Bob Thiel Is NOT A Historian!
Bob Thiel of COGwriter and the Continuing Church of God claims to be an expert on the early history of the Church, but his writings on the subject are extremely biased and ignore a great deal of evidence. In short, Pastor Thiel is not going to win any awards for historical scholarship!
In his booklet Continuing History of the Church of God, he makes a number of statements which are simply NOT supported by the available evidence, and he writes a number of things which are demonstrably FALSE. At the beginning of his booklet, Thiel asked: "Was there an early, original form of Christianity that was so persecuted and so maligned, yet continued from c. 31 A.D.? Even today would it be overlooked by most who profess Christ?" The questions imply that what most of us recognize as Christianity is far different from the original version of the faith. What about that? Is Bob asking the right questions? More importantly, is he providing the right answers to his questions?
First, Pastor Thiel boldly proclaimed that "The Church of God has the Right Name and the Right Size." His proof? A number of Scriptural passages from the King James Version of the New Testament which refer to Christ's disciples as the "Church(es) of God." Never mind that the original Greek word, ekklesia, which is translated into English as "Church" means "an assembly of people called together." Hence, literally, the various passages which he quoted in his remarks refer to an assembly of people called together by God! In other words, the ekklesia of God describes what the Church IS - it is NOT a proper name. In the same way, the "Continuing Church of God" describes a group of people who belong to the organization which Bob Thiel founded!
As we have already noted, Pastor Thiel believes that the "true" ekklesia of God will be "the right size" (meaning that the Church would be small in numbers). His proof? He quotes a number of passages from the New Testament which refer to a "little flock" and talk about intense persecution. Now, to be sure, the early Church was very small in numbers. Indeed, the Church remained focused on Jerusalem for the first decade of its existence! Nevertheless, what Bob forgets or ignores is that Christ had predicted that his gospel would be preached throughout the world before the end, and that he commanded his disciples to "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you." (Matthew 28:19-20) In other words, Christ never intended for his ekklesia to remain a small and insular group of folks centered locally in Judaea!
Pastor Thiel went on to point out that the early Church continued to observe Torah. He even quoted theologian JJL Ratton:
The early Church at Jerusalem, retained most of the distinctive customs of the Jews, such as circumcision, kosher meats, the Jewish Sabbath, the Jewish rites, and worship of the Temple. Our Lord, Himself, lived the exterior life of a Jew, even so far as the observance of Jewish religious customs was concerned. The early Church of Jerusalem followed His example. The Jews looked upon the Hebrew Christians in Jerusalem simply as a Jewish sect, which they called the sect of the Nazarenes.
Of course, Thiel fails to mention that Jesus was a Jew, and that he HAD to fulfill the provisions of Torah! Likewise, Thiel fails to mention that Christ's disciples, and the members of the early Church, were entirely JEWISH. In other words, we would expect to find Jews observing the provisions of Torah! However, it is also clear that most Gentiles were completely unfamiliar with the Jewish Scriptures and had no tradition(s) of observing the commandments therein!
Moreover, Pastor Thiel fails to acknowledge the significance of the great Council of Jerusalem which was called to settle the matter of a Gentile Christian's obligation(s) with regard to the commandments of Torah (see Acts 15). Indeed, when we read this Scriptural account of that Council, we see that the "Jewish" apostles decided to exempt Gentiles from any obligation to become Jews or to observe the tenets of Torah!
Bob went on to underscore the importance of the failure of the second Jewish rebellion against the Romans in 135 CE, but he ignores the traumatic events of 70 CE - when the Romans destroyed Herod's Temple and Jerusalem and ended Jewish self-rule. Why was this such an egregious omission? Because, from that day forward, it was NO LONGER POSSIBLE to observe the commandments of Torah in the manner prescribed in those first five books of the Hebrew Bible! This was true for both Jews and Jewish Christians.
Mr. Thiel also authored an article titled "History of Early Christianity in which he makes a number of statements which are clearly untrue! In that article, he listed a number of doctrinal positions which he attributed to the early Church. Among those, he cited: Baptism, both Testaments, Binitarianism, Hierarchical Church government, the "true" Gospel, tithes and offerings used to support the ministry, etc. Of course, to anyone with even a passing acquaintance with the history of First Century Christianity, a number of problems with Bob's assertions about the teachings of the early Church will be immediately apparent!
Baptism was a ritual which pointed to the burial of the old self and the resurrection of the new person in Christ. The ONLY Scriptures available to First Century Christians were the ones found in the Hebrew Bible - the same one which we now refer to as the Old Testament! While some of the epistles and Gospel accounts were available to some congregations during the latter half of the First Century, it is a well-established fact that the canon of the New Testament took a couple of centuries to come together in the form that we now enjoy. Likewise, there are a number of Scriptural passages which make reference to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (and I would defy anyone to say that the Holy Spirit is not God)! Moreover, Jesus did NOT teach an authoritarian or hierarchical form of church governance. Christ taught SERVANT leadership, and his early disciples practiced that in their individual congregations. After the fall of Jerusalem, there wasn't any "headquarter" Church! According to the Hebrew Bible, tithes were owed by the Israelites to support the Temple, Levites, priests, poor, and to celebrate the commanded festivals at the central sanctuary. In short, in almost every instance, Bob's assertions fail both the Scriptural and historical accounts available to us!
Like many of the followers of Herbert Armstrong, Bob ignores the Didache, epistles of Ignatius of Antioch, writings of Justin Martyr, epistle of Barnabas, etc. and the evidence which they supply about early Christian beliefs and practices. He ignores both the Scriptural and historical evidence which points to the fact that Christians began celebrating Sunday in the First Century - in the time of the apostles. He also ignores the clear evidence that the "Gospel" or "Good News" was all about Jesus Christ and salvation through him - that his purpose was to save all of humanity! No, I'm afraid that Bob Thiel is NOT an expert on early Christianity. His narrative is like the fairy tales of old - it pleases the children of Herbert W Armstrong, but it bears little resemblance to what actually happened!
Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix
Moreover, Pastor Thiel fails to acknowledge the significance of the great Council of Jerusalem which was called to settle the matter of a Gentile Christian's obligation(s) with regard to the commandments of Torah (see Acts 15). Indeed, when we read this Scriptural account of that Council, we see that the "Jewish" apostles decided to exempt Gentiles from any obligation to become Jews or to observe the tenets of Torah!
Bob went on to underscore the importance of the failure of the second Jewish rebellion against the Romans in 135 CE, but he ignores the traumatic events of 70 CE - when the Romans destroyed Herod's Temple and Jerusalem and ended Jewish self-rule. Why was this such an egregious omission? Because, from that day forward, it was NO LONGER POSSIBLE to observe the commandments of Torah in the manner prescribed in those first five books of the Hebrew Bible! This was true for both Jews and Jewish Christians.
Mr. Thiel also authored an article titled "History of Early Christianity in which he makes a number of statements which are clearly untrue! In that article, he listed a number of doctrinal positions which he attributed to the early Church. Among those, he cited: Baptism, both Testaments, Binitarianism, Hierarchical Church government, the "true" Gospel, tithes and offerings used to support the ministry, etc. Of course, to anyone with even a passing acquaintance with the history of First Century Christianity, a number of problems with Bob's assertions about the teachings of the early Church will be immediately apparent!
Baptism was a ritual which pointed to the burial of the old self and the resurrection of the new person in Christ. The ONLY Scriptures available to First Century Christians were the ones found in the Hebrew Bible - the same one which we now refer to as the Old Testament! While some of the epistles and Gospel accounts were available to some congregations during the latter half of the First Century, it is a well-established fact that the canon of the New Testament took a couple of centuries to come together in the form that we now enjoy. Likewise, there are a number of Scriptural passages which make reference to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (and I would defy anyone to say that the Holy Spirit is not God)! Moreover, Jesus did NOT teach an authoritarian or hierarchical form of church governance. Christ taught SERVANT leadership, and his early disciples practiced that in their individual congregations. After the fall of Jerusalem, there wasn't any "headquarter" Church! According to the Hebrew Bible, tithes were owed by the Israelites to support the Temple, Levites, priests, poor, and to celebrate the commanded festivals at the central sanctuary. In short, in almost every instance, Bob's assertions fail both the Scriptural and historical accounts available to us!
Like many of the followers of Herbert Armstrong, Bob ignores the Didache, epistles of Ignatius of Antioch, writings of Justin Martyr, epistle of Barnabas, etc. and the evidence which they supply about early Christian beliefs and practices. He ignores both the Scriptural and historical evidence which points to the fact that Christians began celebrating Sunday in the First Century - in the time of the apostles. He also ignores the clear evidence that the "Gospel" or "Good News" was all about Jesus Christ and salvation through him - that his purpose was to save all of humanity! No, I'm afraid that Bob Thiel is NOT an expert on early Christianity. His narrative is like the fairy tales of old - it pleases the children of Herbert W Armstrong, but it bears little resemblance to what actually happened!
Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix
Let's be fair to Dr. Bob. Unlike so many of his ilk, Bob has earned a Th.D. And, to his credit, Bob earned that Th.D. from a religious school that requires its graduates to profess belief in the Trinity. By virtue of that belief alone, Bob is far more orthodox and authentic to historic Christianity than are most of his detractors with an Armstrong background.
ReplyDeleteThank you Millar/Lonnie for a fine piece.
ReplyDelete'Thiel asked: ''Was there an early original form of Christianity that was so persecuted and so maligned yet continued from 31 AD. Even today would be overlooked by most who profess Christ". What arrogance 'who profess Christ'. But expected from one who believes that only ccog are 'true' Christians.
'It bears little resemblance to what happened' you wrote is very true.
Their 'history' is simply that which gives them some creditability (in their own eyes), anything that says elsewise is not kosher and ignored. The early church was entirely Jewish and kept Jewish practices as did Jesus Himself. This was not a requirement for the gentiles who were coming to Jesus.
I will add that the Armstrong movement does not know what persecution is at all. As much as they lionize the early church, who suffered appallingly for their faith. Cheers.
Who is that a picture of with a cigar? Jim Meredith, perhaps? Bob doesn't smoke cigars.
ReplyDeleteOn the contrary, this is a perfect photo to represent Bob. A condescending, arrogant know-it-all.
DeleteHe's a bonifide traditional Ambassador College researcher, in which condition one accepts Armstrongism as major premise, and then diligently searches for anything which could possibly substantiate or support it. Another name for that type of researcher is "apologist".
ReplyDeleteOne thing he does not do? Objectively follow the evidentiary trail and allow it to guide him to final conclusion.
Translation: If you listen to Bob Thiel, what he teaches is never going to deviate significantly from the Armstrong bull $hit (the HWAcaca)
BB
his writings on the subject are extremely biased...
ReplyDeleteThe older I get, the more I realize MOST writing about history is "biased" in some way. Certain points are brought out, while others are ignored.
Consider the "1619 Project" v. "1776 Project" debate for an example.
Humans struggle with both subjectivity and objectivity. Good historians take a look at ALL of the available evidence. Good historians focus on reliable primary sources and peer reviewed, well-researched secondary sources. Of course, we all understand that some history is pure propaganda, and we're all aware that the "victors" generally get to tell the story - NOT the defeated, oppressed, or poor folks.
DeleteR.L. offered up two good examples of how history can be hijacked and twisted by society. The "1619 Project" was intended to be an effort to tell the story of the significant contributions which African Americans have made to making this nation what it is today. Likewise, the "1776 Project" was intended by Americans of a white European and traditionalist background to keep the focus on the traditional narrative about the history of the United States. Thus, the former is seen by many as revisionist, and the latter is seen by the other side as reactionary. This is what happens when people (like Bob and Herbie before him) have an agenda which motivates the historical narrative they are putting forward.
As Byker pointed out, these are the folks who are seeking evidence which supports their thesis - they are NOT interested in anything which contradicts it! If one objectively looks at ALL of the evidence available to us from the First and Second Century, the traditional Sabbatarian interpretations of what happened will readily appear flawed and misleading. In other words, one who is truly interested in the truth about what happened in the First and Second Century Church will be seeking the story of what happened without a story already in hand (especially one that buttresses his/her theological conclusions). You've got to really want to know what happened and follow the evidence wherever it leads you!
I don't believe Herb had it right that Christ's main message was about a coming lording world government. Which is a self serving claim that justifies his micromanaging church culture. But I also believe contemporary Christianity doesn't have it right either. Christ's criticisms of his churches in the third chapter of Revelation points away from the 'Christ did everything for us' line.
ReplyDeleteBecause of his ingrained bias, it would be impossible for Bob Thiel to take a "clean sheet" approach to early Christian history. He's in the business of furthering the Armstrong cause, as opposed to following the evidence. His entire adult life has been constrained by that,
ReplyDeleteThe human race has become far more sophisticated over the decades since HWA manufactured his package of so-called restored truths. Even the naive can smell a manipulative agenda a mile away. With the (watch out for the cliche!) "information super highway", it is so easy to locate university quality information on any given topic, or to recognize biased materials written by individuals with agendas. If there are no footnotes listing primary sources, it could be a tipoff that the writer has lifted information from proper context, or has presented as fact conjecture, or is quoting other later authors who are themselves quoting earlier sources.
In our earlier lives, many of us simply accepted "proof texts" which were spoon fed to us, without going back and reading the entire work from which these proof texts were pulled. Considering the way of life the Armstrongs preached, who would have suspected any disingenuous quality to their research? They even convinced many of us that Alexander Hislop was an author of great integrity! It is so disappointing to catch one's spiritual guides in blatant lies!
No more! Knowledge is power. Knowledge sets you free!
BB
I take exception to the use of the title "Pastor Theil" as he is 100% NOT a pastor.
ReplyDeleteIsnt it interesting that at no point in his time in various COGs, he was never picked by anyone as a pastor? Its so telling.
DeleteDoes he need to be a Pastor, when he has all those other titles?
DeleteCited from a quotation in Miller's post "The early Church at Jerusalem, retained most of the distinctive customs of the Jews..."
ReplyDeleteI believe this is likely true. But what about the sacrifices? I think they probably kept them but did not invest them with the meanings found in Judaism (Acts 21:26). Christ's sacrifice replaced the Temple sacrifices. But I think it would have created a stir if the early Jewish brothers did not sacrifice. They probably would have been expelled from the Temple.
It is good for us to consider that these early brothers were keeping the Torah in a different spirit – like they may have kept other Temple observations in a new spirit. The Torah was not their pathway to salvation. Jesus was. There was nothing wrong with observing the Torah for cultural or ethical purposes. There is something very wrong with Christians observing the Torah as a pathway to salvation. That is heresy. This is a crucial point. The Jewish brothers outwardly might have looked like they were observing the Torah but inwardly the brothers knew that the Torah had been vacated of its salvific force by the Gospel of personal salvation in Christ.
Those Jews who were not conversant with Christianity back then might have thought from appearances that the brothers were just practicing another brand of Second Temple Judaism. They were not. Their ideology was utterly different. The traditional Jews were in the Temple waiting for the Messiah. Christians Jews were in the Temple and knew the Messiah had already come. And he brought with him a new package that did not contain the Torah intact as a way to salvation.
Scout
Of course "we" know the 4th Commandment is not contingent on a temple in Jerusalem.
ReplyDeleteThat is an interesting exercise, Scout, attempting to put ourselves into the basic frame of mind of First Century Christians, or Second Temple Jews, or those who were simultaneously both. Those of us alive today have so many benefits that were, at best, uncommon during the first century.. We were born and raised during an era when science has been more broadly known and respected. We have been taught the logic and methods of the great philosophers. We can read and write for ourselves, as opposed to having our reading done for us by priests from ancient scrolls one day per week.
ReplyDeleteThere is a passage in one of the gospels or Acts about one of the Jewish movers and shakers noting that certain people had been taught by Jesus, and therefore appeared to have greater than average intelligence. So, it is entirely possible that Jewish Christians did have an expanded view of the animal sacrifices at Temple. They most likely did correlate these with Jesus after his passing and ascension.
In Armstrongism, occasionally we were encouraged to visualize the mindsets of the early Christians, but in most cases, we threw ourselves with our own levels of education, and the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong back into those times, seeing it all through our own biased eyes, and not the eyes of the actual Christians of those times. We thought we'd fit right in. We did not see ourselves as possibly not being able to read or write, or having the freedom we enjoy during our time as being very much restricted by conditions back then, , or being beholden to the leaders of a theocracy subjugated by a great world empire. Fact checking back then consisted of observing miraculous healings, raisings from the dead, and multiplication of food. There was no "Hey, let me Google you," or, "I'm going to look you up in Wikipedia" No, "There was a mistranslation in the passage you just read from that scroll!" , because they just didn't have the abundant resources we have today.
And yet we were taught that we knew everything about everything, and in great detail. Throwing myself into yet another individual's mindset, I can understand how a disciple of HWA could believe that he was a great historian. How could Bob Thiel think otherwise? He was taught that he had "the truth".
BB
There is a larger fraud involving thiel and later this year I will be publishing it.
ReplyDeleteLarger fraud? You mean other than that most of his "health supplements" are rebadged items of dubious quality, which he buys from a wholesaler then slaps his own label on them before raising the price he charges his customers?
DeleteAnonymous 8:30 wrote, "Of course "we" know the 4th Commandment is not contingent on a temple in Jerusalem."
ReplyDeleteAn integral part of keeping the Sabbath was the refreshing of the Shewbread in the Tabernacle. From Leviticus 24:
“You shall take choice flour and bake twelve loaves of it; two-tenths of an ephah shall be in each loaf. You shall place them in two rows, six in a row, on the table of pure gold before the Lord. You shall put pure frankincense with each row, to be a token offering for the bread, as an offering by fire to the Lord. Every Sabbath day Aaron shall set them in order before the Lord regularly as a commitment of the Israelites, as a covenant forever. They shall be for Aaron and his descendants, who shall eat them in a holy place, for they are most holy portions for him from the offerings by fire to the Lord, a perpetual due.”
Notice that the shewbread refreshing is integrated into the weekly Sabbath. This connects proper observance of the weekly Sabbath with the Tabernacle. This ceremony was later transferred to the Temple (1 Kings 7:48). And it was to be a covenant forever. Further, this is not a sacrifice that would have been replaced by the sacrifice of Christ. According to the Torah this is the valid Sabbath observance. You can keep the Sabbath away from the Tabernacle as a local reflection of what was happening in Jerusalem. If there is no tabernacle and no shewbread in Jerusalem, the Sabbath is decapitated.
The Torah does not envision the Jews going into Diaspora or into captivity. It does not envision the Destruction of the Temple. There are no chapters in the Torah about what Jews were to do if there were no Temple or if the Jews were displaced from the Promised Land. The Torah assumes normative conditions. The Torah sans Temple praxis was developed by men as a response to the collapse of Judaism in Palestine in the Tribulation in 70 AD.
IMHO.
Scout
Until he can tell us definitely what ordain minister(s) ordained, Herbert Armstrong, and can track their succession back to the originals, neither he nor any other Armstrongist has a case.
ReplyDeletehttps://catsgunsandnationalsecurity.blogspot.com/2025/03/reference-to-followers-of-armstrongism.html?m=1