Prophecies Web

Examining the Message of William Branham
Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - 2nd Coming of the Lord by

Subscribe
1977 (135 views)
From: KENNAH (JohnK63) 6/26/2002 5:39 pm
To: ALL (1 of 30)
470.1
William Branham spoke of his prediction of "1977" many times, but he placed it in printed form when he
published his book An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages in 1965. The following quote was taken from this
book and represents his last (therefore definitive) statement regarding his view of "1977":
Based on these seven visions, along with the rapid changes which have swept the world in the
last fifty years, I PREDICT (I do not prophesy) that these visions will have all come to pass by
1977 . And though many may feel that this is an irresponsible statement in view of the fact
that Jesus said that 'no man knoweth the day nor the hour.' I still maintain this prediction
after thirty years because, Jesus did NOT say no man could know the year, month or week in
which His coming was to be completed. So I repeat, I sincerely believe and maintain as a
private student of the Word, along with Divine inspiration that 1977 ought to terminate the
world systems and usher in the millennium.
An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, page 322
Although Mr. Branham stated that his prediction of the end of the world was not a prophecy, there are a
couple of problems with his "prediction" when viewed in light of his supposed role as a prophet.
First, we must ask, "What is the difference between a prophecy and Mr. Branhams prediction based on
Divine inspiration?" If this prediction was Divinely inspired, it can only mean that God told Mr. Branham to
make it. That, by definition, is a prophecy.
Second, Mr. Branham implied that, although he did not know the day or hour of the end, he did know the
year because, "Jesus did NOT say no man could know the year, month or week in which His coming was to be
completed."
Since the end of the world and the 2nd coming of the Lord did not come in 1977, we can only conclude that
this Divinely inspired prediction was another of Mr. Branhams false prophecies.
John Kennah
William Branham and His Message

Christian Awareness Fellowship
Contact Me
"Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, [be] honour and glory for ever and ever.
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Edited 7/4/2003 10:35:57 AM ET by KENNAH (JOHNK63)
Options Reply Rate
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/2%20Coming%201977_1-20.html (1 of 12)4/1/2005 3:49:04 AM

Message 2 of 30 was Deleted
From: KENNAH (JohnK63) 6/27/2002 11:42 am

To: 8320JOHN (3 of 30)
470.3 in reply to 470.2
Nonetheless, William Branham is still on record as saying:
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. [italics mine]
LAODICEAN.CHURCH.AGE - CHURCH.AGE.BOOK, page 329
If followers of the Message have found it their prerogative to pick and choose which of their prophets
teachings are from God, it contradicts sound reasoning to say that God even sent William Branham as a
prophet with the infallible Message of the Hour. Of what benefit is following his teachings at all if one must
weed out the truth from the error (and there is a whole lot of error to wade through) before saying its of
God? There are many resources out there that are far more reliable than William Branham's Message if one
wants a guide for in depth Bible study. Can we truly say that one who chooses to remain under the teachings
of a "prophet" who spoke so much error in the guise of the end-time Message has grown and prospered? I
dont believe so.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


To: 8320JOHN (5 of 30)
470.5 in reply to 470.4
I think I misunderstood you. I re-read your post and I suppose you were talking only about your friends who
are coming more into the truth, even listening more to a Baptist minister 5 to 1 than Mr. Branham's tapes.
My apologies. I agree with you that a closer scrutiny of Mr. Branham's teachings, comparing them to the
Bible, will most likely cause one to grow and prosper spiritually as I can personally testify.
As you know by now, I disagree with you regarding Mr. Branham's value in the economy of God. He may
have preached some truth, but I believe his insistence that he was the end-time prophet with the only true
Message for our day has produced more harm than good--spiritually, theologically and in regards to unity
within the family and the Church--for the majority of those affected by him.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: PaulSilas 7/21/2002 1:24 pm

To: KENNAH (JohnK63) (7 of 30)
470.7 in reply to 470.1
Mr. Kennah,
you don't seem to know what false prphesy is.
DEUTERONOMY 18:21
21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken?
DEUTERONOMY 18:22
22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that [is] the
thing which the LORD hath not spoken, [but] the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be
afraid of him.
William Branham is not guilty of fitting that scripture. Here is what he said about 1977:

