Most of the critics of Brother Branham fall into one of the following 2 categories:
Here is a popular tactic used by debaters to discredit Brother Branham:
The critic takes a Trinitarian view and gives the following:
|
What Branham Said |
What The Bible Says |
| "There are not three persons in that Godhead, but ONE." (Ages, page 154) | Matthew 28: 19 "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." |
This same tactic can also be used by Oneness Believers.
|
What Trinatarians Believe |
What The Bible Says |
| Now the Catholic Faith is this: that we worship the one God as a Trinity; and the Trinity as a Unity" (Athanasian Creed) | "I am the LORD, and there is none else"- Isaiah 45:18 |
The critic tries to win the debate with these types of tactics through classification. That is to say, "here is our view categorized with the Bible, and here is the opposing view which surely must be contrary." The TRUTH however must answer the whole of scripture and not focus on pulling both scriptures and quotes out of context.
Clearly had the Critic taken the quote of Brother Branham and the following scripture his point would have been lost.
|
What Branham Said |
What The Bible Says |
| "There are not three persons in that Godhead, but ONE." (Ages, page 154) | I am the LORD, and there is none else"- Isaiah 45:18 |
The point here is simple, by ignoring relevant scriptures one can take any quote and try to discredit someone. This is what most critics try to do to Brother Branham.
I started with the issue of the Trinity and the Godhead since it is a source of great division amongst the Body of Christ.
Brother Branham was a messenger who stood in the gap and told them they are both wrong so long as they fuss with one another:
And I thought, "Well, what must I do? What can I do?"
Well, the great debate come up: "What are you going to do? What--what decision you're going to make?" I said, "My decision has already been made, that... My decision is to stand between both of you and join neither organization, and say, with arms around both of you, 'We are brethren.' (See, see?), 'We are brethren.'"........
Now, I said to Brother Scism and Brother Ness, "To answer your question," I said, "now, I do not take either sides with you brethren, and I know, as long as you fuss, you're both wrong (See?), because I would rather be wrong in my doctrine and right in my heart, than to be right in my doctrine and wrong in my heart." See? I said, "After all, it's your heart's condition."
......And I made that a practice to know this, that if a man, no matter what he does and how much he differs, and what he says about me, if in my heart, not from just a duty, but from my heart I can't love that man as well as I love anyone else, then I know there's something wrong in here. See? That's right."--The Godhead Explained, Chicago, 1961
Brother Branham had a true ministry of reconciliation and taught that denominationlism was a "seperation of Brotherhood", that all sides are wrong so long as they argue. Brother Branham who was an annointed minister with a vindicated prophetic office told them truthfully that it is the "heart's condition" before God first and foremost. Brother Branham often tried to preach love an reconcilation and then come out strongly with the truth on the subject just as he did later in that message.
Somone once said, "If your looking for something to criticize, I'm sure you can find it." The same is true for any man or ministry. Brother Branham has over 1100 messages avialable on magnetic tape. Let me take that many messages of ANY minister you care to name and I guarantee you I can find something's to criticize, find apparent surface contradictions, and mis-represent what that person was trying to say (though I pray as a man of God I would never do that).
Now lets look at some of these criticisms:
In his message the Godhead Explained Brother Branham tried to reconcile the two opposing views, he first told them they were both wrong as long as they are in an argumentive state, and then tried to explain to them that they really wanted to believe the same thing and went on to demonstrate the truth.
The critic of course tries to attack Brother Branham's teaching about the Trinity but fails miserably:
QUOTE: “Jesus and the Father was the selfsame person”, … ("Q and A on the Seals," 3/24/63, Seals, page 520)
CRITIC: Chapter and Verse?
ANSWER: John 14:8-9 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?
QUOTE: "The Bible says The Holy Ghost was his Father." ("Q And A," 5/15/54, COD, page 183, par. 208)
CRITIC: Chapter and Verse?
ANSWER: But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.” --Matthew 1:20.
QUOTE:Now, you’ll have to admit that God the Father, that God the Holy Ghost, is the same Person, or Jesus has two different daddys. ("Questions And Answers," 5/15/54, COD, page 183-208)
CRITIC: This is blasphemy, and ridiculous.
TRUTH: Applying labels isn't a very good argument. Its easy to call something a name and say its ridiculous without offering an explanation. This is a poor debating tactic, one cannot answer the argument so instead lowers themselves to slanderous accusations to discredit the account. The fact is God is a spirit (John 4:24) that spirit overshadowed the womb of Mary and that which was conceived in her was of the Holy Ghost (Matthew 1), therefore the spirit of God was his Father, and God is a spirit. It's the same spirit. In many places the Bible uses the "Spirit of God" and "Spirit of Christ" interchangeably for they are the self-same spirit of the ONE God. There is only ONE God and there is only ONE spirit. “For by ONE Spirit are we all baptized into one body” (I Cor 12:13) Brother Branhams had a perfect understanding on the Deity something most so called Christian scholars don't have. What they have is a hand me down theology that came out of Rome.
For an In-depth discussion on the Godhead and the subject of the Trinity Click HERE
The Critic tries to make it seem like Brother Branham contradicted himself when he made a statement like this one:
CRITIC: “Now, whichever way you’re baptized, that doesn’t matter to me.” ("Q and A," 5/15/54)
ANSWER: The critic stops there with the quote. But Brother Branham continued here: “But I want to tell you the apostolic doctrine of the Bible.”
Brother Branham doesnt offend the trinitarian brother who asked the question (the bible says a brother offended is harder to win than a city) but lays the truth in softly.
The person who wrote that question was a Trinitarian and Brother Branham didn’t want to offend them so he first gets them to open their ears and then explains the truth of the Bible on the subject as to how one ought to be baptized. They have to have ears to hear before they can receive it!
The full quote is: “Now, whichever way you’re baptized, that doesn’t matter to me. But I want to tell you the apostolic doctrine of the Bible."
The very scripture the Trinitarian critic uses to try to prove Trinitarian baptism Brother Branham explains right in the message he takes his quote from. (Q and A’s May 15, 1954.)
“Now here’s the scripture, Mathew 28:19, only one place in the bible it ever mentions these titles. “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:”
“Now the way your baptized is, “in the name of the Father, and in the name of the Son, and in the name of the Holy Ghost.” That’s not even in the scripture! But it is here, “Teach all nations, baptizing in the Name.” Now look at your Bible and see if it says “in the names” or “in the name.””
“Now here not long ago in a meeting, a fellow said, “There’s a contradiction in the Bible!” He said, “I wish you would explain it to me. Why did Jesus tell the people to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost and Peter turned around and baptized in the name of ‘Jesus Christ’ in Acts 2:38. If that don’t contradict itself I don’t see a contradiction.”
“I said, “just because you haven’t sought God right.” He said, “Brother Branham does it make any difference if I baptized this way or baptized that way?” “It certainly does and I’ll prove it by the Bible.”
Brother Branham then goes on and explains it further. If you would like to read more on the question of baptism then click the following link: Baptism
Clearly Brother Branham didn’t contradict himself he presented the truth in such a way as not to be offensive and to relay the truth in a manner that could be received.
QUOTE Paul said, "I know this, that false brethren will make denominations." Paul stood right with that Word, and said, "I know this, that there will be false brethren rise up among you. Go around and what they’ll make –denominations and everything else among you." ("The Sixth Seal," 3/23/63, Seals, pg. 427)
CRITIC: Paul did not condemn denominations, but false teachers who drew people away from the truth.
TRUTH: Denominations did not exist yet in Paul's time, the Roman Catholic Church was the first denomination and all the rest followed suit after her. This was well after Paul’s time so obviously Paul did not condemn denominations, but he did condemn the same spirit that caused them to rise up, a spirit of division which Paul condemned in many places.
It was because of false teachers causing division that denominations arose in the first place so there is nothing wrong with Brother Branham's parallel, "Paul stood right with that Word, and said, "I know this, that there will be false brethren rise up among you. Go around and what they’ll make –denominations and everything else among you." ("The Sixth Seal," 3/23/63, Seals, pg. 427
Brother Branham said denominationalism is a "separation of brotherhood." Brother Branham was drawing a parallel to the modern condition of the church and the spirit of division that gave rise to false teachers. So churches drawing lines in the sand, saying "believe it this way or your out", that’s the wrong spirit. Further the denominational church government is out of whack with the scripture. Man making the decisions by an elected board is not scriptural. Show me elections in the Bible! The Bible is not a democracy. We have westernized the Bible, which is an eastern book. The only time there ever was a church vote in scripture was when the disciples voted Matthias as the twelfth apostle. But God rejected it and chose Paul. “Paul an apostle (not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised him from the dead)”– Galatians 1:1.
Paul was specifically saying he wasn’t voted in by man, but God himself chose him to be an apostle. Jesus Christ is the leader of the Church through his holy spirit. He appoints a man, a shepherd, an overseer. The pastor is the head of the flock, or is suppose to be, not an elected local church board, or a district superintendent, or a regional board of governors controlling the decisions of the local church.
QUOTE: "Before there was ever a speck of star dust; before God was God (God is an object of adoration and no one was there to worship Him, so He was at that time only potentially God.") (Seven Church Ages [Ages], page 149, 12/1965)
CRITIC: Brother Branham says God is not Eternal.
TRUTH: Nonsense! Brother Branham is saying that God is an object of Worship so he was not yet called "God" because there was, as yet, no one to worship him. Many, many times Brother Branham says God is an unchanging God, the self-existing one. His only point was that before there was a creation he was not yet called God because the word "God" means an object of worship. Brother Branham in fact described God as the self-existing one. He was the Eternal and as Brother Branham described, "in him were attributes and he desired to express all that he was." In God was a desire to express his atributes as a creator, a savior, a redeemer, a healer, a husband to a bride, to love and be loved. All those were attributes of what God is but they could not be expressed before there was a creation. All of the attributes were in God eternally and they were expressed in time in Christ Jesus. That's it!
The critic who made this accusation questioned where is the logic in Brother Branham's statement? Who is he kidding? These statements are perfectly reconcilable. God is the Eternal but he was not called God before creation, quite simple even for the unlearned.
Another critic tries to prove a contradiction with the following two quotes. However if he really knew Brother Branham's message and understood it, he would have no problem knowing the simple answer:
QUOTE:"God alone is eternal, and because He lives, we live with Him." (Ages, page 135-2)
"And man’s just as eternal as his Creator, because he was made from eternity.” ("Hebrews Chapter Five And Six," 9/8/57M, 175-57)
CRITIC: Branham contridicted himself in these statements. Which is right?
He then gives the following scripture as a refutation, "Were wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?" (Job 38:4)
TRUTH: The Answer is truly beautiful. But first lets continue on with the rest of the scripture (which the critic doesn’t give), “when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy.”
Oh my where were you when the all the sons of God shouted for joy when God laid the foundations of the Earth?
I will break this answer into several parts:
1065-19b No, the Bride doesn't have to be in any certain place. Many of them will be in the dust of the earth. They'd be around the earth; they'd be frozen in the--the snow in the north, and--and dust of the tropical jungles, and--and all around the world. But when the Trumpet of God shall sound, the dead in Christ shall arise, waken, and come out of the dust of the earth, no matter where they are. And now, in this, the resurrection will be a universal. See? Everywhere every creature on the ball of the earth that's in Christ will come forth with Him when He comes (See?), no matter where you are. Just think of the arena in the days of the early martyrs, that when those Christians were throwed into lions' den, and those lions killed the Christians and eat up their bodies. See? Yet they were scattered, their bodies was in the wastage of the lion across the face of the earth. No matter where it is, you can't... See, you're made up of a substance that's unseen made material, and God will--will give that--that substance back. See? And now, in other words, when you become a young man or a young woman, and like, God takes a picture of you... Now, no matter how old and wrinkled, how disfigured, whatever it will be, that will wind right on down through. And that body may be destroyed, disfigured, burnt, eat up by lions, whatever it is, but it was made up of gases, sixteen elements of the earth. That was calcium, and potash, and petroleum, and cosmic light, and so forth, all goes together to make up the body. Now, no matter, that's--the whole earth is filled with that.
1066-21 But now, this picture is the main thing. Then in the resurrection, those gases, and acids, and things comes right back into the place and develops this picture again. Now, this picture was not taken when you was sixteen, or eighteen, or twenty years old at your best. When was it taken? Before there was a foundation of the world it was put in God's great file. And then, only thing it did was featured itself here for you to make your choice. See? Then you become a servant of God. Him foreknowing it, makes Him a Redeemer, as we've been through it.
Then that picture is absolutely... This is the negative. The negative part of life is where you're living now. And anything, if there is a negative, there's got to be a positive before there can be a negative. Therefore, if this is a negative, there's got to be a positive somewhere. And this ain't the real thing; this is only a foreshadow of the real thing that is to come. Now you got it?
So, I don't care what they would do with you; they cannot destroy that profile, that picture in God's great gallery up there. It cannot destroy it; it's in heaven. You could burn it up, feed it to the lions, do it anyway you want to; it'll come forth again just as sure as two and two is four. Just as sure as God spoke it, it'll come forth."
There is alot of revelation in that quote. Notice Brother Branham said this is the negative side of life, therefore there must be a positive. When this negative takes on the positive in the resurrection the perfect you that God took a picture of in his eternal thoughts will come to life, if you are in Christ Jesus. Remember God is the unchanging God, hes never had a new thought he knew everything right from the beginning. YOU WERE IN GOD'S THOUGHTS BEFORE HE EVER CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH! If you have eternal life God foreknew you.
Where were you when God laid down the foundations of the Earth? I think this is one of Brother Branham's greatest revelations. If you are saved then you were in God then! Those who would receieve eternal life were in his thoughts. And God's thoughts are eternal!!! Call it predestination if you like. We have a choice but God simply knew what choice we would make before there ever was a creation. He is all seeing, he is God! And it is scriptural! "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will" --Ephesians 1: 4-5.
If you have eternal life you are a manifestation of the very thought of God. God spoke creation into existence. Jesus Christ is the "logos" of God, that is the expression of his very image. Logos means word. He is the word, the very thought and attribute of all that God was, is, and shall be, the Eternal. What is a word? A thought expressed. Oh my. This really gets me excited. We are an expression of the thought of God. Not the sinful flesh, but the inner man that is born again by the Holy Spirit in Christ Jesus! That is an attribute of God! That's deep, but its truth. See when Brother Branham said we are eternal what he is saying is that we were eternally in God's thoughts from the beginning and we are now expressed in time. If you have eternal life you were always in God's thoughts before the foundation of the World your name was written there in the Lamb's Book of Life. HALLELUJAH!
Did Brother Branham call himself a prophet?
CRITIC: (quote of Bro Branham) "I have not called myself a prophet. You done that." ("Oneness," 2/11/62, V-10, N- 2, page 38, paragraph 232)
"I do not regard myself to be a prophet of the Lord. I – I haven’t that honor. I believe that the Lord has used me in little special things to help maybe lay a foundation for a prophet that will come." ("Taking Sides with Jesus," 6/1/62, V-3A, N-10, sermon page 15, paragraph 2)
TRUTH: Brother Branham never said he was a "prophet" when preaching the Word. The people called him a prophet. In fact he was a true prophet of God. People seem averse to the word today, but a "prophet" is one of the five fold ministry gifts after all (see Ephesians 5). Its not someone who gets up and quotes scripture, but someone who reveals hidden things. The only time he ever used the term "prophet" was after a service and he was deeply under the anointing and praying for the sick, so under the discernment he would say it to raise people's faith as in this quote:
In the first given quote by the critic Brother Branham is under the spirit of discernment and reveals something to the person in the prayer line that only God could know, and then revealed it to that person to lift their faith. This is what a true prophet would do.
The angel had told him: "If you can just get the people to believe nothing shall stand in your way not even cancer." He would be given two signs, "if they will not hear the voice of the first sign the second sign, this they will hear" And that was the discernment. He would reveal under the anointing the very thoughts and intents of the heart, things only God could know. This is evidenced by the fact of the many miracles, which took place under his ministry, which any researcher honest to find the truth could easily attest to. Also see my page Who is William Branham?
There is no contradiction here. If you had walked up to Brother Branham and said "Are you a prophet?" He would be embarassed by the question and say no. Every minister of any background that ever met him would be the first to admit that he was a very humble man. But under the discerment when God was operating through him performing his word and making it come to life, he would say it to lift peoples faith for healing. He would say this while standing in a spiritual state in deep communion with God that many will never see or perhaps understand. He was operating completely and fully in his office. But he wouldnt stand and make a statement while preaching and say, "I am God's Prophet", as the critic deceivingly tries to imply. Brother Branham was much too humble and of Godly character to do that. It is clear from the quotes that these statements were made while Brother Branham was praying for the sick in order to lift their faith.
QUOTE: He can’t have a mother. Jesus was not even anything to Mary, but He was just…she was an incubator that hatched Him. ("Oneness," 2/11/62, Voice of the Prophet, Volume 10, sermon Number 2, [V-10, N-2], sermon page 15 sermon paragraph 79.
CRITIC: Mr. Branham taught that Mary was not Jesus’ mother, but an incubator that hatched Him. The Bible says Jesus' mother was Mary.
ANSWER: Talk about taking stuff out of context wow. Of course Brother Branham knows and taught that mary was Jesus mother. Brother Branham stated things in this way because of the Roman Catholic teaching of making Mary into "the Mother of God," and making her a “mediatrix” and “co-redeemer” when the Bible clearly states that there is "one mediator between man and God, the man Christ Jesus." Brother Branham says that she is not the "mother of God" but she was the instrument, a virgin who had not known a man, to fulfill the promise of bringing forth the savior being born without sin. Certainly Brother Branham is not disputing the Virgin Birth or that Mary was his Mother who birthed him and raised him. Brother Branham was a very strong supporter of this scriptural fact. Jesus did call her "woman" because he knew that some would try to elevate her status into a place reserved for Christ alone. This is why he used this terminology to say she was not the "mother of God." God is the eternal, without beginning of days or end of life, and cannot have a mother.
A further point: All agree that God provided the seed supernaturally, but traditional denominations are missing is that God had to provide the egg too! Otherwise she (Mary) was born in sin and the taint of sin would be upon her child. Every seed must reporduce after its own kind is a law of God. The Bible says, "we are born in sin, shaped in iniquity and came forth from the womb speaking lies". God provided both egg and seed. "She was found to be with child" and that child was "conceived by the Holy Ghost." The spirit of God over-shadowed her and created both egg and seed in creating the flesh body of Jesus otherwise the taint of sin would be upon him. He was altogether supernaturally created both egg and seed. In this respect she was an "incubator" that carried forth the flesh body of the Lord Jesus truly born without the taint of original sin. Now this does make sense and there is no scripture to disprove it. In my view it shows Brother Branham is a true prophet for seeing the small details which must be right. One scripture a critic uses doesn’t prove anything, "Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." (Matthew 1:20) This only supports Brother Branham's idea, "that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." The zygot was completely conceived by God who provided the egg and the seed and conceived Jesus supernaturally.
One person argued then that Jesus would not then be biologically joined to the human race. How so? He was a human being after all and was simply born without sin. He was the second Adam, the second sinless created human being. The first Adam (also creatred supernaturally) fell into sin, the second Adam was victorious over sin.
The best point here seems to be that in Genesis 3: 15 God said to the serpent that he would "put enmity between thy seed and the woman’s seed." The woman’s seed refers to the prophecy of Christ that would come through the righteous lineage. Granted Mary brought forth the child, she carried him and gave birth to him. She was of the righteous lineage. Amen. No one disputes this.
There are some tough questions in the Bible. For example Matthew 1:1-16 gives the lineage of Jesus through Joseph and we all know Joseph wasn’t his natural father, but yet this scripture gives the lineage through Joseph for what reason God chooses. Jesus can be said to be "made of a woman." She gave birth to him, she reared him and mothered him. But this does not change the idea that God created both egg and seed in her womb. This is a gray area and certainly not a "heresy" of any kind.
I have a whole page dedicated to the subject of theSerpent Seed but will say only this here:
SCRIPTURE: "And the LORD God said unto the serpent, … And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." (Genesis 3:14,15)
CRITIC: Note how God spoke these words to the serpent.
TRUTH: Yes, please note HOW God spoke these words to the Serpent: "God said unto the serpent....And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed"
The serpent that God spoke to is said to have a seed!
Several critics then point out that the Rev. Sun Myung Moon also taught a (alot different) Serpent Seed doctrine. What does that prove? Who cares what Rev Sun Myung Moon taught? He came up later and just borrowed the idea and twisted it. Just because a cult teaches a doctrine doesn’t make it false. By that reasoning one gets the following logic. Nazarenes believe in Sanctification. Mormons believe in sanctification so that doctrine must be false. Or Mormons believe in the Trinity so the trinity must be false. Or analogously Snake handlers believe in "Jesus Only" so Jesus Only must be false. Why bring it up? It’s an old practice of debate trying to classify the attacked argument with something else undesirable. The scripture must decide the truth. See my link above on the Serpent Seed for an in depth look at the scriptures.
Yes I say as a matter of fact that Brother Branham taught that hell isn’t eternal. There is only one thing that is eternal and that is God. Only God existed before creation and is “eternal.” The very word eternal means neither a beginning nor an ending. In fact Jesus said that hell was "prepared for the devil and his angels." It was prepared; it was created for the devil and his angels. It had a beginning so it is not eternal. There is no such thing as an eternal hell, it had a beginning.
Now that should be clear. Does it burn forever and forever is another question? Sure but the word "forever" is the word "aeon" in the Greek which means “ages” or a long space of time. So it burns for ages and ages but not eternally.
Brother Branham did teach annihilation of the Soul. There are scriptures to support this view:
"The soul that sinneth, it shall die." Ezekiel 18:4 and Ezekiel 18:20
That is what the Bible says. "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10: 28
I looked up the word "destroy" here in my Thayer Greek-English Lexicon, and it means: "To destroy, to put out of the way entirely, to abolish, put an end to, to be blotted out, to vanish away, to incur the loss of life." That sounds pretty final to me.
As Brother Branham said if you were alive eternally in hell you would still be alive, you would still exist eternally but in damnation. Hell is the place the damned go to while awaiting judgment for “aeons” of time. After judgment comes the Lake of Fire and both soul and body are utterly destroyed. That is my understanding of it. However Brother Branham did say, “that the fire would eventually go out” so it may be some time billions and trillions of years later. In either case I don’t want to go. The message of Hell is clear. It's not a place one wants to go to. Solution: Receive Christ and Salvation by the Holy Spirit in Jesus name!
Some critics try to paint the most negative picture they can of Brother Branham here is what one critic did:
QUOTE:I never preached anything in my life under inspiration I had to take back, ‘cause I don’t depend on my own understanding." ("Oneness," 2/11/62, V-10, N-2, sermon page 16-87)
Then he tries to make it sound as it Brother Branham said this following quote under "inspiration" and make him into a false prophet. He then gives out a half quote and leaves out the most important part. How convenient.
Here is the correct context of the quote from the book "An exposition of the Seven Church Ages" page 321: "Let me predict (I do not say prophesy, but predict) that the end of the age will be around 1977."
He then goes on and talks about his 7 visions of the future which he talked about many times that took place in 1933. These visions are very accurate up to the last vision, which has yet to take place (it is related to the very end of the age and the oncoming tribulation period).
"Based on these seven visions, along with the rapid changes that have taken place in the last 50 years, I PREDICT (but do not prophesy) will all have come to pass by 1977."
Now those quotes are taken verbatim from the 7 Church Ages Book which was published in the summer of 1965. Brother Branham died in Dec 1965. No changes have been made from the original publication.
Now Brother Branham had seen the first 5-6 things take place. Again this was all publisahed in 1965. He twice said he predicted but did not prophesy. He specifically said it wasn’t a prophecy, but based on all that he had seen come to pass that was shown him it was difficult for him to see the rapture not taking place in the next 12 or so years. Today it looks the same for the last 10 years it seems as though it could happen at any moment. And we in fact as Christian are suppose to “look up” when we see these things take place.
Because of the stature of his ministry and his office the people put tremendous pressure on Brother Branham asking him when the end of the age would be. He never said God gave him a date. As far as he could see he made as best a guess as he could from what was revealed at the time. Israel restored in 1948, the post WW 2 healing revival, the decadence of the 1960's, the decline of morality etc. I knew about 1977 before I ever got into Brother Branham’s ministry because the first thing I read was the church age book. So what? He predicted but specifically said “I DO NOT PROPHESY.” It was his best guess as a private student of the word. God didn’t give him a date and he never claimed that he did.
QUOTE: "Now I know you ladies don’t like this kind of preaching, but sister, you are dead wrong in what you are doing. The Bible forbids you to cut your hair. God gave it for a covering. He gave a command for you to wear it long. It is your glory. When you cut your hair you signified that you left the headship of your husband. Like Eve you walked out and went on your own. You got the vote. You took men’s jobs. You left off being females. You ought to repent and come back to God." (Ages, page 344)
CRITIC: The Bible does not forbid women to cut their hair. The Nazarite vow was a Jewish ordinance, not a church ordinance.
TRUTH: "And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head--it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head,since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head." I Corinthians 11:5-10 NIV
"But that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory. For long hair is given to her as a covering." I Corinthians 11:15
Now the Bible clearly says in the NEW TESTAMENT that a womens hair is given to her for a covering. And it is dishonorable for her to even pray without her head covered. The sign spoken of is her hair for a covering. That her long hair is a glory to her. Further the scripture says if she cuts it at all she should be shorn or shaved bald, which is shame to her for her hair is her covering and her glory. Now the scripture is plain here. And the critic who said the Bible says otherwise is a Liar and a deceitful worker as his work against Brother Branham proves.
Brother Branham explains further in this quote:
“Making them (women) to cut their hair... Oh, they say, "Our church don't pay no attention to that." You know why? They're Blind. "It's no harm to cut your hair." The Bible says it is. It's even an indecent thing for you to even cut your hair and even pray. You say, "Well, a woman should be covered." And the Bible said her hair is her covering, not a hat, her hair."
"What if Moses said, "I'll take off my hat instead of my shoes?" That wouldn't have worked. God said, "shoes"; God meant "shoes." He said, "hair," not "hat." Glory to God. He liked that, I'm sure. Praise be to God. He means just what he says." --Recognizing your Day and It's Message 65-0726m
ESCHATOLOGY: Brother Branham clearly taught that there are 7 Church Ages as he demonstrated in his most complete written work, "An exposition to the Seven Church Ages." Brother Branham is not the only christian minister to teach "ages" of the 7 churches given in Revelation chapters 1-3. Dr. Scofield gives a strong argument for 7 church ages in his "Scofield Bible" which can be purchased at any christian book store.
CRITIC: The Bible does not teach "church ages" or "age messengers."
TRUTH: On the contrary. One need look only at the scriptures and the descriptions of the 7 Churches in the letters. God chose 7 churches for a reason. 7 is the number of completion (7 golden candelsticks, 7 stars, 7 churches, 7 angels, 7 vials, 7 seals and so on). Most scholars agree that John's apocalyptic vision was describing events that would take place up to the return of Christ and the Millenium, virtually every Bible reader knows that.
Revelation 1:3 says “Blessed is he that readeth and they that hear the word of this letter to the first century church only.” Is that how the scripture reads? No it reads thusly:
So we see first of all that the letters of Revelation are a prophecy concerning the future of the church.
The 7 churches describe perfectly all the conditions of the future history of the church at the time of John's vision. The first church age leaves its first love that opens the door for false teachers and the gnostics. In one age we see the “deeds of the Nicolaitans” in the next church age it becomes a “doctrine.” The second church age was the “martyr age” and the last church age is “laodicea” which is the lukewarm church and perfectly matches the description of the endtime church as given by Paul in 2 Timothy study it out and see if this is not so.
Notice immediately after the letter to the 7 church ages the Rapture occurs in Revelation 4:1 (This was taught by Brother Branham, as well as Hilton Sutton, John Wolvard and others) and the word church is never again mentioned in scripture. We have 7 spiritual ages of the church and then the “rapture” and the church is gone. This fits perfectly with 7 Church Ages.
God has always used messengers throughout all the Bible. Before he flooded the Earth he sent the Messenger Noah, when he gave his law he sent a prophet-messenger Moses. All of the prophets were messengers. And in the New Testament before Jesus came a messenger was sent to “prepare the way before him” and that was John the Baptist. Paul was a “messenger” to the Gentiles and so on. God is unchanging and will do it exactly the same way before he comes in the last church age just as he has promised to do. “Elias truly shall come first and restore all things” and “Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.”
The book of Revelations speaks of the 7 church ages. Many people including some critics criticize Brother Branham and interpret the letters to the 7 churches as being only to churches at that time. Now does it make any sense at all that the first 3 chapters of the book of Revelation are for the first century and then ALL the rest of the book of Revelation is about the future by their own incorrect futurist interpretation? Obviously not.
There are 7 churches mentioned, which "prophesy" the future history of the church with complete accuracy. The rise of the Roman Catholic Church and her false denominational offspring are contained in these passages of the 7 church ages. There is a "angel" to evey church. The word "angel in the Greek simply means "messenger." These are earthly messengers whom God sends with a message to each age. God has a specific message to each church and and each age leading up to the rapture. After Laodicea, the Lukewarm rich church, who is spiritually bankrupt, after sending his warning to that age and giving them space, at the end of that age is the rapture of the church.
Some critics go as far as to pick on every thing Brother Branham ever said such as this mis-quote: "two thirds of the angels was kicked out." ( "Q and A On Genesis," 07/29/53, COD, page 21-63)
Obviously that is a mis-quote, Brother Branham meant one third. This was not a doctrinal teaching that he preached time and again it is a one time mis-quote. Give me 1100 plus messages of the critic and see if I can catch a mis-quote here and there. No one is perfect, in fact Brother Branham's simple mistakes such as these simply show that he is human.
This is the one area I dont want to touch on, not because I cant answer it (I can) but because I dont want to cast my pearls before the swine. This is not something that can really be taught anyway. I can answer it but it wouldnt be understood by most christians. It is something you have to discover for yourself by God's spirit leading you into a deeper walk with him. The TRUTH is out there.
QUOTE: Now, I’d better stop right here, see. I just feel checked not to say no more about it. See? So, just remember, the Seventh Seal, the reason it was not opened, the reason He did not reveal it, no one should know about it. ("The Seventh Seal," 3/24/63, Seals, page 564c)
CRITIC: "This may have disappointed many of Mr. Branham’s flock. But Revelation 22:18-19 warns us to not seek after extra-Biblical revelation. Revelation 10:4 says the seven thunders are sealed. The Bible doesn’t tell what their voices said, but we don’t need to know what the Bible excludes."
TRUTH: "But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets." Revelation 10:7
"And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables." --Mark 4:11
I will think I will leave it at that.