William Branham Quote Book
William Marrion Branham:
In the beginning was the Eternal. He wasn't even God. "God," our English word "God," is a—is an object of worship. But He... There wasn't nothing to worship Him. He was just the Eternal.
In Him was attributes. Anyone knows what an attribute is. In others words, in Him was His thoughts, just thoughts. That's His attributes. Then His Word, and a thought expressed is a word. "In the beginning was the Word." Before It was even expressed, It was a thought, attribute. In this thinking He was to be God. Probably created angels first, then He was worshipped, He was God.
And then, in Him was attributes to be Father, be Son, be Saviour. Nothing lost, something had to be lost, so there had to be a way made for that. To be Healer. Nothing sick, so He had—something had to get sick so He could heal it. It's only displaying His attributes.
("Identified Christ of All Ages," April 9, 1964, message #64-0409)
Analysis:
William Branham (WMB) said, "In the beginning was the Eternal. He wasn't even God." Yet the Bible says, "Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God." (Psalm 90:2) WMB said that the English word "God" only means an object of worship. He should have looked up the biblical Hebrew word that's translated into English as God. The Hebrew word is El, meaning "mighty, strong, prominent" (Got Questions?). So WMB was wrong. Even before creation, God was and is eternally God.
As for God's attributes, there have been a few liberal theologians before WMB who thought that God needed to create in order to express certain of His attributes. But is that something that the Bible teaches? Or is it only a product of man's philosophical mind as he tries to figure out things about God that He hasn't revealed to us? God is sovereign and doesn't need anything to exist. Creation, on the other hand, is completely unnecessary and needs God to exist. I believe this is an example of where WMB has gone outside what has been written in order to explain his own personal (and unbiblical) view of the nature of God to his followers
(Deuteronomy 29:29; 1 Corinthians 4:6).
WMB:
Now, anyone knows that God is a Spirit. Is that right? And the Holy Ghost is the Son of God; He's supernatural. Son of man was a prophet, a man. David was a king. But God is a Spirit. And in the church age He's revealed as Son of God. We believe that. You don't believe He's the Son of God, you're lost.
("A Trial," April 27, 1964, message #64-0427)
Analysis:
If you're confused as to what William Branham just said in this quote, you're not alone. In fact, I would venture to say that the majority of Message Believers don't really understand what their prophet believed about the nature of God. Most think they do, but they think he was a Modalist, which is the view that God is a single person that has manifested Himself in 3 different ways: Father, Son and Holy Ghost. WMB did not believe that. His view of God is a convoluted mishmash of ideas from several false prophets throughout history. It would be difficult to explain what he believed here, but you can get some idea of his confusion if you see the page, Jesus According to William Branham.
So what was he saying in this quote? Basically, what he is first saying is that God is a spirit. Jesus was the Son of man, meaning that He was not truly God, but a man in whom God dwelled in His fullness. When Jesus died and resurrected, He returned to His Church in spirit form; not as God, but as the Logos, the spirit being Jesus was when God first created Him before the world was made and before the Incarnation. And in this quote, he's saying that if you don't believe his understanding of God, the Son of man, and the Son of God, then you are lost. Of course, the Apostle Peter knew better than WMB because he testified to Jesus Himself that He was the Christ, the Son of the living God. Just read the gospel of John, chapters 14-17 and see for yourself that what William Branham believed and taught was far from biblical truth.
WMB:
Moses had the Word. Now remember, after the Word was made manifest, Moses was Moses again. See? But while that Word was in him to be give out, he was God. For he wasn't Moses no more; he had the Word of the Lord for that age. Nothing could touch him till that was over, had that Word with him. So therefore, when he come, the people turned their heads; they couldn't understand. He'd been changed; he was a different fellow. He come with that Word. And he put a veil, the Bible said, over his face, for he had the Word. And he was the Word to them.
("The Unveiling of God," June 14, 1964, message #64-0614M)
Analysis:
This quote represents William Branham's view that man can be God on earth when he yields himself totally to God's Word. Notice he said that Moses was God, not like God. Moses was the precursor to Jesus, except Moses was a sinner. Jesus will be a new kind of Moses, one who was specially created to be God like Moses was, except without sin. But in WMB's theology, even though Jesus is sinless, He isn't in and of Himself God. He was only God as long as God indwelled Him (see, Jesus According to William Branham). Jesus was the first of a race of mankind who would be sinless just like God while not actually being God. That's why WMB can say that both Moses and Jesus are God, but yet not really God. By qualifying Jesus' Divinity, WMB is doing the the opposite of exalting Christ. That is something a true prophet would not do.
WMB:
If Christian women could only (so-called Christian women)—could only recognize, could recognize that the immoral spirit upon them is of the devil to make them cut their hair. The devil's the only thing would do that. That's contrary to God's Word for you. Just like it was in the garden of Eden. What did they... If they could only recognize. They try to say, "Oh, that little holy-roller preacher saying..." It's not me. I'm not telling you what to do. I'm only quoting the Word. If they could only recognize that it's the devil. They call themselves Christians. Jesus said, "How can you call Me, Lord, and do not the things that I say to do?" They can't be Christians. I'm not their judge, but I'm just saying what the Word says. "How can you call Me, Lord, and then do not the things that I said to do?"
("Recognizing Your Day And Its Message," July 26, 1964, message #64-0726M)
Analysis:
William Branham just said that women who cut their hair can't be Christians. The fact is, the Bible doesn't say that a woman must not cut her hair, but that God gave her long hair as a sign of honor to the husband and for her glory, and therfore she should not pray with her head uncovered, that is, with short hair, or without a veil (1 Corinthians 11). What is long hair as opossed to short hair? I would leave the determination of how long is long when it comes to a woman's hair between her conscience and God. But I would certainly not say that hair length is a sign of whether a person is a Christian or not. God sent Jesus to set us free from the law, not make new laws that are required for Christians!
WMB:
It's into the Kingdom of God with Eternal Life, with the predestinated that never did start. It never started on any day. You wasn't saved on any day. You was always saved. Amen. Jesus just come to redeem that, but you was saved from the beginning, because you had Eternal Life to begin with.
("The Future Home of the Heavenly Bridegroom and the Earthly Bride," August 2, 1964, message #64-0802)
Analysis:
William Branham says this because he interpreted the word "eternal" as always having no beginning or end. He believed that if we have eternal life now, we are eternal beings. He has even said at other times that we existed before we were born. However, sometimes the Greek word for eternal can pertain to aspects of creation which had a beginning but will never end, such as eternal fire (Matthew 18:8), or an eternal sin that has no forgiveness (Mark 3:29). WMB's strict understanding of eternal as only meaning "without beginning and end" confuses the Creator/creature distinction. God is the only being who is without beginning or end. But His creation, which includes mankind, had a beginning, as Moses wrote: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth," and, "Let us make man in our image" (Genesis 1:1, 26). There was a beginning of creation and there was a beginning of us! But God eternally knew and chose us according to His foreknowledge before we were even created (Ephesians 1:4; Peter 1:2). By God's grace, we who God conceived as sinners in the womb, reached a time in our life when He saved us and caused us to be born again and receive the gift of eternal life (Luke 18:30; John 10:28; Ephesians 2:8; 1 Peter 1:3). If Jesus gives us eternal life, and we receive eternal life, that means we didn't have it before we repented and believed in Him. WMB contradicted the Bible when he said we were always saved. A true prophet would never contradict God's Word. Jesus gives us Eternal life and we can therefore never die! Thank God for His indescribable gift!
WMB:
The child [born out of wedlock] can't help what's been done. That is true. But I... About going in the rapture... Saved, I'd say, "Yes." But in the rapture it's a predestinated seed that goes in the rapture. And I can't believe that adultery was a predestinated seed.
("Questions and Answers," August 23, 1964, tape #64-0823E)
Analysis:
What did William Branham think the difference was between being "saved" and being a "predestinated seed"? WMB believed that a person who was predestinated seed was someone who was the elect Bride of Christ who was chosen by God from the foundation of he world. He believed that those people existed in God's thoughts before they were born. At the time they're born, their souls contain the seed of God. When they hear the gospel, that seed in them germinates and they become born again and can never lose their salvation. They are Christ's "Bride."
But WMB believed there are also three other categories of people who can be "saved" but who are not born with the seed of God in their souls. They are therefore not "predestinated seed" and will not make the "rapture." They are:
- Those who accept Christ but don't follow the Message.
- People who are good to the Bride, whether or not they've accepted Christ as their savior.
- Faithful Jews who do not believe in Jesus because of their blindness during the age of the Gentiles.
But the Bible tells a different story. Those who are saved are they whom Paul describes in Romans 8:28-30,
And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.Jesus said, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me," and, "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day" (John 14:6 & 6:44, respectively). Between these three passages, there is no room in the gospel for anyone to be saved and not be part of Christ's Bride. The Apostle Paul said,
But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!William Branham clearly taught a different gospel than God revealed in the Bible. Take no heed to WMB's different gospel. Repent and believe the true Gospel of Jesus Christ!
(Galatians 1:8-9)
WMB:
Well, you're not bound by law. Say, for instance, here's the same thing; I'll explain in the natural way, quickly. For instance, out here it says go down the street, thirty miles an hour is all the faster you can go. All right now. Now if I go down the street forty miles an hour, I'm condemned by the law. But if I go down the street just thirty miles an hour, I'm not under the law. See? That's freedom in Christ (See?), the same thing. You're not bound by the law as long... If I don't steal, lie, smoke, commit adultery, any of those things there, I'm not bound by no law. See? I'm free from the law; I'm in Christ.
("Questions and Answers," August 30, 1964, message #64-0830M)
Analysis:
Here William Branham shows that he doesn't have a biblical understanding of what it means to be free from the Law. Let's look at WMB's analogy from a biblical perspective. The "law" says you are not to go over 30 miles per hour. If you exceed the speed limit, you will be condemned by the law. But if you keep the law, you aren't "under" it. WMB called that, "freedom in Christ," but really it was the Law of Moses. How? If you break the Law, you stand condemned. Freedom in Christ is the opposite: If you break the Law, you are under no condemnation (Romans 8:1). What WMB is demonstrating in his analogy is not Christian freedom, but condemnation under the law through obedience in the flesh. The fatal flaw with WMB's analogy is that nobody could ever keep the law. A universal trait in humanity is that we are all sinners. Even if we are somehow able to keep the speed limit all our life, we will still break the law in some other area because of our fallen nature. And if justice is to prevail, the penalty must be paid. WMB says that if you stay below the speed limit, then you are no longer bound by the law. However, WMB didn't account for the sin that remains in our flesh, even in those who are born again. In WMB's analogy, sin is represented by going over the speed limit, and to be a Christian means that if you don't sin, then you are free from guilt. But that's not the gospel because we do still sin. WMB's gospel (gospel means "good news") is really bad news!
The gospel is this: The speed limit is 30 miles an hour. You know that is what you ought to do, but you are late for work, and you break the speed limit "just this once." Then you see the flashing red lights in your rear view mirror and are reminded that you transgressed the 30 mile per hour speed limit and your conscience tells you that you you broke the law. You pull over and the police officer gives you a ticket. You later go to court and the judge happens to be your dad, and he tells you the fine for speeding must be paid. But then he tells you he paid your fine for speeding and therefore, you are no longer condemned by the law.
As Christians, we know that Christ paid the fine for our breaking of every one of the 10 Commandments, past, present, and future. We aren't free from the law only when we obey it. We are free from the law even when we break it! Our freedom from condemnation came at the price of the death of Jesus on the cross. We know that every sin is wrong, and we know that every sin has been paid for. But we sometimes forget that the penalty of our sins was paid for in love by Jesus' suffering and the spilling of His blood for our sake. That is what WMB should have said. Instead, he bound his followers to the law by making them think they were free from the law as long as they obeyed it—something that is impossible for us to do! A true prophet of the Lord could never get the gospel so wrong!
Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
(Romans 8:1-5)
When we are in Christ, the requirement of God's Law is fulfilled in us, not by us!
But WMB's error doesn't stop there. With his speed limit analogy, he was responding to someone's question during a Q & A session: "What does Paul mean by freedom and liberty in Christ? What way is freedom from law?" WMB didn't really answer the question. Instead, he reestablished the law into Christianity by saying that Christians are not condemned by the Law as long as they obey it. Paul addressed this question in Galatians 5:1-4, where he said,
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
Paul is not talking about the Christian's freedom from condemnation for sin in this passage, but the Christian's liberty from following Jewish laws such as circumcision that distinguished Israel as a nation in covenant with Yahweh. Not all the statutes in the Law of Moses were moral in nature. Many had nothing to do with morality, yet they were binding to Israel as signs to the world that Israel was in covenant with the one true God. Such ceremonial and civil statutes do not apply to Gentiles since they didn't belong to the nation of Israel.
Paul told the Galatians not to practice circumcision even though it was a most important sign of God's covenant with Israel. Paul's contention with circumcision in his letter to the Galatian church was brought on because the church was being influenced by a faction of Judaizing "Christians" who were trying to bind the Galatian church to the Law of Moses, namely the practice of circumcision. Paul said that circumcision was part of the Law, and the intention of the Law was not justification, but to lead us to Christ by demonstrating it's inability to justify (Galatians 3:23-25). In context of the question being asked of WMB, he should have said that we have liberty in Christ in that we are not required to follow Israel's dietary restrictions, prohibitions of mixing different kinds of fabric, and yes, practicing circumcision. After that, he could have gone further to explain why we Christians are no longer condemned by the transgressing of biblically moral laws as well. Sadly, WMB gave the questioner the wrong answer in every respect.
WMB:
The baby that... When the act has taken place between the—the egg and the sperm, or the gene... But when they... Potentially, the baby's there when the act is done. Then the body is developed, second stage; but the baby has to be born here, and then it receives the breath of life. It is not yet the breath of life. You say, "Oh, it's alive." No, it isn't. That's little nerves jerking, muscles. See? The baby hasn't received life till it's born. And you may jump and jerk, but you're not... See, see? You got to be born. You know what I mean? All right.
("Questions and Answers #3," August 30, 1964, message #64-0830M)
Analysis:
"When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. And she cried out with a loud voice and said, 'Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And how has it happened to me, that the mother of my Lord would come to me? For behold, when the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby leaped in my womb for joy" (Luke 1:41-44).
Why would William Branham say such a thing that a baby isn't alive until it takes its first breath? Some people, including some early Jews, read in Genesis 2:7 and see that Adam wasn't declared a living soul until God breathed the breath of life into him. From that they assume that babies likewise aren't living souls until they take their first breath. Also, Ezekiel 37:6 says that God would put flesh and sinews back onto them, and then cause them to breath so that they would have life. However, there is an important differemce between these two examples. Adam wasn't created as a baby gestating in the womb. So the Bible presents Adam as not being a living being yet until God breathed the breath of life into him. And the dead bones in the desert were indeed said to be dead before God gave them breath. However, it is an undeniable fact that a baby is unique living individual from the moment of conception that receives the oxygen it needs viariously from the breathing of the its mother. does receive the oxygen it needs to live from it's mother.The baby is benefiting from the process of breathing in a way that neither Adam nor the dry bones did until God caused them to breathe.
Also, Exodus 21:22 describes a scene where two men are fighting each other and a pregnant woman somehow gets struck by one of the men, if she suffers a miscarriage, the man who caused the baby's death will pay "life for life."
There are people who profess to believe in God and the Bible who try to justify abortion by claiming the unborn child is not alive until it takes its first breath. Even WMB was against abortion, since he believed that the baby's "little angel, little spirit, a little messenger" is waiting to enter the baby's body at birth. (See the next quote).
WMB:
[During a Q&A session, William Branham is asked the following question]: If the church is saved even though she does not go in the Rapture, as I believe you taught, she must go through the tribulation for purifying. But what about these that are dead, how will they be purified?
[WMB answers]: All right. Those that have that...The Bride don't need no purification; She's already purified. And those that are—are—are dead back there, these that go through...See? They never received the Light that these church up here has received; they lived under their Justification, Sanctification, so forth like that. They lived to the Light that they had, maybe in a—in a way that they suffered, and whatever they went through with, in their persecution. But now, in this rapturing time like this (see?), there will have to come a time now that this bride will (that rejects the Head's part of the Bride) will have to suffer for her rejection, because the Gospel wasn't made plain to them back there, like it's made plain to you today. See? You see it so plain. You done had all of those years and examples, the Seals opened, the Church's Age laid out, and everything like that. It's just so plain you can't miss it. See? And then, if you fully reject it, there's only one thing do, suffer for it. Did you get that Brother Neville? What does it pertain to? I just...I better go now, 'cause it's getting too late.
("Questions and Answers #3," August 30, 1964, message #64-0830M)
Analysis:
This has to do with WMB's teaching that the "Bride" (aka, Message believers) will go up in the Rapture, but those in the church who are saved but not part of the Bride (which includes those who believe in Jesus but never accepted the Message) will have to be purified by going through the Tribulation because they weren't purified by believing the Message.
So, this questioner is asking WMB what happens to the part of the church who are saved but never accepted the Message and died before the Tribulation. How could they be purified? They're saved, but they haven't been purified. What happens to them? WMB obviously never thought about that before. His answer is that the gospel wasn't made plain to them and they lived according to the light they had. The questioner knows that's the whole reason why they need to be purified! The questioner wanted to know what happens to them since they died before they could be purified by the Tribulation. How are they purified? He never answered the question, saying, "I better go now, 'cause it's getting too late." Then he continues answering more questions for nearly another 30 minutes.
As far as I know, WMB never clarified what happens to a saved, non-Message believing Christian who dies before they can be purified by the Tribulation. How do you react to a prophet with an end time Message who doesn't understand his own doctrine of salvation? Run from him! And believe the true Gospel of Jesus Christ!
WMB:
Notice, a mother, she can be ever so mean and cruel, but just before that baby's born, there's a certain kindness that sets in. Did you ever notice a mother when she's to be mother? There's something sweet about her; she always takes on that sweetness. It's because that that little angel, little spirit, a little messenger to this little tabernacle is ready to come forth into the world. And then, when this little angel comes into the body (that's a little angel of the earth, a spirit that's ordained of God to take this body)...
("Questions And Answers #4," August 30, 1964, message #64-0830E)
Analysis:
There is nothing in the Bible that says that before a person is born, there is a spiritual part of themselves waiting to receive the physical body when it's born into the world. This is another example of William Branham adding something to Scripture that isn't there. See also:
Now, the little fellow, when he—he—he's got life—he—he's got life, 'cause the little cells are moving and kicking after about three months and—or four. And then, he's kicking and moving but he isn't borned yet. But as soon as he is brought into the world, the doctor, mother, or someone, holds him up and [Brother Branham claps his hands—Ed.] gives him a little spanking. "Whaah!" There he goes (see?), and then he starts breathing. And just as soon as he breathes the breath of life, then he becomes a living soul.
("Questions And Answers," message #59-1223)
When a baby is being—a baby is being formed in a womb of a mother, soon as it's put there...See? See? But first it's a spirit. And as that spirit begins to take on flesh, a little germ of life begins to take on flesh, and as soon as it drops from its...Now, in the womb, it's a little, quivering, jerking muscles. We know that. That's cells. Just like you take a horse hair and put it in the water, it'll cap over and it'll move, and you touch it and it'll jump. That's the way a baby is. But as soon as it's born in this world and breathes its first breath, it becomes a living soul. See? Because as soon as the earthly body is born into the world, there's a celestial body, or a spiritual body, to take hold of it. And as soon as this natural body is dropped, there is a Heavenly tabernacle waiting for it. "If this earthly tabernacle be dissolved, there is a Heavenly tabernacle waiting for it." Just as soon as—as the baby's dropped into the earth in flesh, there's a spiritual body waiting to receive it.
("Questions And Answers," message #61-0112)
The moment when a mother is fixing to have a baby, you notice, I don't care how cruel she's been, and how mean. You know, a while before that baby is born, the mother gets gentle. Why is it? When them little muscles in that womb is twitching and jumping like that, there is a heavenly body waiting for it. And when it comes from the mother, the doctor or the midwife, whoever it is has to pick it up and shock it, spank it, shake it, or something, and then it catches the breath of life. And the little angelic spirit comes into it, the breath of life, and it becomes a living soul.
("The Flashing Red Light Of The Sign Of His Coming," message #63-0623E)
Just as the little baby, its little muscles, in the mother, are twisting and turning. And, but just...See? And you notice, you can take a woman, if she is ever so foul; but when she's become a mother, a little while before that baby is born, there's a kindness about the woman. Get around her, there's always something, she's more tender. Why? There's a little angel spirit waiting to receive that natural body. Just as soon as it's born, the breath of life comes into it. And God breathes it in there, and it becomes a living soul. Now, just as this baby is being born, then the spiritual body is there to receive it.
("Things That Are To Be," message #65-1205)
WMB:
Now, I don't believe in mixing marriages. I believe that a white man should not marry a colored girl, or a colored girl marry a white man, or a yellow marry a colored, or a white, or a... I believe the brown, black, white, and races of people are like a flower garden of God, and I do not believe they should be crossed up. I believe that's the way God made them, and I believe that's the way they should remain.
What... It fools me that I seen some real pretty colored girl, intelligent, nice looking kid, just as pretty as any woman you'd want to see... What does she want to marry a white man and have mulatto children? What would an intelligent colored girl want with such a thing as that? Is because that something... that communist... And how would a—a fine a-a-a colored man want to marry a white woman and have mulatto children?
I don't believe I... I believe you should stay just what we are. We—we're servants of Christ. And God made me... If He made me, my color black, I'd be happy to be a black man for God. If He made me yellow, I'd be a happy yellow man for Christ. If He made me white, I've a—happy white man for Christ. If He made me brown, or red, an Indian, whatever it is, I'd stay my same color. That would be me. I want to be like my Maker made me.
("Questions and Answers #4," August 30, 1964, message #64-0830E)
Analysis:
I think "mulatto" children are the color their Maker made them to be. But what does the Bible say about "mixed marriages," or so-called interracial marriages? The first thing we know about the human race is that we are all descendants of Adam and Eve. The Bible says God "hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation... (Acts 17:26. Incidentally, if Serpent's Seed were true, we would all be made of a mixture of TWO bloods: Adam's and the serpent's!). We are all human beings who each have different characteristics based on our DNA in some way or another. Adam and Eve were created in north Africa. Noah and his family came to rest in the ark during the flood in what is believed to be Turkey. In Genesis 11 we read the account of the building of the Tower of Babel and learn that it is from this point that mankind began to disperse from the Middle East to the rest of the globe. So when did mankind turn into groups of separate "races"? We never did! To shorten what would be a long post, I would like to direct you to a good, short article written by Ken Ham called, "What Should We Believe About 'Interracial' Marriage?" In it, he gives a clear reason why the view of interracial marriage is not only unbiblical but also a nonsensical concept biologically.
We cannot deny that God providentially directs differences in ethnicity as groups of people branch out and adapt to a variety of different kinds of geographical locations throughout the world. However, we have no biblical reason to say that God made man as separate races that should not be mixed by marriage. That idea seems to stem from a prejudiced mindset WMB learned from his cultural upbringing, not from the Bible.
WMB:
Now, when Jesus came to the earth, He came in the name of three Sons: Son of man (which is a prophet), Son of God, and Son of David. Now, He lived here on earth; He never did say He was the Son of God. He said, "I'm the Son of man." Jehovah Himself called Ezekiel in the prophets "son of man," because He had to come to fulfill Scripture as a prophet. Moses said, "The Lord your God shall raise up a Prophet likened unto me." That's the reason He could not be the Son of God there, because He was the Son of man. He... The Word came to the prophets and He was the Word in Its Fullness: Son of man, the major Prophet, not the major Prophet, but the God Prophet. The Fullness of the Godhead bodily was in Him; therefore, He was the Son of man.
Now, for two thousand years He's been known to us as Son of God, Spirit. And in the millennium He'll be Son of David upon the throne. We all know that, who believe the Scriptures.
("This Day This Scripture Is Fulfilled," February 19, 1965, message #65-0219)
Analysis:
WMB said Jesus never called Himself the Son of God. Here's what Jesus Himself said:
Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
(John 10:36)
When Jesus asked His disciples who they thought He was, Peter said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." Jesus didn't correct him and say, "No, I am the Son of Man." He answered, "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven" (Matthew 16:17).
In Matthew 26:62-64, when the high priest asked Jesus if He was the Son of God, He answered, "Thou has said," which means, "You are correct."
While Jesus never specifically said He was the Son of David, many people called Him that when they spoke to Him and He never corrected them nor denied it (see Matthew 9:27; 15:22; 20:30-31; 21:9; Mark 10:47-48; Luke 18:38-39).
The fact is, WMB's theory that Jesus was not the Son of God or the Son of David during His earthly ministry holds no water. He was and is all three.
There's another serious problem with this quote where WMB said that Jesus has been the "Son of God, Spirit" for the last 2,000 years. What he means is that Jesus is now with us in the form of the Holy Spirit, as he has said many times before. That contradicts much of what Jesus said when He spoke of what the Holy Spirit's role would be in the Church after His resurrection in John 14:16-26, 15:26, and 16:7.
WMB did not have a biblical understanding of who Jesus was and is (see, Jesus According to William Branham). William Branham's Jesus was not the Jesus of the Bible. He was a different Jesus. That means WMB's gospel is a different gospel. WMB was a false prophet promoting a false Jesus and a different gospel. Take Jesus' warning and do not listen to a word WMB said!
WMB:
Did you know Satan was coequal with God one day? Sure was, all but a creator; he was everything, stood at the right hand of God in the heavens, a great leading cherubim.
("Marriage and Divorce," February 21, 1965, message #65-0221M)
Analysis:
Satan was coequal with God in every way except being a creator? This statement displays both an exalted view of Satan as he was originally created, and a diminutive view of God. In other words, Satan would be a co-sovereign with God except for not having the ability to create. And if God were coequal with Satan, He would not truly be Divine since He would be equal to His creation (i.e., Satan) which itself is not Divine. If William Branham weren't a true prophet, one might think he just blurted out something totally preposterous without even thinking. But on the other hand, it's clear that is what he did, which means he was not a true prophet, but a false one.
WMB:
In the beginning there's only one man and one woman, one male, one female. But when she crossed that line and brought this sin, now the world's to be repopulated again by sex; not by creation; by sex. See where the woman's at now? Now, but that's the way the world's populated today, through women. That's the reason Jesus had to come through the woman to bring it back to its original beginning again, without sex desire. He's virgin born. But, hallelujah. there will come a time where it won't be no more sex, but God shall call His children from the dust of the earth, back like they was in the original. Not through any woman, but through the molding of the clay and the cosmic lights and the petroleum; He'll create again like He did Adam at the first time.
("Marriage and Divorce," February 21, 1965, message #65-0221M)
Analysis:
To understand what WMB is saying here, we have to explain his view that when God created Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, His plan was to follow-up His creation of Adam by creating an entire race of human beings from the dust of the earth like He did with Adam; not by sex between a man and woman:
Now, the way He was going to do it was reach down and get like He did Adam, a little bunch of calcium, potash and cosmic light, and, "whew." [Brother Branham makes blowing sound--Ed.] Say, "There's My other son." See? Then He'd bring up some more and, "whew" [blowing sound--Ed.], "There's another one."
("The Fourth Seal," message #63-0321)
WMB believed that when Eve had sex with the serpent, God cursed mankind and made it so that from then on, future human beings could only come about through sex between a man and a woman. There are two serious problems with his "revelation." The first is that the Bible never says that in any way, shape, or form. The second problem is that God actually told Adam and Eve to "be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth" (Genesis 1:28). So if God's original plan was to populate the earth Himself in the same way as He created Adam, why would He tell THEM to be fruitful and multiply?
This is the kind of problem that arises when someone goes beyond what is written in Scripture for their doctrine. WMB's Message added something to the Bible that actually contradicts the Bible. That is something a true prophet would not have done. That is the sign of a false prophet.
WMB:
There is no minister that can marry a widow. Did you know that? You want to read that? All right, you get in Leviticles—Leviticus 21:7 and Ezekiel 44:22 and it will show you that the priesthood was not to marry a woman that's been touched by man. This type is of the virgin Bride of Jesus Christ, because they handled the fire of God, the priests did, Aaron's sons.
("Marriage and Divorce," February 21, 1965, message #65-0221M)
Analysis:
There are two things wrong with this. First, Christians are not bound to the Law of Moses. Gentiles never were, and Jesus death on the cross abrogated the Law to Jews who are born again followers of Christ. Second, Peter said of believers in Christ, "Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 2:5). All Christians are part of the holy priesthood to God. If WMB were to be consistent, then he should have said no Christian, whether he's a minister or not, should marry a widow because we're all priests. But WMB would be wrong again, because Paul said many times that widows could marry as long as they marry another believer (who would actually be a part of Peter's "holy priesthood"). WMB did err, not knowing the Scriptures. The Bible says that the Levitical priesthood is a symbol of all true believers in Christ (see also Revelation 5:9-10), not just ordained ministers. There is nothing in the New Testament that prohibits a minister from marrying a widow.
WMB:
The other day in the Tucson paper I was reading an article that where there was a—a woman driving down the road, at I believe about forty, fifty miles an hour, and she hit an old man with an overcoat on. She screamed and stopped her car. It threw him up in the air: right out of the plain desert. And she run back to find him, and he wasn't there. So what did she do? Some people behind her saw it happen, saw the old man fly up in the air, his overcoat turning. So they run back to find out. They couldn't find the man anywhere. They called the police force. The police come out to examine the place; there was nobody there. Well, each one of them testified the car chugged, hit the man. He went up in the air, and everybody saw it. Witnesses and two or three carloads of them, they seen it happen. Come to find out, five years ago there was an old man with an overcoat on hit and killed on the same spot. When you leave here, you're not dead. You've got to come back even if you're a sinner and be judged according to the deeds done in the body. "If this earthly tabernacle is dissolved, we have one waiting." "En morphe," that's the word.
("Who Is This Melchisedec?" February 21, 1965, message #65-0221E)
Analysis:
Did WMB believe in ghost stories? It appears so. And I know of Message believers that followed his example and believe they've seen their dead loved ones roaming the earth. What are Bible believers to think about something like this? We are to have nothing to do with such things because the Bible doesn't allow for believing that the spirits of the departed can live among us.
First let's look at WMB's biblical justification for his view. Just previous to telling this story, he was talking about how angels can appear to men on earth. He then talks about his interpretation of Melchisedec's visit to Abraham, which he believed was the appearance of Jesus in a human body (known as a "Christophany"). The problem with these examples is that, however one interprets the identity of Melchisedec, neither angels or Jesus were dead people making an appearance on earth. There is no comparison between angels or Christophanies and dead people appearing in flesh-and-blood bodies, still wearing their overcoats.
You might ask, "But what about when Samuel appeared to Saul during the witch of Endor's séance?" If this was indeed Samuel, the most we can gather from this event is that God, in His sovereignty, allowed Samuel to awaken from his rest to pronounce judgment on Saul. This is not evidence that the spirits of the departed have the ability to roam the earth.
Next, WMB refers to 2 Corinthians:
For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.He believed Paul was saying that everyone has a body waiting in heaven for us to enter when we die. It is that body (which WMB often calls a "theophany") which was hit by a car in his sermon illustration. Another verse he appears to allude to is in Hebrews, chapter 9:
(2 Corinthians 5:1)
And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment...He seemed to imply that the old man's judgment was to re-experience his being hit by a car. Of course, the writer of Hebrews is talking about the day of judgment, not being punished by coming back to earth to die again by a car. WMB's theology now includes the idea that when a sinner dies in his sins, he comes back to repeat his death as judgment for what he did when he was alive. Do you see the problem with applying Bible verses to explain a ghost story? The Bible teaches that when a Christian's body is destroyed in death, we have an eternal abode made by God in the heavens. Paul is talking about Christians having eternal life even after we die. He isn't talking about the afterlife of unbelievers at all. In WMB's theology, unbelievers can't even live eternally. Here's what the Bible says about the judgment of unbelievers:
(Hebrews 9:27)
And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
(Mark 9:43-48)And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
(Revelation 20:15)
Did WMB's Tucson ghost story really happen? If it did, how could we explain it? The only supernatural beings that have appeared to men in human form besides God and Samuel are angels and demons. There is no biblical record of any supernatural beings succumbing to traumatic physical accidents. I think we can attribute this to nothing more than WMB's appeal to anecdotal folklore as support for his unbiblical theology. Telling ghost stories is not behooving for a true prophet of the Lord.
WMB:
Did you know any man that kisses a woman is morally obligated to marry her? Potentially it's a sex act. Sure, it is. Yes, sir. What is it? It's the male glands in a man's lip and the female glands. When male and female glands comes together, it's sex.
("God's Provided Place of Worship," April 25, 1965, message #65-0425)
Analysis:
I have never heard of someone getting pregnant after just kissing. It's not possible. That's because there are no sex glands in the human lips, contrary to what WMB just said. They are contained only in the human reproductive system. There is nothing in the Bible that says an unmarried couple who kiss are morally obligated to marry. Even if they unwisely elevate their kisses to deeper passions, the Bible still does not bind a couple's consciences to an obligation to marry. That is just an example of WMB's legalism which could well have ruined the lives of many Message-believing couples who weren't meant for each other.
WMB:
So say I, in the Name of Jesus Christ: Don't you add one thing, don't take, put your own ideas in It, you just say what is said on those tapes, you just do exactly what the Lord God has commanded to do; don't add to It! He has ever, keeps His promise to us. Every promise that He has made, He's kept it. Has He told you what would happen, and did it happen? I bring heavens and earth before you today, in a challenge: Has God ever said anything that He has not fulfilled and done exactly what He said He would do for us? Hasn't He done it just the way He said He would do it? That's exactly. So will He continue to do it. Just don't add to It. Don't take from It. Just believe It and walk humble before the Lord your God, for we're nearing the going into the land.
("Trying To Do God A Service Without Being The Will Of God," July 18, 1965, message #65-0718M)
Analysis:
William Branham has always portrayed his Message as God's Word for the hour, yet he has always told his followers to make the Bible their absolute. He has also taught—from outside what is written in Scripture—that God's prophets are the only ones who can interpret the Bible correctly. That being said, here is an important warning for those who follow the Message: Since the Bible is to be interpreted through the Message, then his Message must be a higher authority for Message believers than the words they read in the Bible for themselves. That's because a Message believer's understanding of the scriptures must be subject to the Message's interpretation of them. In other words, the Message is a Message believer's absoulute, not the Bible itself. Please remember that the next time you read something in the Bible that doesn't quite say what WMB said it means.
WMB:
We find out that when a man comes, sent from God, ordained of God with the true THUS SAITH THE LORD, the message and the messenger are one and the same. Because he is sent to represent THUS SAITH THE LORD, Word by Word, so he and his message is the same.
A denominational man under denominational auspices, he and the church is the "one." A theologian under theology made by some denomination, he and his message are one: church of theology, a theologian. It's correctly.
Then when a man comes with THIS SAITH THE LORD, he and the Message is one. And when Elijah come with THUS SAITH THE LORD, he and his message became one. Just as Jesus, when He come, He was the Word, Saint John 1. So the Word of God and the messenger of the age was the selfsame thing all the time.
("Spiritual Food in Due Season," July 18, 1965, message #65-0718E)
WMB:
Notice Revelation 16:13 to 14, between the Sixth and Seventh Vial, "Three unclean spirits like frogs" (did you notice that?) "went out of the mouth of someone." Now notice, quickly. Are you ready? Say, "Amen." A trinity of spirits! Now denominational brother, set still just a minute. Don't get up and walk out of the room, back out there on this radio, telephone hook-up. Don't turn your tape recorder off. Set still just a minute, and listen. You're born of God, you will. A trinity of frogs! A frog is an animal that always looks backward. He never looks where he's going; he looks where he's come from. See? Don't you see? Where was trinitarianism born at? Remember, 'three unclean spirits,' individual spirits. Are you getting it? Notice, they look back to the Nicaea Council where the trinity doctrine was born at, not in the Bible. There's no such a thing. They look back to the Nicaea Council at Nicaea, Rome, where the trinity was born at.
Notice where they come from. Notice. And the trinity of frogs came out of an old trinity, give birth to a new trinity, their mother. What'd it come out of? A trinity, 'the dragon,' see, 'the beast,' and 'the false prophet.' A trinity, new. For when were these frogs come out? When did it? Notice, they was there all the time, but it wasn't manifested until between the Sixth and Seventh Vial, just before the Seals opened to reveal it. "For in the Message of the seventh angel, the mysteries of God would be known," all these trinitarian things, and false baptisms, and everything was to be made manifest.
("The Anointed Ones at the End Time," July 25, 1965, message #65-0725M)
Analysis:
Was William Branham guilty of blaspheming against the Holy Spirit? Compare what he said about the three frogs with what Jesus said in Mark 3:28-30:
"Truly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the children of man, and whatever blasphemies they utter, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin"—for they were saying, "He has an unclean spirit."Wm Branham was as much against the doctrine of the Trinity as the Pharisees were against Jesus. They said Jesus had an unclean spirit. WMB said the Trinity—Father, Son and Holy Spirit—were literally unclean spirits like frogs! Was this teaching by WMB blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? Don't make the same mistake he did! Please repent while you realize your mistake in following him as a prophet! Believe the true Gospel of Jesus Christ!
WMB:
What caused death in the garden of Eden? Knowledge. But can't be of God, so it's of the devil. Whew, was that a good one! Knowledge, science, education, is the greatest hindrance that God ever had. It is of the devil.
(The God of This Evil Age," message #65-0801M)
WMB:
See, the world don't know what that is [flying saucers]. You know... You know, it's all in... We know what it is. See? We know it's investigating judgment Angels (You see?), and they... How that the Pentagon, all about how it comes right down to the intelligence; how they go like a flash and be gone; pull away from anything they got. See, and they don't realize what it is. See? Let them think whatever they want to. They call them flying saucers or whatever; they don't know. See?
("And Knoweth it Not,: August 15, 1965, message #65-0815)
WMB:
If you are a son of God, and if I am a son of God, or a daughter of God, we were in God at the beginning. And when Jesus became the fullness of the Word, then we were in Him, germ form. When He was crucified, we was crucified in His body. When He arose from the dead, we rose with Him. And now, since we have recognized it, "now we set together with Him, in Heavenly places in Christ Jesus." See? For He...We, if we are sons and daughters of God, we are God's children, then we are attributes of God. Then we were... got Eternal Life. And God is the only Eternal Life there is. Then, we were in Him from the beginning. And when Jesus became all that Word, then we were a part of Him then."
("Christ Is Revealed In His Own Word," message #65-0822M)
WMB:
Now, you know, sometime ago they told us that the—that when the Bible said that he saw four Angels standing on the four corners of the earth, that that couldn't be; the earth was round. But the Bible said "four corners." Well now, you seen two weeks ago (Three weeks ago it's been now.), the papers packing this article; they found out that the world is square. How many's seen that? Sure. See? I got it all copied off and just waiting for somebody to say something.
("Christ is Revealed in His Own Word," August 22, 1965, message #65-0822M)
WMB:
You're going to find out one of these days that when you go to heaven, you don't fly off somewhere else; you're still right here too, just in another dimension faster then this. Right through this room's coming color. Every color shirt, dress, whatever you got on is eternal, laying right on records, going around and around the world. Every time you bat your eyes, it's right on record. Watch, television will prove that.
("Christ is Revealed in His Own Word," August 22, 1965, message #65-0822M)
WMB:
We always say today, people try to say, "We compare. We've got to compare Bible leaf with Bible leaf, Scripture with Scripture." That isn't the truth. No, it isn't the truth. "This Greek word means this, and this means that." The Greeks themself, way back in the Nicaea Council, and them writers back in there, they had different forms. One believed this way. This Greek scholar meant this, and the other one said this one meant it this way. And they fussed over It. We don't need interpretation of Greek scholars or Greek words. To know Him is Life, the Person, Christ Himself, not comparing. It's a revelation that God built His church upon.
("Thirst," September 19, 1965, message #65-0919)
WMB:
How did you come to do this? You were deceived into it by your first marriage, to your adulterous parent, Eve. It's no fault of your own. By your natural birth, you come after Eve, who committed adultery. That's the reason you was born an adulteress. You're a sinner, to begin with. That's right. You was deceived into it. You had no... No, you, it ain't your fault.
("Invisible Union Of The Bride Of Christ," November 25, 1965, message #65-1125)
WMB:
No leaven among you, that brings the entire Fulness of the Godhead bodily among you. Couldn't do it in Luther's age, couldn't do it in Wesley's age, couldn't do it in the Pentecostal age; but in the day when the Son of man will be manifested, revealed, brought back the church together with the entire Deity of God amongst His people, showing the same visible signs, manifesting Himself like He did at the beginning when He was manifested on earth in a form of a Prophet God (Oh, Glory.) promised by Malachi 4, promised by the rest of the Scriptures.
("God's Only Provided Place of Worship," November 28, 1965, message #65-1128M)
WMB:
Notice, now, that David being anointed, yet with the anointing he did, he got out of the will of the Lord with that anointing; and all the people, not taking the run of the Scripture or the key to this revelation, all of them anointed too, they all, together, shouting and praising God for a thing that looked exactly right: to bring the Word of God back to the house of God. But David was king, not prophet.
("God's Only Provided Place Of Worship," November 28, 1965, message #65-1128M)
Analysis:
William Branham got the story a bit wrong. He is talking about when David decided to bring the ark to Jerusalem where it belonged (see also, "Trying to do God a Service Without Being the Will of God," message #65-0718M). However, he said that David acted out of the will of God when he made the decision to bring the ark back without first consulting Nathan the prophet. The Bible doesn't say that. It says that God stopped David from bringing the ark to Jerusalem because of how the ark was handled by Uzzah, one of the drivers of the cart that was carrying the ark. When the cart was being driven, it teetered, threatening to topple the ark to the ground. Uzzah instinctively put his hand on the ark to keep it from falling, and the Lord suddenly struck and killed him (1 Samuel 6:1-11; 1 Chronicles 13:1-13).
There is nothing in the Bible that says that David should have consulted Nathan the prophet before starting the ark's journey to Jerusalem. In fact, Nathan never appears in the Bible until well after this incident happened. Instead, God struck Uzzah (who was from the tribe of Judah) because he was not authorized by the Law to transport the ark in any way, or even to touch the ark. The only ones authorized by God to transport the ark were the Levites, who were to carry it "on their shoulders with the poles, as Moses had commanded according to the word of the Lord". As we read further, we find David again taking the task of bringing the ark to Jerusalem without consulting Nathan, just as before. Only this time he succeeded because he did it according to the Word of the Lord as Moses had commanded (1 Chronicles 15:11-15).
Furthermore, WMB was wrong when he said that "David was King, not prophet." The Apostle Peter called David a prophet in Acts 2:29-31. In the Old Testament, David personally inquired of God at least 9 times about what actions he should take in various situations, and God told him what to do. And of course, David prophesied many, many times in the Psalms concerning the coming Messiah.
How could a prophet of the Lord repeatedly make so many blatant mistakes in his Bible teaching (he spoke on this passage at least 3 times in 1965)? A true prophet wouldn't. What should that tell you?
WMB:
There was three watches. Now, the first watch started at—from nine until twelve; the second watch started from twelve to three, and the third watch of the night was counted from three to six. Now, we got three, three three's, which is a nine, imperfect number. Then we come back to the seven for the rapture, which will take place I believe between six and seven o'clock—or six and nine o'clock some morning. For the trumpet of the Lord shall sound...
("The Rapture," December 4, 1965, message #65-1204)
WMB:
In Hebrews 1:1, God in sundry times wrote the Bible by His own chosen way. He never wrote It by theologians; neither does He interpret by theologians. There never was a time that—that the theologians ever had an interpretation of the Word of God. The interpretation comes only to a prophet. And the only way we're ever going to get out of this mess is for God to send us that prophet; just exactly, the only way it's going to be done. It's been believed, watched for, and the fulfillment... See? It was not wrote by men, but It was wrote by God. It's not a man's Book. It's not a theologian's Book. It's the Book of God, which is a Book of prophecy wrote by the prophets and interpreted by the prophets. The Bible said, "The Word of the Lord comes to the prophets." Exactly.
("Modern Events Are Made Clear By Prophecy," December 6, 1965, message #65-1206)
Analysis:
The book of Nehemiah 8:7-8 directly contradicts William Branham's assertion that only a prophet can interpret the Bible:
Also Jeshua, and Bani, and Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites, caused the people to understand the law: and the people stood in their place.
So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.
(Nehemiah 8:7-8)
It seems that WMB was protecting his own Message from other Bible teachers who warned others that his theology was often against sound biblical doctrine. What better way to keep his followers from listening to other Bible teachers than to say that only a prophet (namely himself) could interpret the Bible.
WMB:
Many of you think, 'I got the baptism of the Holy Ghost; I'm going to heaven.' That don't mean one thing that you're going to heaven. No, sir. You can have the baptism of the Holy Ghost every hour in your life and still be lost and go to hell. The Bible says so. See? It's exactly right.
("Leadership," December 7, 1965, message #65-1207)
Analysis:
Contrast that with what Jesus said:
Gathering them together, He [Jesus] commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for what the Father had promised, "Which," He said, "you heard of from Me; for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now."
(Acts 1:4-5)
and Peter, reiterating Jesus' words:
And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them just as He did upon us at the beginning. And I remembered the word of the Lord, how He used to say, "John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit." Therefore, if God gave them the same gift as He also gave to us after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?" When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, "Well then, God has also granted to the Gentiles the repentance that leads to life."
(Acts 11:15-18)
Those listening heard what Peter was saying: The Baptism with the Holy Spirit was the gift of God given to those whom He granted repentance that leads to life!
The Apostle Paul said that those who believed are actually sealed with the Holy Spirit, agreeing with Jesus that is was an actual promise from the Father:
In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of the promise, who is a first installment of our inheritance, in regard to the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of His glory.
(Ephesians 1:13-14. See also, Ephesians 4:30 and 2 Corinthians 1:22).
These are words which evoke hope and joy. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit is associated with believers in Jesus who receive repentence that leads to life! But when WMB talked about the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, it almost sounded like a dour warning of possible everlasting torment! Is there even one example in the Bible of a Spirit-filled Christian who was lost and went to hell? Does the Bible ever say that a true believer in Christ who actually received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, can later lose their salvation and die in their sins? No, it doesn't. Rather, all you who have believed in Jesus Christ can take encouragement from Him when He said,
It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh provides no benefit; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit, and are life.
(John 6:63)
Hallelujah!
WMB:
Jesus said, "There shall rise false christs." Not "false Jesuses," now, nobody stands still for that; but "false christs." Christ means "the anointed ones." Falsely anointed; they are anointed, but they are false at the bottom of it, and do great signs and wonders, speak in tongues, dance in the Spirit, preach the Gospel."
("Leadership," December 7, 1965, message #65-1207)
Analysis:
In this quote, William Branham misinterprates Jesus' words. In Matthew 24, Jesus is indeed warning His disciples against false Jesuses. How do we know? Because He was answering a question from his disciples, "...what will be the sign of Your coming...?" Jesus isn't just warning about some nameless, generic christs in the last days, as WMB suggests. Contrary to what WMB would have us believe, Jesus was warning them of future impostors claiming to be the fulfillment of His return!
So why would WMB make a distinction between false Jesuses and false christs against what the Bible says? To him, a false christ is merely a "falsely anointed" prophet and not an impostor of the Messiah Himself. He made this distinction because he saw himself as the only true prophet of our day and believed his role was being threatened by other prophets in the charismatic movement who were drawing away many of his followers. In order to keep his followers loyal to the notion that he was the last prophet to our day, he had to make a claim that all other prophets were false, and what better way than quote (rather, misquote) Jesus!
"Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." (Matthew 24:23-24)
"Yea, hath God said...?" (The serpent to Eve in Genesis 3:1, just before he's about to misrepresent God to her)
WMB:
One day when Jesus was upon earth, a certain important man came to visit Him. This man said, "Rabbi, we know you are a teacher sent from God." But you will notice that Jesus cut him short. He turned to Nicodemus and the words He spoke may well be paraphrased thusly, "I am NOT a teacher. I am the Sacrificial Lamb for sin. I am making possible the New Birth by My Spirit. But there is a coming One Who is the Teacher. He is the Holy Spirit."
(An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, page 141)
Analysis:
Let's allow Jesus to correct William Branham. Speaking to Nicodemus, Jesus said:
"You call Me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am."
(John 13:13)
This is yet another example of William Branham directly contradicting the living Word of God. In this case, he explicitly contradicted the words from Jesus' own lips! What's more, Jesus' actual answer to Nicodemus wasn't anything close to WMB's paraphrase. Jesus' response was, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." In their ensuing discussion, Jesus proceeds to teach Nicodemus about the workings of the Holy Spirit.
Only a false prophet would contradict our Lord so blatantly!
WMB:
The first resurrection has nothing to do with the second death. That is at the end of the thousand years when ALL THE REST of the dead live again. And in that day there will be those who come forth to eternal life and those others who are caught in the second death. Now we do not need to guess about those who in the second resurrection are given life. We are told it is given to them on the grounds that they have been kind and good to the "Brethren". Those who are raised and cast into the lake of fire will be so treated because of their mistreatment of the "Brethren". Since this is the Word of God we simply accept it. There is no argument here, just a simple statement of fact.
(An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, page 277)
WMB:
On the basis of human behavior alone, anyone knows that where there are many people there is even divided opinion on lesser points of a major doctrine which they all hold together. Who then will have the power of infallibility which is to be restored in this last age, for this last age is going to go back to manifesting the Pure Word Bride? That means we will have the Word once again as it was perfectly given, and perfectly understood in the days of Paul. I will tell you who will have it. It will be a prophet as thoroughly vindicated, or even more thoroughly vindicated than was any prophet in all the ages from Enoch to this day, because this man will of necessity have the capstone prophetic ministry, and God will shew him forth. He won't need to speak for himself, God will speak for him by the voice of the sign. Amen.
(An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, page 329)