........................
" And at 1906 the Laodicean church age set in, and I don't know when it'll end, but I predict it'll be done by
1977.
I predict, not the Lord told me, but I predict
it according to a vision that was showed me some years ago, that five of those things has (out of the seven)--
has already taken place about..."
..................................
We clearly see that he didn't say that in the Name of the Lord. He clearly says that the Lord didn't tell him. If
I predict that it rains tomorrow and it doesn't, then I am in biblical terms no false Prophet. But if I say it in
the Name of the Lord, and it doesn't rain, then I am a false Prophet. So we clearly see that you cannot take
Br. Branham's statement concerning 1977 to mark him as false Prophet.
Let's listen again to what Br. Branham said concerning 1977:
..........................
" Now, remember, "predict," especially you listening at the tape. I don't say it will be, but predict that it will
end by 1977, that the church will go completely into apostasy, and she'll be ousted out of the mouth of God.
And the second coming, or the rapture of Christ, might come anytime. Now, I could miss that a year; I can
miss it twenty years, I could miss it a hundred years. I don't know where. And I could be wrong; I'm
predicting. Everybody understand say, "amen" if you do."
.................................
seems like YOU Mr. Kennah didn't understand it, and therefore you run around bearing false witness against
William Branham!
Now let's take a look at another Quote:
............................
" Now, I do not want anyone to go away misunderstanding this. Tape's still playing? I don't want anyone to
misunderstand it. Don't misunderstand now, and say, "Brother Branham said Jesus will come in 1977." I
never said no such a thing. Jesus may come today. But I have predicted that between '33 and '77 something
would take place, that these things that I seen come to pass in the vision would take place. And five of them
has already took place. "
.........................
Even though he didn't want anyone to misunderstand it, you obviously did so. Now there is no excuse for you
if you any longer say that William Branham said the world ends in 1977.
PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate


To: PaulSilas (8 of 30)
470.8 in reply to 470.7
What do you think he meant when he said that he based his prediction on Divine Inspiration? Please note
that in the very same quote, he implied that, although he didn't know the day nor hour, he knew the year of
the Lord's return. How would you explain that statement? Keep in mind that this quote was his final
reference to the 1977 prediction, coming from Church Ages book. He had plenty of time to correct it before
he died if he believed it was in error. His followers believed it to be a true prophecy, yet he allowed this
statement to stand as written.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: Bulls_Eye 7/22/2002 10:30 am

470.9 in reply to 470.8
As the old saying goes, The way the tree leans, that is the way it will fall.
You John insists that all trees are to lean in your direction, quite adamantly you wish to enforce your view as
correct on this subject as if Brother Branham never made the other statements.
In 1977 I lived in California and such reasoning did not move me beyond the reality that then was being
manifested. I simply saw it as a prediction and went on with my life. Many that respected Brother Branham
did not succumb to YOUR LINE OF REASONING. Yes, there were many that upheld what you deem is THE
WAY TO LOOK AT IT, but that does not mean God did not have other trees in His garden whose roots were so
tender that they falling over in those years. Some recognized that other things were not in line for it to
happen.
As far as Divine Inspiration, I study the WORD everyday under Divine Inspiration. WE were DIVINLY
instructed to STUDY THE WORD. That does not mean our calculations of certain events are exact and correct.
WE still have controversy on the year of Christs birth. But a Study of the WORD Divinely reveals many clues
so that we can project into our thinking a timeline that certainly has the inspiration of the Scriptures behind
it. This is what WMB referred to as his DIVINE INSPIRATION as a STUDENT OF THE WORD.
You really hate him without a cause.

Maranatha
Stephen Martin
Options Reply Rate
From: PaulSilas 7/22/2002 10:50 am

470.10 in reply to 470.8
Well Mr. Kennah,

first I have to state here very clear that I doubt that William Branham wrote the Church Age Book himself.
His sermons provided the basement for the book, yes. But dear Mr. Kennah, you seem to be so good in
analysing grammar and vocabulary and things like that, that you must have noticed that the language in the
Church Age Book and William Branham's language are so far apart, that even the assumption that someone
just corrected it for him is not maintainable.
Now to your point about the divine revelation. I didn't hear Br. Branham say that on tape, but I surely heard
him say that it is not in the Name of the Lord that he predicts that. He even said that he could miss it 100
years. So why don't you just accept that he didn't claim to know the year, but that he just expected certain
things to happen before 1977?
If you look into the Bible you will find almost every Prophet expecting things earlier than they should come to
pass.
I bet you even think God was wrong when he said to Abraham that they would be 400 years in a foreign
country. How do you explain the 30 years that they stayed longer than that???
GENESIS 15:13
13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land [that is] not theirs,
and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;
EXODUS 12:40
40 Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, [was] four hundred and thirty years.
EXODUS 12:41
41 And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to
pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.
I more and more get the impression that you pathologically search for anything that you could use to accuse
William Branham of false prophesy, even if you have to take Quotes out of context or if you have to interpret
his Words in the way you need them.
PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate

From: philrickerby 7/23/2002 6:42 am

470.11 in reply to 470.10
As well as the statement in the Church Age Book concerning 'divine inspiration' for the 1977 date. On other
occaisions Branham attributed the date to a vision. Do you think the vision was in error? If so who or what
was it from?
Options Reply Rate

To: philrickerby (12 of 30)
470.12 in reply to 470.11
> As well as the statement in the Church Age Book concerning 'divine inspiration' for the 1977 date. On other
occaisions Branham attributed the date to a vision. Do you think the vision was in error? If so who or what
was it from? <
If you base your calculations or thoughts or whatever on a Newspaper article, then I don't think that the
Newspaper article is guilty or wrong if your calculatuions or thoughts are wrong. Same here: William Branham
said that he based his prediction (which he didn't say was from the Lord) on the Vision he saw, because 5 of
the 7 things were already fulfilled. Does that make the Vision wrong? NO, only the conclusion. Hope that ou
use your own common sense next time to find these easy answers!
> I don't say it will be, but predict that it will end by 1977, that the church will go completely into apostasy,
and she'll be ousted out of the mouth of God. And the second coming, or the rapture of Christ, might come
anytime. Now, I could miss that a year; I can miss it twenty years, I could miss it a hundred years. I don't
know where. But I just predict that according to a vision He showed me, and taking the time, the way it's
progressing, I say it'll be sometime between '33 and '77. <
Can we have it more clear out of the mouth of William Branham??? He said "I DON'T SAY IT WILL BE", "I
COULD MISS IT A HUNDRED YEARS"!!!
It is very easy to draw a wrong conclusion out of a fact. Science is more then evidence enough for that.
PaulSilas
Edited 7/23/2002 12:26:26 PM ET by PAULSILAS
Options Reply Rate

From: MomWhoLovesJesus (Momfothree) 7/23/2002 6:41 pm

470.13 in reply to 470.12
"I could miss it a 100 years."
They why even mention 1977 at all?!
Options Reply Rate

To: MomWhoLovesJesus (Momfothree) (14 of 30)
470.14 in reply to 470.13
> They why even mention 1977 at all?! <
It is not my buisiness and I think it isn't yours as well.
Please go back to your memory for me, and try to think of an occasion, where someone told you his opinion
of how long he thinks it will be untill the Lord Jesus shall come back. (Or maybe you heard a conversation
where such things weer discussed). I have heard many many people from all the different Denominations say
at least a guess about how they think it will go.
But I am sure such things never happen around where you are, and you never heard anyone say such a
thing, right?
PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate

470.15 in reply to 470.14
If a public figure makes a statement publicly, then it IS my business. I've heard true people of God say they
believe the end will be soon, but not put a date (or even year) on it. There have been several Leaders of
groups (religions, cults, etc...) that have falsely predicted the end (the Jehovah Witnesses come to mind),
and they too make excuses when their predictions don't come true. And their followers keep on believing
them too. How sad.
Options Reply Rate


470.16 in reply to 470.12
In downplaying the 1977 date you are conviently forgetting how seriously it was taken by the message up
until 1978...
Branham claimed that in 1933 an angel told him "As John the Baptist was sent for the forerunner of the first
coming of Christ, you've got a--have a Message that will bring forth the forerunning of the second coming of
Christ."
John the Baptists ministry overlapped with Jesus' ministry. Branham has been dead for more than 36 years
now and Jesus has not yet returned, making the comparison with John the Baptist quite implausible even
now. Do you think that 100 years could go by and the Angls alledged claim still be true?
Options Reply Rate

470.17 in reply to 470.16
> In downplaying the 1977 date you are conviently forgetting how seriously it was taken by the message up
until 1978... <
I don't know what you call the Message. To me, the message is what we have got on tapes. The Message is
not a perspn o some churches to me. There are churches who accept the Message, but these churches aren't
the Message. Hope you can understand my point here. (If I look and see how many people claim to follow
Jesus Christ and what they do etc., then it would be easy for me to doubt that Jesus was sent from God. You
have to seperate the Message and the followers. Only because some followers aren't handling right what
Jesus told, that dosn't make Jesus a false Prophet.)
Now same here: only because some people don't handle the Message of this hour right, doesn't make the
Message wrong. My Grandfather always warned the people to think that 1977 was the end. He preached
against 1977, and yet he accpeted the Message just like the many people who thought 1977 would be the
end.
I again tell you: You have to seperate the Message and the people who follow it. If someone takes truth and
does wrong with it, that dosn't make the truth wrong.
> John the Baptists ministry overlapped with Jesus' ministry. Branham has been dead for more than 36 years
now and Jesus has not yet returned, making the comparison with John the Baptist quite implausible even
now. <
You quoted that right: "... YOUR MESSAGE will forerun the second Coming of Chrsit". As far as I know the
Message is still forerunning. It is doing that more now than when William Branham lived. So there is nothing
to worry for me concerning the overlapping.
Hope this helped you understand my view,
PaulSilas

Options Reply Rate
From: Nicknack7 8/1/2002 10:27 am

470.18 in reply to 470.16
Your post illustrates your ignorance. In the third Seal Bro Branham said that he believed the Lord would come
between 30 & 35 years of right now ( March 1963) IN HIS ESTIMATION. 1993 TO 1998
Way beyond 1977 !
<< Branham has been dead for 36 years now and Jesus has not yet returned >>
Bro Branham taught the coming of Jesus Christ is in two parts . According to the scripture the appearing is
the event that precedes the coming amd is going on NOW.
What is to occur at the time of the APPEARING ? ( Not the coming )
2nd Timothy 4- 1.
I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick & the dead at his
appearing andhis kingdom.
JUDGEMENT my friend. The Judge is here now.
Options Reply Rate

To: Nicknack7 (19 of 30)
470.19 in reply to 470.18
Welcome back, NN7! Did you ever solve the mystery of the phantom poster who was using your nick?
>>Your post illustrates your ignorance. In the third Seal Bro Branham said that he believed the Lord would
come between 30 & 35 years of right now ( March 1963) IN HIS ESTIMATION. 1993 TO 1998
Way beyond 1977 ! <<
Here is the actual quote you're referring to:
Now, I'm going to try to turn you around for a minute, so be ready. I--I believe Jesus will come within
less than three minutes from right now, of His time. You know how long that would be? About thirty-
five years. See, a thousand years is only one day with Him. You see? So when you hear... The apostle
back here said, "The time is at hand." Over here, "The time is at hand." The apostle said that in
Revelations. You know how long that's been? That hasn't--that was just yesterday to God--not even
two days yet. And see, if it's three minutes, less than three minutes of His coming (See, that'd be
thirty years, about, to us, or something on that order.) and look how--at what three minutes would
be to Him. He's already rising up to come.
THIRD.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN WEDNESDAY_ 63-0320
I don't believe that Mr. Branham was predicting here that the Lord would come in about 30-35 years. In fact,
he said the Lord would come "within less than three minutes from right now, of His time." That would be
less than 30 years by his calculations. Even if this statement were intended as a prophecy, it would be past

due by 9 years.
Actually, if 1,000 years in our time were literally as a day for the Lord, then 3 minutes in the Lords time
would be equal to about 2 years for us, not 30-35 years. That would make 1965 the year of the Lord's return.
In any case, the quote you gave was not William Branham's final word on the subject. The Church Ages book
was published in 1965 after having been written under Mr. Branham's direct supervision. The Church Ages
book contains Mr. Branham's final statements concerning 1977. In it he said,
I still maintain this prediction after thirty years because, Jesus did NOT say no man could know
the year, month or week in which His coming was to be completed. So I repeat, I sincerely
believe and maintain as a private student of the Word, along with Divine inspiration that 1977 ought
to terminate the world systems and usher in the millennium.
LAODICEAN.CHURCH.AGE - CHURCH.AGE.BOOK CPT.9
It is clear that Mr. Branham was unequivocal in stating that he knew the end would come in 1977.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Christian Awareness Fellowship (CAF) (CAF is a non-profit organization run by some friends of mine)
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
Keep Reading>>
Enhanced Features for JEENA_EL (DelphiPlus Member)

WYSIWYG Editor:
Personal Icon: Web Space
On
Hide Signatures: Staff Badge:
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Block Ads: On Check jeena_el@delphiforums.com email
Navigate this discussion: 1-20 21-30
Rate My Interest:
High Neutral Ignore Apply


An Examination of the Teachings of William Branham
from a Former Follower's Perspective
William Branham and the Cloud

The Lord Jesus loves you. And He died that you might be well. He sent me as His prophet to tell you
what is truth.--William Branham
Table of Contents
Introduction
My Testimony
Who Was William Branham and What Was His Message?
Controversial Prophecies
Controversial Teachings
Issues and Events in William Branhams Life
Mistinterpreted Scriptures
William Branham Quote Book
What Was the Attraction on the Mountain?
Why Do People Believe the Message?
Quote of the Week--March 27, 2005
Discussion Forum
Other articles by John Kennah as they've appeared in Christian Awareness Fellowship's

newsletter, The SERVANT:
"The Message of William Branham" (1992)

"The Message of William Branham: Part 2" (1992)
"The Message of William Branham: Part 3--Factions Within the Message" (1993)
"What Was the Attraction on the Mountain?" (1996)
http://people.delphiforums.com/JohnK63/home.htm (1 of 13)4/1/2005 3:49:28 AM

Recommended Links:
How to Become a Christian

Christian Research Institute
Walter Martins Religious Info Net
Apologetics Index
Ravi Zacharias International Ministries
Online Bibles
Introduction
Dear Reader,
Are you a follower of the Message of William Branham or do you know
someone who is? Do you have questions about the Message that you have
longed to ask but were afraid of being judged as a doubter of the prophet--or
even worse, "serpents seed?" Do you struggle with certain things that
William Branham taught that just don't seem right and have no one to discuss
them with? Have you seen an absence of the "signs following" in your life and
now doubt that you have the Holy Spirit living in you, even though you have
repented and accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior? Has the Message
church you attend taken control of your life? Do you live in fear of someone
finding out about your questions and doubts?
Maybe you are not a follower of the Message but you have loved ones who
are. Perhaps youve seen friendships severed or family members distance
themselves from you because you dont believe the Message of William
Branham. You may find yourself wishing you knew what "The Message" is
all about.

My name is John Kennah. I spent nearly 10 years of my life following,

studying and preaching the Message of William Branham. I no longer follow
the Message, but I have learned much in the 24 years since I first accepted the
Message that may be helpful to those of you who have read this far. I am not a
trained counselor nor an ordained minister, but I love Jesus Christ and strive
to pattern my life according to the written Word of God, the Bible. I would be
more than happy to answer your questions concerning Wm. Branham's
teachings and how they relate to Scripture, as I am able.
If you are a follower of the Message, perhaps you will be

challenged by this Website to search the Bible as the
Bereans did (Acts 17:10-11) to see if the Message really
does line up with the Scriptures. If youre not a Message
believer, maybe it will give you just the insight you need to
speak more knowledgeably with a friend or a relative who
does follow the Message. In either case, my prayer is that
you will in some way benefit from my experience with the
Message and that you and yours will find encouragement
and a closer, more biblically based walk with our Lord and Savior, Jesus
Christ. If I can be of help, you may email me at JohnK63@comcast.net. Your
letter will remain confidential. If you choose not to write, my prayer is that
this Website will provide you with the information you need to help you
resolve the issues that led you this far. Please continue reading as I share my
testimony of my involvement with the Message of William Branham.--John
Kennah
My Testimony
My name is John Kennah. I was introduced to the teachings of William

Branham and accepted them as the Message of the Hour in June 1980. I
attended Tucson Tabernacle, where Pearry Green is pastor, from then until
December 1989. I was a diligent student of the Message and preached it in
Arizona prisons and local nursing homes. As I studied the Message in greater
depth, I began to discover discrepancies and contradictions in Mr. Branham's
teachings. The first discrepancy to catch my attention was in his teaching of

the "Seventy Weeks of Daniel" where he offered several conflicting

interpretations of Daniel chapter 9 in the course of his ministry (these are
described at this Site in the section titled, "Controversial Teachings"). I
occasionally sought the insight of the leadership at the Tabernacle for
explanations of the apparent contradictions, but I never received any concrete
answers. Their advice to me consisted of statements such as, "Just put your
questions on the shelf and the Lord will reveal it to you in His time," or, "Just
don't dwell on it. Lean not on your own understanding; just have faith that the
Message is true." As time went on, I came across other disturbing
discrepancies in the Message.
My doubts began to create a fear in me that I was "Serpent's Seed." I learned

that some brothers and sisters at the Tabernacle were already calling me
Serpent Seed behind my back because I had dared to question the prophet. I
clung even tighter to the Message, ignoring my doubts! Finally, during a
sermon in late 1989, Pearry Green criticized a man who indicated that
William Branham could not have been legally hunting javelina at the time of
the February 28, 1963 Cloud that appeared in the May 17, 1963 issue of LIFE
magazine. The thought that Bro. Branham might have been hunting out of
season so disturbed me that I began to research this claim myself. I contacted
the Arizona Game and Fish Department to find out when javelina season was
in 1963. I learned that javelina hunting season that year ran from March 1
through 10. I also began a study of everything that Bro. Branham had to say
about the Cloud and this hunting trip. As a result, I discovered that Bro.
Branham himself indicated that he did not go on this hunting trip until after
March 4, 1963 (See or listen to his sermon, Absolute, preached on March 4,
1963. Compare this to his sermon, Trying to do God a Service Without it
Being Gods Will, vol. 7, book 2, pages 8 and 9, preached November 27,
1965).
Indeed, William Branham did not go on this hunting trip until after the Cloud
had come and gone! This was the last blow to my waning faith in the
Message! The truth hit me hard. While praying earnestly about what to
believe concerning the Message, I felt the Holy Spirit impress on my heart
that the Bible is our guide to the Truth. I heard Him say (not audibly) that if I
found some of Bro. Branhams teachings to be inconsistent with the Bible, I
was not obligated to accept them. The Bible would be my absolute. Once I

recognized that I could question Bro. Branham's teachings without fear of the
Lords condemnation, I began to recall the many questions I had about the
Message, some of which I had long forgotten. I decided to give each of two
prominent elders at the Tabernacle one last opportunity to address the
discrepancies in the Message. They were unable to give me any satisfactory
answers. One of these elders had several dreams which confirmed to him that
Bro. Branham was a prophet. He scolded me for implying that his dreams
may not have come from the Holy Spirit. I left Tucson Tabernacle and the
Message in December 1989. I have since found a wonderful, Bible-based
Christian church where I now worship.
Rewriting Message History
A lot has happened since I left the Message in 1989 and started my calling to
educate Message leaders, followers and the general public of the
irreconcilable discrepancies of Wm. Branhams account of the Cloud by way
of through mail, radio, newsletter publications and email.
Wm. Branhams oldest daughter, Rebekah Branham-Smith, would write an

article in her magazine, Only Believe (see, "On the Road to Sunset", June
1992), in which she confirmed my findings but reinterpreted the Cloud as a
sign predicting that a week later, seven angels would appear to him to
commission him to preach the Seven Seals--based only on a single, misquoted
statement Wm. Branham made in the sermon, "Come, Follow Me", in June
1963!
In 1993, Pearry Green did his part in rewriting Message history by publishing
a revised edition of his book, The Acts of the Prophet, in which the only
changes that were made were: 1) The removal of all statements in which he
claimed the Cloud was formed while Wm. Branham was hunting javelina at
Sunset Peak, and; 2) Inserting the new explanation that Rebekah Branham-
Smith had introduced in her article.
As a result of this rewriting of Message history, a new generation of Message

believers is emerging who is being told from the pulpit that Wm. Branham
claimed that the Cloud actually appeared "a day or two" before he went
hunting at Sunset. This in spite of the fact that he explicitly said in over a

dozen sermons that it was formed at the very time he was hunting at Sunset
Peak (See my article, What Was the Attraction On the Mountain, at this site).
Furthermore, pastors in the Message are now saying that so-called critics like
myself are the ones who really misunderstood what Wm. Branham said about
the Cloud, even though it is they who were forced to reinterpret its appearance
as a result of what those same critics were saying! The Bible has had its critics
over the centuries, but archeological facts have always sustained the integrity
of the Bible and proven the critics wrong time after time. