a hitherto unrevealed purpose of God. It therefore follows that God’s direct authority is now exercised in the realization of the features of this age which are thus termed mysteries. On the Church in her relation to the New Testament mysteries, Dr. Rollin Thomas Chafer has written: “The Church does not appear in the Old Testament. As something new in God’s provision for Jew and Gentile, the true Church and some of its unique characteristics are spoken of by Paul as mysteries. These mysteries were withheld from Old Testament saints, but are freely revealed to New Testament believers, hence the church is not found in the Old Testament. These mysteries include the Church itself, its Head, its message of grace, the Body of Christ as an organism made up of saved Jews and Gentiles, indwelt by Christ as the hope of glory, its ministry controlled by the Lord Himself, its ultimate removal from the earthly scene by resurrection and translation, and its approaching marriage as the Bride of the Lamb...
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. I, Page 45
(5) The Mystery Form of the Kingdom, as outlined by Christ in the seven parables of Matthew 13:1–52, continues throughout this age. According to its New Testament usage, the word mystery refers to a truth which has hitherto been unrevealed. The present dispensation is characterized by the accomplishment of a divine purpose which is rightly termed a mystery. All else is being conformed to this purpose. Ephesians 3:1–6 declares this purpose and there it is seen to be the outcalling into one new Body of both Jews and Gentiles, who, each and every one, are made new creatures by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. The kingdom of heaven is God’s rule in the earth and He is now ruling in this the “times of the Gentiles” only in so far as the realization of the New Testament mysteries may require. This is the extent of the kingdom in mystery form (Matt. 13:11).
Truthtesty: Thieme's hermenutics are pathetic. One such example is Thieme says you should insert in place of the Blood, “the SPIRITUAL DEATH” of Christ. This is a violation of the basic hermeneutical principles of Scripture interpretation by setting up a typology in the New Testament based on the anti-type also in the New Testament. Type and anti-type are Old Testament "Type" to New Testament "Anti-Type". This is BASIC hermenuetics and NOT ADVANCED hermenuetics AND Thieme fumbles the ball. Thieme forces this on the average people who really don't know much about hermenuetics. Most average people think "well he went to school so it must be true" but it is not true. Again this "private interpretation" of Thieme's is to support his false fascist politically extreme ideology.
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.
Truthtesty: Thieme not only insults the intelligence of members of the Thieme cult, and nearly every human teacher in history, but Thieme even insults the intelligence of God. Thieme arrogates "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."
Thieme tried to "be like the most high."
Truthtesty
Truthtesty: Well would this be an insentive to accept Thieme as a source on the Shed Blood of Christ? What did Dr. Chafer say about the Blood of Christ?
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. V pg 199
1 John 1:7 Quote:
"Those who have attained by His grace to the courts of glory are identified, not by their works, their sufferings, or their personal merit, but they are described as those whose robes have been washed in the blood of the Lamb. This is a figure calculated to represent purification as high as heaven in quality. It is termed a figure of speech, but it is not meaningless on that account; and so there is limitless reality in it. It may be understood only as Christ’s blood is seen to be the one divinely provided means whereby the soul and spirit of man may be purified. Cleansing so depends upon the blood of Christ that it may be said to be accomplished directly by that blood.
I don't have all Thieme's booklets, but Thieme quotes Chafer in no less than 12 of Thieme's booklets. But Thieme doesn't quote Chafer at all in Thieme's Blood of Christ booklets. You see because that would not be seen as "an insentive to accept" Thieme as a source on the Shed Blood of Christ. That would be a disinsentive to accept Thieme as a source. But as we have seen time and again, Thieme does not tell you the whole truth.
pss quote : 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.
Truthtesty: Would you mind showing me where in Ephesians 3:3-9 it references the Shed Blood of Christ?
Ephesians 3:3-9 (KJV)
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, 4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) 5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; 6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: 7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power. 8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; 9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
Truthtesty: You are saying that Dr. Chafer did not understand "salvation", the "mystery doctrines", and wasn't "spiritually aware"? When it was Dr. Chafer's Systematic Theology that Thieme reversioned with his crayon and corrupted? When Thieme has quoted Dr. Chafer in no less than 12 of Thieme's booklets?
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 5, Page 349 6. The Present Form. Since, as earlier defined, the kingdom of heaven is the rule of God in the earth, it follows that it is now present to the extent to which He is exercising authority over the affairs of the cosmos. Assuredly God is not at this time executing a preannounced Jewish program, nor is He extending Jewish blessings to Gentiles; rather He is calling out a heavenly people from both Jews and Gentiles on equal terms of privilege and to the heights of glory never extended to any people in past ages. In such unprecedented and momentous undertakings God, of necessity, must govern the affairs of men to an extended degree. This present exercise of divine authority is styled “the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven” (cf. Matt. 13:11). A New Testament mystery is a hitherto unrevealed purpose of God. It therefore follows that God’s direct authority is now exercised in the realization of the features of this age which are thus termed mysteries. On the Church in her relation to the New Testament mysteries, Dr. Rollin Thomas Chafer has written: “The Church does not appear in the Old Testament. As something new in God’s provision for Jew and Gentile, the true Church and some of its unique characteristics are spoken of by Paul as mysteries. These mysteries were withheld from Old Testament saints, but are freely revealed to New Testament believers, hence the church is not found in the Old Testament. These mysteries include the Church itself, its Head, its message of grace, the Body of Christ as an organism made up of saved Jews and Gentiles, indwelt by Christ as the hope of glory, its ministry controlled by the Lord Himself, its ultimate removal from the earthly scene by resurrection and translation, and its approaching marriage as the Bride of the Lamb...
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. I, Page 45
(5) The Mystery Form of the Kingdom, as outlined by Christ in the seven parables of Matthew 13:1–52, continues throughout this age. According to its New Testament usage, the word mystery refers to a truth which has hitherto been unrevealed. The present dispensation is characterized by the accomplishment of a divine purpose which is rightly termed a mystery. All else is being conformed to this purpose. Ephesians 3:1–6 declares this purpose and there it is seen to be the outcalling into one new Body of both Jews and Gentiles, who, each and every one, are made new creatures by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. The kingdom of heaven is God’s rule in the earth and He is now ruling in this the “times of the Gentiles” only in so far as the realization of the New Testament mysteries may require. This is the extent of the kingdom in mystery form (Matt. 13:11).
Truthtesty: Thieme's hermenutics are pathetic. One such example is Thieme says you should insert in place of the Blood, “the SPIRITUAL DEATH” of Christ. This is a violation of the basic hermeneutical principles of Scripture interpretation by setting up a typology in the New Testament based on the anti-type also in the New Testament. Type and anti-type are Old Testament "Type" to New Testament "Anti-Type". This is BASIC hermenuetics and NOT ADVANCED hermenuetics AND Thieme fumbles the ball. Thieme forces this on the average people who really don't know much about hermenuetics. Most average people think "well he went to school so it must be true" but it is not true. Again this "private interpretation" of Thieme's is to support his false fascist politically extreme ideology.
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.
Truthtesty: Thieme not only insults the intelligence of members of the Thieme cult, and nearly every human teacher in history, but Thieme even insults the intelligence of God. Thieme arrogates "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."
Thieme tried to "be like the most high."
Truthtesty
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: May 19, 2008 11:20AM
Truthtesty: One such example is Thieme says you should insert in place of the Blood, “the SPIRITUAL DEATH” of Christ. This is a violation of the basic hermeneutical principles of Scripture interpretation by setting up a typology in the New Testament based on the anti-type also in the New Testament. Type and anti-type are Old Testament "Type" to New Testament "Anti-Type".
Truthtesty: In his booklet "Canonicity", Thieme has stated that thier is perfect agreement of type and anti-type and perfect organized continuity of type and anti-type He says more, but he uses type and anti-type to prove that throughout history thier must have been a greater author of the bible than man.
But? What does Thieme do with his type and anti-type error of replacing "Blood of Christ" with "spiritual death"? Thieme never resolves this typological error. Sure he goes on and on with volumes of information, but never resolves the typological error. This is not perfect agreement and perfect organized continuity of type and anti-type.
Perhaps Thieme thinks that he is a better author than God?
Truthtesty
Truthtesty: In his booklet "Canonicity", Thieme has stated that thier is perfect agreement of type and anti-type and perfect organized continuity of type and anti-type He says more, but he uses type and anti-type to prove that throughout history thier must have been a greater author of the bible than man.
But? What does Thieme do with his type and anti-type error of replacing "Blood of Christ" with "spiritual death"? Thieme never resolves this typological error. Sure he goes on and on with volumes of information, but never resolves the typological error. This is not perfect agreement and perfect organized continuity of type and anti-type.
Perhaps Thieme thinks that he is a better author than God?
Truthtesty
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
mile2
()
Date: May 21, 2008 07:01AM
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?
PastorThiemeIsGreat2Me:
I Tim. 3:2 " A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,..."
This passage of scripture seems very clear and straightforward. If a man has married more than one woman, then he does not qualify for the position of pastor. If you disagree with my understanding then please state what you believe these verses mean and why, using the "exegesis and isagogics of that passage".
You wrote "You have also made accusations that I have no proof are correct." I assume you are referring to the statement that Bobby has been divorced 3 times. That is not an accusation. It is simply a statement of fact. I learned this from the biography entitled, "Robert B. Thieme Jr., His Ancestry, His Life", by C.G. Hunt. All the information in this book is thoroughly referenced, and you can verify this for yourself by going to www.cclerk.hetx.net/. Click on "Search Databases", then click on "Marriage Licenses", enter the last name of "Thieme", and click on "Inquire". Also please notice that Col. Thieme performed each marriage, thereby giving his approval.
Recently, Truthtesty made me aware of this passage from Thieme's booklet, "Divine Establishment".
"Divinely ordained, marriage is structured to form the basic stability in a society. It totally rejects any concept which contributes to anarchy, such as promiscuity, homosexuality, communal living, polygamy or excessive divorce. God has designed one specific man for one specific woman; consequently, each member of the human race, believer or unbeliever, has a right opposite number, except in rare cases where an individual possesses the gift of celibacy."
By his own words then excessive divorce contributes to anarchy and undermines the basic stability in a society. Yet he supported a man who had been divorced 3 times to succeed him as the leader of Berachah. Can you explain the obvious contradiction here? Does Col. Thieme subject his life to the authority of God's Word, or does he just do as he pleases, making his own will paramount?
I am very interested in your careful consideration of this matter and look forward to your reply.
Also, I await the response from Radaph.
mile2
PastorThiemeIsGreat2Me:
I Tim. 3:2 " A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,..."
This passage of scripture seems very clear and straightforward. If a man has married more than one woman, then he does not qualify for the position of pastor. If you disagree with my understanding then please state what you believe these verses mean and why, using the "exegesis and isagogics of that passage".
You wrote "You have also made accusations that I have no proof are correct." I assume you are referring to the statement that Bobby has been divorced 3 times. That is not an accusation. It is simply a statement of fact. I learned this from the biography entitled, "Robert B. Thieme Jr., His Ancestry, His Life", by C.G. Hunt. All the information in this book is thoroughly referenced, and you can verify this for yourself by going to www.cclerk.hetx.net/. Click on "Search Databases", then click on "Marriage Licenses", enter the last name of "Thieme", and click on "Inquire". Also please notice that Col. Thieme performed each marriage, thereby giving his approval.
Recently, Truthtesty made me aware of this passage from Thieme's booklet, "Divine Establishment".
"Divinely ordained, marriage is structured to form the basic stability in a society. It totally rejects any concept which contributes to anarchy, such as promiscuity, homosexuality, communal living, polygamy or excessive divorce. God has designed one specific man for one specific woman; consequently, each member of the human race, believer or unbeliever, has a right opposite number, except in rare cases where an individual possesses the gift of celibacy."
By his own words then excessive divorce contributes to anarchy and undermines the basic stability in a society. Yet he supported a man who had been divorced 3 times to succeed him as the leader of Berachah. Can you explain the obvious contradiction here? Does Col. Thieme subject his life to the authority of God's Word, or does he just do as he pleases, making his own will paramount?
I am very interested in your careful consideration of this matter and look forward to your reply.
Also, I await the response from Radaph.
mile2
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: May 21, 2008 10:05AM
To the Forum:
Truthtesty: I have already proven that Thieme misrepresented the figurative to literal meaning of "blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice" in Bauer, Ardnt and Giingrich many times on this forum. Thieme completely misrepresents the figurative to literal meaning of Bauer, Ardnt and Giingrich p. 22, 23.
In addition:
Remember this is "absolute truth" Bible doctrine from Thieme. Nothing at the Thieme temple could be more "absoluty truthy" or more "bible doctriney" than Thieme speaking about "spiritual death" and the Blood of Christ".
Thieme 1979 "Blood of Christ" booklet: THE PLAN OF SALVATION
In studying the New Testament we frequently encounter the phrase "the blood of Christ." In every instance, this term is a synonym for the saving work of Christ on the Cross.
Truthtesty: Note Thieme says in every instance.
Ok? same booklet, again remember this is "absolute truth" to thiemites.
Thieme 1979 "Blood of Christ" booklet: As proof that there are others who understand that the blood of Christ is figurative, permit me to quote Arndt and Gingrich, the latest Greek lexicographers. Under the word haima, "blood," they devote an entire paragraph to the figurative uses of the word. They describe it as "the blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice, especially the blood of Christ as the means of expiation."17
17William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, trans, and adapt.,A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, by Walter Bauer (Cambridge: The University Press and Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 22.
Truthtesty: This figurative (to literal) explanation begins on p. 22 (2. fig.-A) but the "blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice, especially the blood of Christ as the means of expiation.", is actually on p. 23 (2. fig.-B). This not my point. This is my point. However, on p. 23 (3.) This is the continued page that is still under the same heading of "haima". P. 23 lists LMorris JTS n.s. 3, '52, 216-227. And what is LMorris JTS n.s. 3, '52, 216-227 on p. 23?
[jts.oxfordjournals.org] THE BIBLICAL USE OF THE TERM ‘BLOOD’
And what does Morris say about the Blood of Christ? Many things, but one of them specifically is
From "THE BIBLICAL USE OF THE TERM 'BLOOD" by Leon Morris
...The remaining passages seem to point to sacrificial blood. Six times there is reference to covenant blood, which calls for no comment to show the sacrificial reference; in Rom. 3:25 God is said to have set forth Christ as hilasterion ... en to autou haimati , where the word hilasterion points us to the sacrifices. In Heb. 9 the whole context with its mention of the blood of sacrificial victims shows that verses 12 and 14 carry a reference to the sacrificial system when they speak of the blood of Christ, and the same is true of 10:19. The unusual phrase 'blood of sprinkling' (Heb. 12:24) points to a sacrificial action, and the context shows that in Heb. 13:12 the sin offering is in mind. The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood, and the same is probably true of 'the blood of the Lamb' in Rev. 7:14, 12:11. Finally, the thought of cleansing associated with the blood in 1 John 17 seems to be an allusion to sacrifice.
And what does the KJV say 1 Pet. 1:19 says?
1 Pet. 1:19 (KJV) But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
Leon Morris clearly states above: The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood,
The precious Blood of Christ is clearly sacrificial blood in 1 Pet 1:19, stated by Leon Morris, Morris was referenced by Ardnt and Gingrich (actually Bauer Ardnt Gingrich), and Ardnt and Gingrich was referenced by Thieme.
From Thieme's own reference p 22, 23 Ardnt and Gingrich, the Blood of Christ is proven to be literal sacrificial Blood.
If thiemites hadn't been so busy submitting thier study for Thieme's study, and if thiemites had done thier own study by comparing and contrasting thier study to other studies instead, they would have found these errors. But they were to busy submitting thier study to thier "right pastor"'s study.
Now this was "absolute truth" to thiemites. The reality is that absolute power corrupts absolutely, Thieme believed that he could say absolutely anything and that thiemites would be absolutely foolish enough to believe absolutely anything Thieme said absolutely.
The "Sacred Science"
The cult's ideology becomes the ultimate moral vision for the ordering of human existence. The ideology is too "sacred" to call into question, and a reverence is demanded for the leadership. The cult's ideology makes an exaggerated claim for possessing airtight logic, making it appear as absolute truth with no contradictions. Such an attractive system offers security.
[www.freeminds.org]
Try to begin to understand differentiated contexts.
Truthtesty
Truthtesty: I have already proven that Thieme misrepresented the figurative to literal meaning of "blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice" in Bauer, Ardnt and Giingrich many times on this forum. Thieme completely misrepresents the figurative to literal meaning of Bauer, Ardnt and Giingrich p. 22, 23.
In addition:
Remember this is "absolute truth" Bible doctrine from Thieme. Nothing at the Thieme temple could be more "absoluty truthy" or more "bible doctriney" than Thieme speaking about "spiritual death" and the Blood of Christ".
Thieme 1979 "Blood of Christ" booklet: THE PLAN OF SALVATION
In studying the New Testament we frequently encounter the phrase "the blood of Christ." In every instance, this term is a synonym for the saving work of Christ on the Cross.
Truthtesty: Note Thieme says in every instance.
Ok? same booklet, again remember this is "absolute truth" to thiemites.
Thieme 1979 "Blood of Christ" booklet: As proof that there are others who understand that the blood of Christ is figurative, permit me to quote Arndt and Gingrich, the latest Greek lexicographers. Under the word haima, "blood," they devote an entire paragraph to the figurative uses of the word. They describe it as "the blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice, especially the blood of Christ as the means of expiation."17
17William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, trans, and adapt.,A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, by Walter Bauer (Cambridge: The University Press and Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 22.
Truthtesty: This figurative (to literal) explanation begins on p. 22 (2. fig.-A) but the "blood and life as an expiatory sacrifice, especially the blood of Christ as the means of expiation.", is actually on p. 23 (2. fig.-B). This not my point. This is my point. However, on p. 23 (3.) This is the continued page that is still under the same heading of "haima". P. 23 lists LMorris JTS n.s. 3, '52, 216-227. And what is LMorris JTS n.s. 3, '52, 216-227 on p. 23?
[jts.oxfordjournals.org] THE BIBLICAL USE OF THE TERM ‘BLOOD’
And what does Morris say about the Blood of Christ? Many things, but one of them specifically is
From "THE BIBLICAL USE OF THE TERM 'BLOOD" by Leon Morris
...The remaining passages seem to point to sacrificial blood. Six times there is reference to covenant blood, which calls for no comment to show the sacrificial reference; in Rom. 3:25 God is said to have set forth Christ as hilasterion ... en to autou haimati , where the word hilasterion points us to the sacrifices. In Heb. 9 the whole context with its mention of the blood of sacrificial victims shows that verses 12 and 14 carry a reference to the sacrificial system when they speak of the blood of Christ, and the same is true of 10:19. The unusual phrase 'blood of sprinkling' (Heb. 12:24) points to a sacrificial action, and the context shows that in Heb. 13:12 the sin offering is in mind. The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood, and the same is probably true of 'the blood of the Lamb' in Rev. 7:14, 12:11. Finally, the thought of cleansing associated with the blood in 1 John 17 seems to be an allusion to sacrifice.
And what does the KJV say 1 Pet. 1:19 says?
1 Pet. 1:19 (KJV) But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
Leon Morris clearly states above: The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood,
The precious Blood of Christ is clearly sacrificial blood in 1 Pet 1:19, stated by Leon Morris, Morris was referenced by Ardnt and Gingrich (actually Bauer Ardnt Gingrich), and Ardnt and Gingrich was referenced by Thieme.
From Thieme's own reference p 22, 23 Ardnt and Gingrich, the Blood of Christ is proven to be literal sacrificial Blood.
If thiemites hadn't been so busy submitting thier study for Thieme's study, and if thiemites had done thier own study by comparing and contrasting thier study to other studies instead, they would have found these errors. But they were to busy submitting thier study to thier "right pastor"'s study.
Now this was "absolute truth" to thiemites. The reality is that absolute power corrupts absolutely, Thieme believed that he could say absolutely anything and that thiemites would be absolutely foolish enough to believe absolutely anything Thieme said absolutely.
The "Sacred Science"
The cult's ideology becomes the ultimate moral vision for the ordering of human existence. The ideology is too "sacred" to call into question, and a reverence is demanded for the leadership. The cult's ideology makes an exaggerated claim for possessing airtight logic, making it appear as absolute truth with no contradictions. Such an attractive system offers security.
[www.freeminds.org]
Try to begin to understand differentiated contexts.
Truthtesty
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: May 21, 2008 10:36AM
To the Forum:
And don't forget the verse prior about redemption. Blood redemption.
1 Peter 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot
Truthtesty
And don't forget the verse prior about redemption. Blood redemption.
1 Peter 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot
Truthtesty
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: May 21, 2008 10:51AM
To the Forum:
Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. I, Page 362 The great redemptive act of the Old Testament is that wrought by Jehovah when He redeemed Israel from Egypt. In that act, which is true to the plan of redemptive truth and in which there are many types to be seen, redemption is wholly wrought by Jehovah (Ex. 3:7, 8); it is wrought through a person—Moses; it is by blood (Ex. 12:13, 23, 27); and it is by power—Israel was removed from Egypt by supernatural power. The New Testament redemption follows the same steps. It is wrought of God, through Christ, by His blood, and deliverance from the bondage of sin is by the power of the Holy Spirit. Israel’s redemption was of the nation for that and all future generations. They stand before Jehovah as a redeemed nation forever. Their redemption on typical ground was verified and established in the death of Christ.
Truthtesty
Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. I, Page 362 The great redemptive act of the Old Testament is that wrought by Jehovah when He redeemed Israel from Egypt. In that act, which is true to the plan of redemptive truth and in which there are many types to be seen, redemption is wholly wrought by Jehovah (Ex. 3:7, 8); it is wrought through a person—Moses; it is by blood (Ex. 12:13, 23, 27); and it is by power—Israel was removed from Egypt by supernatural power. The New Testament redemption follows the same steps. It is wrought of God, through Christ, by His blood, and deliverance from the bondage of sin is by the power of the Holy Spirit. Israel’s redemption was of the nation for that and all future generations. They stand before Jehovah as a redeemed nation forever. Their redemption on typical ground was verified and established in the death of Christ.
Truthtesty
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
PastorThiemeisGreat2me
()
Date: May 24, 2008 09:31PM
Truthtesty: Well would this be an insentive to accept Thieme as a source on the Shed Blood of Christ? What did Dr. Chafer say about the Blood of Christ?
OK TT, Thieme and Chafer did not see eye to eye on that subject. I agree with Chafer up to a point but I also agree with Thieme when he says that it's the spiritual death of Christ that is represented by the statement The Blood of Christ. Why? do I believe it ? Well because what I've learned about spiritual death and many other categorical doctrines about God and Christ. So it makes perfect sence to me that the Blood of Christ refers to spiritual death. How could the physical blood itself solve the spiritual judgement of the terrible decision of Adam and Eve? God sacrificed a lamb and put coats of skin on them but did that solve the spiritual death issue? That Spiritual death is the judgement of God on Adam and Eve and the first problem man brought on himself so Christ had to solve that problem of seperation or spiritual death. He did that on the cross when all the sins of the world wee judged on Christ. We as humans are born physically aine and spiritual dead but our personal sins have to be judged and were on Christ where he died a spiritual death on the cross, the gospel is the solution to spiritual death and the second death as well.
pss quote : 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.
Truthtesty: Would you mind showing me where in Ephesians 3:3-9 it references the Shed Blood of Christ?
Everytime you see the word GOSPEL the Blood of Christ is there. Christ did not die physically for our sins but spiritually. We were judged at birth with spiritual death because Adams original sin was applied to us as being heirs of Adam's seed but our personal sins had to be judged on Christ to deliever us from spiritual death and the second death. No sins will be mentioned at the white Throne judgement but only human good works. All sins were poured out on Christ and judged with the spiritual death of the God-man Christ who was perfect and sinless. The only sin that was not judged was the sin of unbelief. So believe in Christ or faith in Christ vs. unbelief or no faith in Christ becomes the issue for receiving God's salvation and eternal life with him forever.
Truthtesty: You are saying that Dr. Chafer did not understand "salvation", the "mystery doctrines", and wasn't "spiritually aware"? When it was Dr. Chafer's Systematic Theology that Thieme reversioned with his crayon and corrupted? When Thieme has quoted Dr. Chafer in no less than 12 of Thieme's booklets?
I was not refering to Dr. Chafer but to you. Your understanding of salvation is seems incorrect, when looking at your post in the past.
Truthtesty: Thieme not only insults the intelligence of members of the Thieme cult, and nearly every human teacher in history, but Thieme even insults the intelligence of God. Thieme arrogates "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."
Thieme tried to "be like the most high."
Sounds like to me that others are trying to be like the most HIGH. I thought God was the only one authorized to pronounce judgement on men of God and those who use their tongue to ascribe sins to someone else get triple compound discipline and a double dose of that for doing it to Pastors. I never call anyone arrogant except 1John 1:9 myself at times so i can get back into fellowship with God. Arrogance is the number one sin of the human race and no one is immune to it.
[[color=#660099]Truthtesty: Thieme's hermenutics are pathetic. One such example is Thieme says you should insert in place of the Blood, “the SPIRITUAL DEATH” of Christ. This is a violation of the basic hermeneutical principles of Scripture interpretation by setting up a typology in the New Testament based on the anti-type also in the New Testament. Type and anti-type are Old Testament "Type" to New Testament "Anti-Type". This is BASIC hermenuetics and NOT ADVANCED hermenuetics AND Thieme fumbles the ball. Thieme forces this on the average people who really don't know much about hermenuetics. Most average people think "well he went to school so it must be true" but it is not true. Again this "private interpretation" of Thieme's is to support his false fascist politically extreme ideology.[/color]
TT , You are mistaken. All of RBT's doctrinal conclusions are not derived strictly from hermenutics but an evaluation of a combination of categorical doctrines, exegesis and other texual critcism that one learns in Semenary. Plus you are also concluding that Dr Chafer can not be improved upon which is an inaccurate conclusion. You are saying that LS Chafer had it all and we or other men of God in the future just have to stop studying and lean strictly on the teachings of LS Chafer. Well at least that is where you have gone.
I take nothing away from the brillance of LSC but he is a man also and ALL men are fallible, You, I, RBT, Walls, LSC all but Christ. We are all in this spiritual fight together. We are not the enemy but Satan and demons are.
TT, Those of us who love the Word of God and God should stop accusing each other and if we are Royal family of God agree to dis-agree with what ever doctrines that we do, as long as the salvation message is delivered accurately which helps the unbeliever receive the greatest gift that the Lord has for him and after salvation letting him know that the Plan of God has many blessings for him as he advances to maturity. That is every Christian's goal, to advance to spiritual maturity and receive as much TRUTH they can handle from whomever they decide will help them get there. For you it's Dr Chafer and Dr Walls for me and others it's Pastor Thieme.
We will get all the Complete and totally accurate TRUTH that we missed on earth when we step foot in Heaven on our first day after our death or the Rapture. No doubt I will see you there and you I, RBT, Chafer and Walls will be looking at our Lord and bowing our knees to him the one who loved us and gave himself for us and those most precious gifts of eternal life. and wisdom. Again our goal is to reach spiritual maturity and that is a personal thing and I would have to say God knows when we did, will or have reached there.
We are all members of the body of Christ and with so many different denominations and Churchs and teachers out there and all of us thinking we have it right, I know I'm not perfect and no one else is either. The issue is to me is, are we happy the way God has brought us out from our past ignorance? I am happy -Proverbs 3:13-18 Jeremiah 15:16.
TT, Thanks for all your post and showing that you Love the Word of GOD also but you are not the only one who loves it. Christian debates reveal things to those who are interested. We all have opinions and I can't convince you nor you I that I'm in a cult or RBT' ministry is cult. I can stop listening at anytime I chose and will not be punished by another human. Or commit suicide. HAHAHAHA that is obsurb, I have the freedom to study on my own or with LSChafer or anyone I please or with no one, which I would be arrogant to think I don't need help from someone more knowlegable than myself, But I enjoy reading, researching and applying God's WORD to my life and the blessings that result when I obey my Heavenly Father. RBT is a man God used to teach his word and whether you like it or not he has helped many many people achieve spiritual growth and a closer relationship with the Heavenly Father and our Lord. Your understanding of the Blood of Christ is different than my understanding of the BLOOD of CHRIST although I used to believe simular to the way you do and after further investigation I see what RBT is saying. So WHAT. Our understanding of Salvation is also different and that is a concern of mine.
Do cults teach Salvation correctly? If they can then when a person is born again into the Family of God through Faith alone in Chriat alone, how can they be labeled truly a cult? Cult like is at best what one could describe it as. But if one is taught to be occupied with Christ and also the procedures on how to accomplish that is explained and after applying those principles God shows you in so many ways that those principles and Bible Docrtine works then Cult like would also have to be elliminated as an applicable description as well.
OK TT, Thieme and Chafer did not see eye to eye on that subject. I agree with Chafer up to a point but I also agree with Thieme when he says that it's the spiritual death of Christ that is represented by the statement The Blood of Christ. Why? do I believe it ? Well because what I've learned about spiritual death and many other categorical doctrines about God and Christ. So it makes perfect sence to me that the Blood of Christ refers to spiritual death. How could the physical blood itself solve the spiritual judgement of the terrible decision of Adam and Eve? God sacrificed a lamb and put coats of skin on them but did that solve the spiritual death issue? That Spiritual death is the judgement of God on Adam and Eve and the first problem man brought on himself so Christ had to solve that problem of seperation or spiritual death. He did that on the cross when all the sins of the world wee judged on Christ. We as humans are born physically aine and spiritual dead but our personal sins have to be judged and were on Christ where he died a spiritual death on the cross, the gospel is the solution to spiritual death and the second death as well.
pss quote : 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.
Truthtesty: Would you mind showing me where in Ephesians 3:3-9 it references the Shed Blood of Christ?
Everytime you see the word GOSPEL the Blood of Christ is there. Christ did not die physically for our sins but spiritually. We were judged at birth with spiritual death because Adams original sin was applied to us as being heirs of Adam's seed but our personal sins had to be judged on Christ to deliever us from spiritual death and the second death. No sins will be mentioned at the white Throne judgement but only human good works. All sins were poured out on Christ and judged with the spiritual death of the God-man Christ who was perfect and sinless. The only sin that was not judged was the sin of unbelief. So believe in Christ or faith in Christ vs. unbelief or no faith in Christ becomes the issue for receiving God's salvation and eternal life with him forever.
Truthtesty: You are saying that Dr. Chafer did not understand "salvation", the "mystery doctrines", and wasn't "spiritually aware"? When it was Dr. Chafer's Systematic Theology that Thieme reversioned with his crayon and corrupted? When Thieme has quoted Dr. Chafer in no less than 12 of Thieme's booklets?
I was not refering to Dr. Chafer but to you. Your understanding of salvation is seems incorrect, when looking at your post in the past.
Truthtesty: Thieme not only insults the intelligence of members of the Thieme cult, and nearly every human teacher in history, but Thieme even insults the intelligence of God. Thieme arrogates "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."
Thieme tried to "be like the most high."
Sounds like to me that others are trying to be like the most HIGH. I thought God was the only one authorized to pronounce judgement on men of God and those who use their tongue to ascribe sins to someone else get triple compound discipline and a double dose of that for doing it to Pastors. I never call anyone arrogant except 1John 1:9 myself at times so i can get back into fellowship with God. Arrogance is the number one sin of the human race and no one is immune to it.
[[color=#660099]Truthtesty: Thieme's hermenutics are pathetic. One such example is Thieme says you should insert in place of the Blood, “the SPIRITUAL DEATH” of Christ. This is a violation of the basic hermeneutical principles of Scripture interpretation by setting up a typology in the New Testament based on the anti-type also in the New Testament. Type and anti-type are Old Testament "Type" to New Testament "Anti-Type". This is BASIC hermenuetics and NOT ADVANCED hermenuetics AND Thieme fumbles the ball. Thieme forces this on the average people who really don't know much about hermenuetics. Most average people think "well he went to school so it must be true" but it is not true. Again this "private interpretation" of Thieme's is to support his false fascist politically extreme ideology.[/color]
TT , You are mistaken. All of RBT's doctrinal conclusions are not derived strictly from hermenutics but an evaluation of a combination of categorical doctrines, exegesis and other texual critcism that one learns in Semenary. Plus you are also concluding that Dr Chafer can not be improved upon which is an inaccurate conclusion. You are saying that LS Chafer had it all and we or other men of God in the future just have to stop studying and lean strictly on the teachings of LS Chafer. Well at least that is where you have gone.
I take nothing away from the brillance of LSC but he is a man also and ALL men are fallible, You, I, RBT, Walls, LSC all but Christ. We are all in this spiritual fight together. We are not the enemy but Satan and demons are.
TT, Those of us who love the Word of God and God should stop accusing each other and if we are Royal family of God agree to dis-agree with what ever doctrines that we do, as long as the salvation message is delivered accurately which helps the unbeliever receive the greatest gift that the Lord has for him and after salvation letting him know that the Plan of God has many blessings for him as he advances to maturity. That is every Christian's goal, to advance to spiritual maturity and receive as much TRUTH they can handle from whomever they decide will help them get there. For you it's Dr Chafer and Dr Walls for me and others it's Pastor Thieme.
We will get all the Complete and totally accurate TRUTH that we missed on earth when we step foot in Heaven on our first day after our death or the Rapture. No doubt I will see you there and you I, RBT, Chafer and Walls will be looking at our Lord and bowing our knees to him the one who loved us and gave himself for us and those most precious gifts of eternal life. and wisdom. Again our goal is to reach spiritual maturity and that is a personal thing and I would have to say God knows when we did, will or have reached there.
We are all members of the body of Christ and with so many different denominations and Churchs and teachers out there and all of us thinking we have it right, I know I'm not perfect and no one else is either. The issue is to me is, are we happy the way God has brought us out from our past ignorance? I am happy -Proverbs 3:13-18 Jeremiah 15:16.
TT, Thanks for all your post and showing that you Love the Word of GOD also but you are not the only one who loves it. Christian debates reveal things to those who are interested. We all have opinions and I can't convince you nor you I that I'm in a cult or RBT' ministry is cult. I can stop listening at anytime I chose and will not be punished by another human. Or commit suicide. HAHAHAHA that is obsurb, I have the freedom to study on my own or with LSChafer or anyone I please or with no one, which I would be arrogant to think I don't need help from someone more knowlegable than myself, But I enjoy reading, researching and applying God's WORD to my life and the blessings that result when I obey my Heavenly Father. RBT is a man God used to teach his word and whether you like it or not he has helped many many people achieve spiritual growth and a closer relationship with the Heavenly Father and our Lord. Your understanding of the Blood of Christ is different than my understanding of the BLOOD of CHRIST although I used to believe simular to the way you do and after further investigation I see what RBT is saying. So WHAT. Our understanding of Salvation is also different and that is a concern of mine.
Do cults teach Salvation correctly? If they can then when a person is born again into the Family of God through Faith alone in Chriat alone, how can they be labeled truly a cult? Cult like is at best what one could describe it as. But if one is taught to be occupied with Christ and also the procedures on how to accomplish that is explained and after applying those principles God shows you in so many ways that those principles and Bible Docrtine works then Cult like would also have to be elliminated as an applicable description as well.
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: May 25, 2008 09:50PM
Truthtesty: Well would this be an insentive to accept Thieme as a source on the Shed Blood of Christ? What did Dr. Chafer say about the Blood of Christ?
pss quote OK TT, Thieme and Chafer did not see eye to eye on that subject.
Truthtesty: They did not see eye to eye? CHAFER WOULD SEE THIEME'S FALSE TEACHING AS A SATANIC CULT. Not eye to eye? Also, you convieniently bypass my evidence from Bauer "Ardnt and Gingrich". Bauer "Ardnt and Gingrich " did not see "eye to eye" with Thieme either. Neither did Leon Morris see "eye to eye with" Thieme. Neither does historic ORTHODOX christianity see "eye to eye" with Thieme. Is this as Thieme would say "a satanic plot"? Everyone else is a satanic liar? Only Thieme is telling the truth?
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: The walls are closing in on Thieme. This is Thieme's paranoid delusion. Thieme is divorced from reality. This is simply not true. Satan did not write the scirptures. The Holy Spirit wrote the scriptures. The Holy Spirit simply does not mention the spiritual suffering aspect of Jesus' total death that much.
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.
pss quote I agree with Chafer up to a point but I also agree with Thieme when he says that it's the spiritual death of Christ that is represented by the statement The Blood of Christ. Why? do I believe it ? Well because what I've learned about spiritual death and many other categorical doctrines about God and Christ.
Truthtesty: Have you even read all of Chafer? Do you think Dr. Chafer did not understand categorical doctrines? When it was Dr. Chafer who wrote LS Chafer's "Systematic Theology", When Systematic Theology is about organizing the teachings of the Bible into categorical systems? When it was Dr. Chafer who taught Thieme? When it was Dr. Chafer who founded Dallas Theological Seminary (where Thieme earned a masters degree)?
What part of LMorris do you not understand? I just proved from Thieme's own reference "William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, trans, and adapt.,A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, by Walter Bauer (Cambridge: The University Press and Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 22. " (see above) that Leon Morris said the "Blood of Christ" in 1 Peter 1:19 was the literal sacrificial Blood of Christ.
What do you have to say to the clear evidence of Ardnt and Gingrich? Thieme's own reference Ardnt and Gingrich stated by Leon Morris clearly states above: The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood...
The precious Blood of Christ is clearly sacrificial blood in 1 Pet 1:19, stated by Leon Morris, Morris was referenced by Ardnt and Gingrich (actually Bauer Ardnt Gingrich), and Ardnt and Gingrich was referenced by Thieme.
1 Pet. 1:19 But with the precious Blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
The Literal sacrificial Blood from LMorrris from "Ardnt and Gingrich". Haima p. 23
As I stated before:
From "THE BIBLICAL USE OF THE TERM 'BLOOD" by Leon Morris
...The remaining passages seem to point to sacrificial blood. Six times there is reference to covenant blood, which calls for no comment to show the sacrificial reference; in Rom. 3:25 God is said to have set forth Christ as hilasterion ... en to autou haimati , where the word hilasterion points us to the sacrifices. In Heb. 9 the whole context with its mention of the blood of sacrificial victims shows that verses 12 and 14 carry a reference to the sacrificial system when they speak of the blood of Christ, and the same is true of 10:19. The unusual phrase 'blood of sprinkling' (Heb. 12:24) points to a sacrificial action, and the context shows that in Heb. 13:12 the sin offering is in mind. The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood, and the same is probably true of 'the blood of the Lamb' in Rev. 7:14, 12:11. Finally, the thought of cleansing associated with the blood in 1 John 17 seems to be an allusion to sacrifice.
1 Pet. 1:19 (KJV) But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Leon Morris clearly states above: The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood,
(In Rom 3:25 I used transliterated "hilasterion dia (tes) pisteos en to autou haimati" because the Greek font does not appear to work on Rick Ross, Morris uses the actual Greek and associated fonts.)
Differentiated context.
As Barr said ""illegitimate totality transfer," i.e. the whole range of meanings that a word could have in its various semantic contexts is thought to be present in each individual case. According to Barr, it is much more appropriate to look for theology not in a word but in a sentence or combination of words, a principle that most subsequent scholarly efforts to produce a "theological dictionary" have tried to follow.
pss quote He did that on the cross when all the sins of the world wee judged on Christ. We as humans are born physically aine and spiritual dead but our personal sins have to be judged and were on Christ where he died a spiritual death on the cross, the gospel is the solution to spiritual death and the second death as well.
This is a part of Thieme's pathetic logic. Thieme has not not framed "seat of life" arguement correctly. You say:
pss quote "We as humans are born physically aine and spiritual dead but our personal sins have to be judged and were on Christ where he died a spiritual death on the cross, the gospel is the solution to spiritual death and the second death as well.
Truthtesty: But? Adam wasn't born that way was he? No. Adam was created spiritually alive and physically alive. This is a standard "framing" failure of Thieme's illogic. The seat of the life of Adam was Adam's physical eternal blood and physical eternal body and eternal soul. All united in spiritual connection with God. That is right there in Genesis and that's was God's intention from the start. The theophany of God/Man Jesus was the same potential - physical eternal Blood and physical eternal Body and the eternal Soul All united in spiritual connection with God. Thieme starts his false arguement with corrupt man and uses corrupt man as a basis to frame his false 1/2 salvatory argument, NOT starting with God intended Perfect man progressing to corrupt man progressing then again to Perfect man, as basis for a full salvatory arguement.
When Jesus Shed His eternal Blood (which Blood was spiritually connected with God) that was at the GREAT cost of His son Jesus' eternal Blood on earth. It was God's willing eternal Blood sacrificial gift, along with total death of eternal life on earth. This is clearly described in Old Testament archetypes.
Dr. Waite, Dr. Wall, Dr. Chafer, and most of Thieme's critics do not deny that Jesus did suffer spiritual efficacious separation (yet God was still in him 2 Cor. 5:19) aspect of total death, but there is simply no archetype for "spiritual death only" in the Old Testament. The archetype (or God's lexicon) is Shed Blood and Total death. Apparently, that's why Dr. Chafer says to men who deny the efficacy of the literal Shed Blood by twisting and denying meaning by means of arrogant academic wordplay metaphors to deny original meaning, as arrogating "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."
Archetype.
Also where do you think Thieme got this notion "humans are born physically alive and spiritual dead"?
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 2, Page 222 Those that in this life are spiritually dead are alive physically, while those that have died physically are alive spiritually, in the sense that they cannot cease to exist. In the end, spiritual death of this life, if not healed by redeeming grace, merges into unending second death, while physical death will yet be rebuked for all—saved and unsaved. “There shall be no more death” (Rev. 21:4), and “the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death” (1 Cor. 15:26).
Truthtesty: From divine revelation we see that Jesus' physical aspect of total death was substitutionary for the judgement aspect of sin.
VII. THE CHRISTIAN’S RELATION TO IMPUTED SIN
Physical death, as has been observed, is the penalty of imputed sin, and though for the Christian its judgment aspect is wholly repealed, the experience of death as the only way of departure from this world is the portion of all believers until the return of Christ. The penalty or judgment feature of death has been so perfectly abrogated that it can be said of all believers, “There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1, R.V.; cf. John 3:18; Rom. 8:38–39; 1 Cor. 11:32). The Apostle also declares, “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 15:55–57). It is asserted that a mighty triumph has been gained over both death and the grave. “The sting of death is sin,” but death’s power to injure is canceled by the death of Christ. “The strength of sin is the law,” but the entire merit system is terminated by Christ in His death. He met the demands for merit by releasing His own perfect merit to all who believe. The strength of sin is seen in the truth that it is lawlessness; yet the strength of the law as a means of righteousness is turned to feebleness because of the weakness of the flesh (Rom. 8:3). Thanks, indeed, be unto God for this victory over the judgment aspect of death, which victory is gained by the Lord Jesus Christ
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 7, Page 113 It is physical death which will later be destroyed (cf. 1 Cor. 15:26; Rev. 21:4). This “the last enemy” will be cancelled by a reversing of it; that is, all that have died will be raised to die no more (cf. John 5:25–28; 1 Cor. 15:22). The divine cure for physical death is resurrection.
1 Pet. 3:18 “For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit”.
Truthtesty: Physical death is a state to be entered and resolved. The question is how is it to be entered and resolved?
How many times does Thieme get to move the goal post around clear scriptural evidence? How many times does Thieme get to rewrite his "absolute truth" Blood of Christ manuals? Do you not endlessly excuse Thieme's errored theory and ignore clear evidence of the scriptures? When is it time for you to look at other possibilities? When someone offers you an incentive? a free DVR perhaps? Never?
Have you ever read "THE BIBLICAL USE OF THE TERM 'BLOOD" by Leon Morris?
Have you ever read " THE SOTERIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PHYSICAL SUFFERINGS AND DEATH OF CHRIST" By Philip J. Mitchell?
Mitchell goes into detail of Thieme's errors in Greek and Hebrew of Thieme's faulty argumentation therefore faulted conclusions.
If you think Thieme has surpassed Chafer, I disagree, but if you believe that why do you stop with Thieme? Both Dr. Wall and Mitchell have both surpassed Thieme. Why stop your indivdual personal study with Thieme?
I am totally in favor of new theories or new breakthroughs, however, Thieme has consistently shown error and deliberate misrepresentations (or colossal incompetence). Yet? Thieme is unwilling to acknowledge his errors. Thieme invalidated the christians personal study, and aggressively and dogmatically claimed an false gentile authority structure before the "heritage" or property of God - the body of Christ. (Thieme's false doctrine of right pastor) And in doing so has dysfunctionalized the discrimantory faculties of many christians who absolutely believed absolutely anything Thieme said absolutley. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Cult.
Jesus' authority structure:
Luke 22:25And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. 26But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. 27For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth. 28Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations. 29And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; 30That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Pauls' authority sructure:
Ephesians 3:8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;
Truthtesty: If Thieme can not be trusted in English, why should the average english speaking christian trust Thieme in Greek? They shouldn't. In any case the average christian should do thier own comparison and contrast of study, which would include a scientific verification of any evidence, OF ANY TEACHER.
By the way to date there have been 216 people in the United States exonerated through DNA evidence. [www.innocenceproject.org]
Do not be so quick to dismiss the efficacious value of Divine Blood in Jesus' timeless act of efficacious Work, which undoubtedly had God's DNA and God knows what other spiritually connected Power. Do you think God's timeless DNA will be there to identify you and exxonerate you in when the trumpet sounds?:
1 Cor. 15:51–53 “Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality”
Truthtesty
pss quote OK TT, Thieme and Chafer did not see eye to eye on that subject.
Truthtesty: They did not see eye to eye? CHAFER WOULD SEE THIEME'S FALSE TEACHING AS A SATANIC CULT. Not eye to eye? Also, you convieniently bypass my evidence from Bauer "Ardnt and Gingrich". Bauer "Ardnt and Gingrich " did not see "eye to eye" with Thieme either. Neither did Leon Morris see "eye to eye with" Thieme. Neither does historic ORTHODOX christianity see "eye to eye" with Thieme. Is this as Thieme would say "a satanic plot"? Everyone else is a satanic liar? Only Thieme is telling the truth?
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: The walls are closing in on Thieme. This is Thieme's paranoid delusion. Thieme is divorced from reality. This is simply not true. Satan did not write the scirptures. The Holy Spirit wrote the scriptures. The Holy Spirit simply does not mention the spiritual suffering aspect of Jesus' total death that much.
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.
pss quote I agree with Chafer up to a point but I also agree with Thieme when he says that it's the spiritual death of Christ that is represented by the statement The Blood of Christ. Why? do I believe it ? Well because what I've learned about spiritual death and many other categorical doctrines about God and Christ.
Truthtesty: Have you even read all of Chafer? Do you think Dr. Chafer did not understand categorical doctrines? When it was Dr. Chafer who wrote LS Chafer's "Systematic Theology", When Systematic Theology is about organizing the teachings of the Bible into categorical systems? When it was Dr. Chafer who taught Thieme? When it was Dr. Chafer who founded Dallas Theological Seminary (where Thieme earned a masters degree)?
What part of LMorris do you not understand? I just proved from Thieme's own reference "William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, trans, and adapt.,A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, by Walter Bauer (Cambridge: The University Press and Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 22. " (see above) that Leon Morris said the "Blood of Christ" in 1 Peter 1:19 was the literal sacrificial Blood of Christ.
What do you have to say to the clear evidence of Ardnt and Gingrich? Thieme's own reference Ardnt and Gingrich stated by Leon Morris clearly states above: The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood...
The precious Blood of Christ is clearly sacrificial blood in 1 Pet 1:19, stated by Leon Morris, Morris was referenced by Ardnt and Gingrich (actually Bauer Ardnt Gingrich), and Ardnt and Gingrich was referenced by Thieme.
1 Pet. 1:19 But with the precious Blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
The Literal sacrificial Blood from LMorrris from "Ardnt and Gingrich". Haima p. 23
As I stated before:
From "THE BIBLICAL USE OF THE TERM 'BLOOD" by Leon Morris
...The remaining passages seem to point to sacrificial blood. Six times there is reference to covenant blood, which calls for no comment to show the sacrificial reference; in Rom. 3:25 God is said to have set forth Christ as hilasterion ... en to autou haimati , where the word hilasterion points us to the sacrifices. In Heb. 9 the whole context with its mention of the blood of sacrificial victims shows that verses 12 and 14 carry a reference to the sacrificial system when they speak of the blood of Christ, and the same is true of 10:19. The unusual phrase 'blood of sprinkling' (Heb. 12:24) points to a sacrificial action, and the context shows that in Heb. 13:12 the sin offering is in mind. The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood, and the same is probably true of 'the blood of the Lamb' in Rev. 7:14, 12:11. Finally, the thought of cleansing associated with the blood in 1 John 17 seems to be an allusion to sacrifice.
1 Pet. 1:19 (KJV) But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Leon Morris clearly states above: The sprinkling of the blood in 1 Pet. 1:2 again indicates a sacrificial action, while the blood 'as of a lamb without blemish and without spot' (1 Pet. 1:19) is clearly sacrificial blood,
(In Rom 3:25 I used transliterated "hilasterion dia (tes) pisteos en to autou haimati" because the Greek font does not appear to work on Rick Ross, Morris uses the actual Greek and associated fonts.)
Differentiated context.
As Barr said ""illegitimate totality transfer," i.e. the whole range of meanings that a word could have in its various semantic contexts is thought to be present in each individual case. According to Barr, it is much more appropriate to look for theology not in a word but in a sentence or combination of words, a principle that most subsequent scholarly efforts to produce a "theological dictionary" have tried to follow.
pss quote He did that on the cross when all the sins of the world wee judged on Christ. We as humans are born physically aine and spiritual dead but our personal sins have to be judged and were on Christ where he died a spiritual death on the cross, the gospel is the solution to spiritual death and the second death as well.
This is a part of Thieme's pathetic logic. Thieme has not not framed "seat of life" arguement correctly. You say:
pss quote "We as humans are born physically aine and spiritual dead but our personal sins have to be judged and were on Christ where he died a spiritual death on the cross, the gospel is the solution to spiritual death and the second death as well.
Truthtesty: But? Adam wasn't born that way was he? No. Adam was created spiritually alive and physically alive. This is a standard "framing" failure of Thieme's illogic. The seat of the life of Adam was Adam's physical eternal blood and physical eternal body and eternal soul. All united in spiritual connection with God. That is right there in Genesis and that's was God's intention from the start. The theophany of God/Man Jesus was the same potential - physical eternal Blood and physical eternal Body and the eternal Soul All united in spiritual connection with God. Thieme starts his false arguement with corrupt man and uses corrupt man as a basis to frame his false 1/2 salvatory argument, NOT starting with God intended Perfect man progressing to corrupt man progressing then again to Perfect man, as basis for a full salvatory arguement.
When Jesus Shed His eternal Blood (which Blood was spiritually connected with God) that was at the GREAT cost of His son Jesus' eternal Blood on earth. It was God's willing eternal Blood sacrificial gift, along with total death of eternal life on earth. This is clearly described in Old Testament archetypes.
Dr. Waite, Dr. Wall, Dr. Chafer, and most of Thieme's critics do not deny that Jesus did suffer spiritual efficacious separation (yet God was still in him 2 Cor. 5:19) aspect of total death, but there is simply no archetype for "spiritual death only" in the Old Testament. The archetype (or God's lexicon) is Shed Blood and Total death. Apparently, that's why Dr. Chafer says to men who deny the efficacy of the literal Shed Blood by twisting and denying meaning by means of arrogant academic wordplay metaphors to deny original meaning, as arrogating "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."
Archetype.
Also where do you think Thieme got this notion "humans are born physically alive and spiritual dead"?
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 2, Page 222 Those that in this life are spiritually dead are alive physically, while those that have died physically are alive spiritually, in the sense that they cannot cease to exist. In the end, spiritual death of this life, if not healed by redeeming grace, merges into unending second death, while physical death will yet be rebuked for all—saved and unsaved. “There shall be no more death” (Rev. 21:4), and “the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death” (1 Cor. 15:26).
Truthtesty: From divine revelation we see that Jesus' physical aspect of total death was substitutionary for the judgement aspect of sin.
VII. THE CHRISTIAN’S RELATION TO IMPUTED SIN
Physical death, as has been observed, is the penalty of imputed sin, and though for the Christian its judgment aspect is wholly repealed, the experience of death as the only way of departure from this world is the portion of all believers until the return of Christ. The penalty or judgment feature of death has been so perfectly abrogated that it can be said of all believers, “There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1, R.V.; cf. John 3:18; Rom. 8:38–39; 1 Cor. 11:32). The Apostle also declares, “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 15:55–57). It is asserted that a mighty triumph has been gained over both death and the grave. “The sting of death is sin,” but death’s power to injure is canceled by the death of Christ. “The strength of sin is the law,” but the entire merit system is terminated by Christ in His death. He met the demands for merit by releasing His own perfect merit to all who believe. The strength of sin is seen in the truth that it is lawlessness; yet the strength of the law as a means of righteousness is turned to feebleness because of the weakness of the flesh (Rom. 8:3). Thanks, indeed, be unto God for this victory over the judgment aspect of death, which victory is gained by the Lord Jesus Christ
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 7, Page 113 It is physical death which will later be destroyed (cf. 1 Cor. 15:26; Rev. 21:4). This “the last enemy” will be cancelled by a reversing of it; that is, all that have died will be raised to die no more (cf. John 5:25–28; 1 Cor. 15:22). The divine cure for physical death is resurrection.
1 Pet. 3:18 “For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit”.
Truthtesty: Physical death is a state to be entered and resolved. The question is how is it to be entered and resolved?
How many times does Thieme get to move the goal post around clear scriptural evidence? How many times does Thieme get to rewrite his "absolute truth" Blood of Christ manuals? Do you not endlessly excuse Thieme's errored theory and ignore clear evidence of the scriptures? When is it time for you to look at other possibilities? When someone offers you an incentive? a free DVR perhaps? Never?
Have you ever read "THE BIBLICAL USE OF THE TERM 'BLOOD" by Leon Morris?
Have you ever read " THE SOTERIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PHYSICAL SUFFERINGS AND DEATH OF CHRIST" By Philip J. Mitchell?
Mitchell goes into detail of Thieme's errors in Greek and Hebrew of Thieme's faulty argumentation therefore faulted conclusions.
If you think Thieme has surpassed Chafer, I disagree, but if you believe that why do you stop with Thieme? Both Dr. Wall and Mitchell have both surpassed Thieme. Why stop your indivdual personal study with Thieme?
I am totally in favor of new theories or new breakthroughs, however, Thieme has consistently shown error and deliberate misrepresentations (or colossal incompetence). Yet? Thieme is unwilling to acknowledge his errors. Thieme invalidated the christians personal study, and aggressively and dogmatically claimed an false gentile authority structure before the "heritage" or property of God - the body of Christ. (Thieme's false doctrine of right pastor) And in doing so has dysfunctionalized the discrimantory faculties of many christians who absolutely believed absolutely anything Thieme said absolutley. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Cult.
Jesus' authority structure:
Luke 22:25And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. 26But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. 27For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth. 28Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations. 29And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; 30That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Pauls' authority sructure:
Ephesians 3:8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;
Truthtesty: If Thieme can not be trusted in English, why should the average english speaking christian trust Thieme in Greek? They shouldn't. In any case the average christian should do thier own comparison and contrast of study, which would include a scientific verification of any evidence, OF ANY TEACHER.
By the way to date there have been 216 people in the United States exonerated through DNA evidence. [www.innocenceproject.org]
Do not be so quick to dismiss the efficacious value of Divine Blood in Jesus' timeless act of efficacious Work, which undoubtedly had God's DNA and God knows what other spiritually connected Power. Do you think God's timeless DNA will be there to identify you and exxonerate you in when the trumpet sounds?:
1 Cor. 15:51–53 “Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality”
Truthtesty
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: May 26, 2008 01:33AM
Truthtesty: You are saying that Dr. Chafer did not understand "salvation", the "mystery doctrines", and wasn't "spiritually aware"? When it was Dr. Chafer's Systematic Theology that Thieme reversioned with his crayon and corrupted? When Thieme has quoted Dr. Chafer in no less than 12 of Thieme's booklets?
pss quote: I was not refering to Dr. Chafer but to you. Your understanding of salvation is seems incorrect, when looking at your post in the past.
Truthtesty: It your concept and Thieme's concept of salvation which is malformed, ill informed, and "seems" incorrect. Be specific when you attack me. This is no more than a pretentious "Holier than thou art" (or should I say pretending to be more intelligent than thou art) diversionary generalized non-specific attack on me. This is the flip-side of your generalized praise for Thieme. My concept is near identical to Dr. Chafer's. But? stick to the question. Let me phrase this so you can actually commit to an answer, in the spirit of rational communication: Do you believe that Dr. Chafer did not understand "salvation", the "mystery doctrines", and wasn't "spiritually aware"? When it was Dr. Chafer's Systematic Theology that Thieme reversioned with his crayon and corrupted? When Thieme has quoted Dr. Chafer in no less than 12 of Thieme's booklets?"
Truthtesty
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2008 01:36AM by Truthtesty.
pss quote: I was not refering to Dr. Chafer but to you. Your understanding of salvation is seems incorrect, when looking at your post in the past.
Truthtesty: It your concept and Thieme's concept of salvation which is malformed, ill informed, and "seems" incorrect. Be specific when you attack me. This is no more than a pretentious "Holier than thou art" (or should I say pretending to be more intelligent than thou art) diversionary generalized non-specific attack on me. This is the flip-side of your generalized praise for Thieme. My concept is near identical to Dr. Chafer's. But? stick to the question. Let me phrase this so you can actually commit to an answer, in the spirit of rational communication: Do you believe that Dr. Chafer did not understand "salvation", the "mystery doctrines", and wasn't "spiritually aware"? When it was Dr. Chafer's Systematic Theology that Thieme reversioned with his crayon and corrupted? When Thieme has quoted Dr. Chafer in no less than 12 of Thieme's booklets?"
Truthtesty
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2008 01:36AM by Truthtesty.
Re: R.B. Thieme Jr.
Posted by:
Truthtesty
()
Date: May 26, 2008 02:38AM
Truthtesty: Thieme not only insults the intelligence of members of the Thieme cult, and nearly every human teacher in history, but Thieme even insults the intelligence of God. Thieme arrogates "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."
Thieme tried to "be like the most high."
pss quote: Sounds like to me that others are trying to be like the most HIGH. I thought God was the only one authorized to pronounce judgement on men of God and those who use their tongue to ascribe sins to someone else get triple compound discipline and a double dose of that for doing it to Pastors. I never call anyone arrogant except 1John 1:9 myself at times so i can get back into fellowship with God. Arrogance is the number one sin of the human race and no one is immune to it.
Truthtesty:
First I was paraphrasing Chafer who Chafer was rebuking (not maligning) those who attack the Blood of Christ with arrogant academic wordplay which ignores and diverts from God's clear archetypes of the Old Testament.
Second, Thieme's "triple compound discipline" is false becuase Thieme is referring to Matthew 7:2 "For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." This is a KINGDOM LAW not a GRACE OR CHURCH AGE LAW .
This is one of the false fear tactics of the Thieme temple. Cults do not like to be exposed it is no wonder Thieme says "Every believer should develop a conscious habit of keeping his mouth shut..." Christian Suffering by R. B. Thieme jr.
Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 4, Page 223 (8) Warning Against Judgment of Others. This kingdom law is unyielding (Matt. 7:1–6): “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.” One under grace has passed beyond all judgment, by virtue of his acceptance in Christ who died for him (John 5:24). He may be chastened by his Father, which is a form of judgment (1 Cor. 11:27–32); but such judgment is never said to be the return of his sin back upon his own head, as is prescribed in this portion of the kingdom teaching.
But still? What am I doing? One 2 Timothy 2:15 Study to show thyself approved unto God." (not Thieme) Two 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.
The Thieme cult definitely tried to squeeze Matthew 7:2 into the "Age of Grace" or "Church Age", but that's a "Kingdom" Law.
This is another proof for "test all things" and performing your own personal study.
Truthtesty
Thieme tried to "be like the most high."
pss quote: Sounds like to me that others are trying to be like the most HIGH. I thought God was the only one authorized to pronounce judgement on men of God and those who use their tongue to ascribe sins to someone else get triple compound discipline and a double dose of that for doing it to Pastors. I never call anyone arrogant except 1John 1:9 myself at times so i can get back into fellowship with God. Arrogance is the number one sin of the human race and no one is immune to it.
Truthtesty:
First I was paraphrasing Chafer who Chafer was rebuking (not maligning) those who attack the Blood of Christ with arrogant academic wordplay which ignores and diverts from God's clear archetypes of the Old Testament.
Second, Thieme's "triple compound discipline" is false becuase Thieme is referring to Matthew 7:2 "For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." This is a KINGDOM LAW not a GRACE OR CHURCH AGE LAW .
This is one of the false fear tactics of the Thieme temple. Cults do not like to be exposed it is no wonder Thieme says "Every believer should develop a conscious habit of keeping his mouth shut..." Christian Suffering by R. B. Thieme jr.
Lewis Sperry Chafer Vol. 4, Page 223 (8) Warning Against Judgment of Others. This kingdom law is unyielding (Matt. 7:1–6): “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.” One under grace has passed beyond all judgment, by virtue of his acceptance in Christ who died for him (John 5:24). He may be chastened by his Father, which is a form of judgment (1 Cor. 11:27–32); but such judgment is never said to be the return of his sin back upon his own head, as is prescribed in this portion of the kingdom teaching.
But still? What am I doing? One 2 Timothy 2:15 Study to show thyself approved unto God." (not Thieme) Two 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.
The Thieme cult definitely tried to squeeze Matthew 7:2 into the "Age of Grace" or "Church Age", but that's a "Kingdom" Law.
This is another proof for "test all things" and performing your own personal study.
Truthtesty
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.