I
can't think of anything more malicious than for any so-called theologian and
pastor to attack the blood of Jesus Christ. The Blood of Christ is the
very heart of the Word of God, and is vitally important to our salvation.
In fact, we are saved by the blood of Christ, "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; But with
the precious blood of Christ..." -1st Peter 1:18,19. How could
any professed man of God deny the power of the blood of Jesus Christ?
R.B. Thieme Jr. diminishes the importance of the blood of Christ. The
same is true of heretic John MacArthur, who appears to have been a student of
Thieme.
Thieme Speaks Blasphemy!
In the booklet, The Blood of Christ (ISBN 1-55764-036-X), by R.B. Thieme Jr., he viciously attacks the Biblical doctrine of the blood of Christ. As you will see, Thieme twists the Word of God around to teach his heresies.
On page 18 of his blasphemous book, The Blood of Christ, Thieme says...
"The red liquid that ran through the veins and arteries of Jesus' mortal body is not related to our salvation, and there is no Biblical basis for attributing any unusual properties to Christ's bodily fluids. The term "blood of Christ" is far more significant than any magical or mystical power falsely ascribed to His physical blood by those who are ignorant of doctrine. John's record indicates that His literal blood was not a factor in either His spiritual or His physical death.
When Jesus therefore had received the sour wine, He said, 'It is finished!' And He bowed His head, and gave up His Spirit. (John 19:30, NASB)
When Christ had paid the penalty for sins, He announced that salvation was finished..."
Thieme is too educated for his own good. He subtly claims that Jesus' blood is "far more significant than any magical or mystical power falsely ascribed..." Using his reasoning, then why would God have told the Old Testament high priest to APPLY the slain lamb's blood to the mercyseat? Why not just kill the lamb? If Thieme is correct, and the blood of Christ wasn't intended to take away our sins, then why did God require the blood of animals in the Old Testament to represent the sacrifice of the coming Messiah? Thieme's logic is irrational. Why would God use blood to represent death, when the lamb's death could have just as easily been sufficient in itself? No, God required a blood sacrifice (Hebrews 9:22)!
Also, when Jesus said "it is finished," he could
not have been speaking about redemption because Jesus hadn't died, been
buried, or risen from the dead yet. The Apostle Paul defines the Gospel
as the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ (1st Corinthians 15:1-4).
The only thing finished was all the prophecies concerning Christ up until that
point, "After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished,
that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst ... When Jesus
therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he
bowed his head, and gave up the ghost." It is clear that Jesus said
"it is finished" concerning the prophecies concerning Himself. Jesus
meticulously paid attention to every detail. I hear so many preachers
teaching that Christ's work of redemption was completed when He said "it is
finished"--no it wasn't! Jesus still needed to die, be buried, rise
again, and apply the blood to the mercyseat in Heaven.
Thieme's Ridiculous Reasoning
On page 24 of The Blood of Christ, Thieme states...
"External bleeding was not the cause of death ... He did not bleed to death."
Whoever claimed that Jesus bled to death? It is clear from Luke 23:46 that Jesus dismissed Himself from this earthly life. But what does this have to do with the importance of the blood? Thieme deceitfully tries to establish a link, where there is no link, between the importance of Christ's blood and the method in which Christ died. On page 22, Thieme states...
"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. Thus while on the cross, our Lord provided proof that He did not bleed to death and that, unlike the blood of a sacrificial animal, His literal blood has no spiritual significance."
Thieme claims that since Jesus didn't bleed to death, it is proof that Christ's blood is not important. However, just because the Bible doesn't teach that Jesus bled to death, doesn't diminish the importance of His blood sacrifice in any way. There is nothing in the Old Testament where the high priests were told to let the lamb bleed to death. No, they were to kill the lamb, and then apply the blood to the mercyseat. Thieme is twisting things around backwards, reading into the Bible something which is not there. Thieme teaches that Jesus died spiritually; BUT, that is not true. The only spiritual death is in the Lake of Fire, and Jesus didn't go to the lake of Fire (Gehenna). Jesus, the man, died physically; BUT, the Holy Spirit cannot die.
Thieme's Heresy Concerning Hebrews 9:22
R.B. Thieme Jr. is a heretic! In the quote above he states, "...unlike the blood of a sacrificial animal, His literal blood has no spiritual significance." In contrast, the Word of God states in Hebrews 9:23, "It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these." Thieme actually claims that the blood of Old Testament animals had significance; BUT, not the blood of Jesus. To the contrary, Hebrews 9:23 declares that the sacrifice in Heaven was a BETTER sacrifice. And what was that BETTER Heavenly sacrifice? Verse 24 gives us the answer ... "For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us." Thieme is sly like a snake and states on page 27...
"When Hebrews 9:22 states that 'without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness,' animal blood is in view. The entire context of that passage relates the shadow Christology on animal sacrifices to their fulfillment in the reality of Christ."
But Mr. Thieme isn't as smart as he thinks he is, and the Bible totally contradicts what he states above. Thieme claims that Hebrews 9:22 is only speaking about the blood of Old Testament animal sacrifices, and not of Christ. I would like to prove to you now that Mr. Thieme is a liar concerning the blood of Christ...
"Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus" -Hebrews 10:19
Praise God ... did you read that?! We are able to enter into the holiest, and stand in the presence of our God, by THE BLOOD OF JESUS!!! Carefully notice, the Word of God didn't say "by the death of Jesus." No, the Bible says by THE BLOOD OF JESUS! You see friend, you can't be deceived if you'll read and study the Word of God. Thieme is deceiving multitudes of ignorant people, who blindly trust his teachings, because they don't go to the Word of God for themselves.
"Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us." -Hebrews 9:12
Did you read that? This Scripture blows R.B. Thieme Jr. and John MacArthur right out of the water!!! Jesus ENTERED IN ONCE INTO THE HOLY PLACE ... BY HIS OWN BLOOD!
Thieme teaches that Christ DID ascend into Heaven and enter into the Holy of Holies, presenting Himself as a Sacrifice; BUT, Thieme states on page 31...
"He did not take any blood with Him to heaven."
Hebrews 9:12 clearly states, "...by his own
blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal
redemption for us." What part of this Scripture doesn't Mr. Thieme
understand? The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus entered into the
Heavenly Holy Place BY HIS OWN BLOOD. I don't see the word "death"
mentioned anywhere. How could any so-called Christian foolishly claim
that Jesus didn't take His blood to Heaven? The Old Testament
tabernacle, holy of holies, high priest, and blood sacrifices were all a
SHADOW of the Heavenly Holy Place (Hebrews 10:1). So why would Thieme
claim that the blood didn't need to be applied to the mercyseat in
Heaven, when it was ABSOLUTELY MANDATORY in the Old Testament? Again,
Thieme's reasoning is irrational. EVERYTHING that the Old Testament high
priests were REQUIRED to do was for a specific purpose. It is outright
unscholarly and unbiblical rubbish, for Thieme to teach that the events
occurring in Heaven were NOT in direct accordance with the "shadow" of
everything required of the Old Testament high priest. Don't you tell me
that Jesus entered into the Heavenly Holy Place WITHOUT blood, when the
Old Testament high priest was required to enter WITH blood (Hebrews
9:7). Remember, the Old Testament high priest was required to bring the
blood of a perfect lamb into the holy place, as a picture of the coming Lamb
of God who would take away the sin of the world WITH HIS OWN BLOOD ... "Wherefore
Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood."
Thieme Falsely Teaches That Jesus Died TWICE on the cross
On page 34 of The Blood of Christ, Thieme states...
"Our Lord died twice on the cross. His first death is called "the blood of Christ," and only after the completion of this, His spiritual death, did He die physically. The blood of Christ definitely does not refer to His physical death because He did not bleed to death!"
There is absolutely nothing in the Word of God
teaching anything about Jesus dying "twice." Jesus died once!
Jesus never died spiritually. Physical death is when our soul and spirit
SEPARATE from our earthly body (tabernacle). When Jesus' Spirit left His
body, His body died. Thieme cannot back up his statements with
Scripture. Furthermore, Thieme keeps trying to refute things which the
Bible doesn't even teach in the first place. He says, "The blood of
Christ definitely does not refer to His physical death because He did not
bleed to death..." Why is Thieme making this up? Whoever said
that the blood of Christ referred to anything? The blood of Jesus stands
alone, and does not refer to anything. The blood of Jesus is
NOT representative of Christ's death.
It's the Blood of Jesus That Saves!
In the Old Testament, Moses was told by God to instruct the people to kill a lamb, and then APPLY the lamb's blood upon the lintel and door posts of the home. If the Lord saw the blood as He passed through, then the firstborn lived. Notice what God said in Exodus 12:13, "When I see the blood, I will pass over you..." If a family killed the lamb, but didn't apply the blood to the home ... then the firstborn DIED! The blood had to be applied Mr. Thieme!
On page 38 of The Blood of Christ, Thieme states...
"...but it is no more bizarre than the false idea that the 'blood of Christ' is somehow a literal phrase. yet how many Christians believe just that!"
"We have seen that literal blood cannot bring man eternal life and that Christ's blood is a representative analogy which describes His spiritual death."
On page 31 Thieme states...
"We have seen in great detail that His mortal, human body fluids have absolutely nothing whatever to do with salvation."
R.B. Thieme Jr. speaks lies! Why would God continually refer to Christ's "blood" if He meant Christ's "death"? Thieme would lead us to believe that God doesn't always say what He means, or mean what He says. The Word of God couldn't be any clearer concerning the importance of the blood of Jesus. Here are a few Scriptures for you to ponder...
"In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins." -Colossians 1:14
"...and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." -1st John 1:7
"Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God." -Romans 3:25
"Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him." -Romans 5:9
"But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ." -Ephesians 2:13
In lieu of such abundant Scriptural proofs, it is utterly ridiculous for Thieme, MacArthur, or anyone else to teach that Christ's blood is only representative of His death. It is abundantly clear from the Word of God that we are saved through the blood of Jesus Christ. Here is irrefutable proof...
"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; But with the precious blood of Christ..." -1st Peter 1:18,19.
How could Mr. Thieme be so blind? I say this kindly ... some of the biggest fools in this world are found amongst highly educated people. On the back cover of his booklet, The Blood of Christ, Thieme boasts of having "extensive academic training in Greek, Hebrew, theology, history, and textual criticism..." Ironically, and tragically, he is an educated fool. I do not say this to be unkind; BUT, to EXPOSES R.B. Thieme Jr. as Ephesians 5:11 commands me to, "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove (Gk., "elencho," meaning, "to expose") them." Mr. Thieme is an imposter who teaches damnable heresies. Be denying the efficacy of Christ's blood, Thieme denies Christ Himself...
"But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction." -2nd Peter 2:1
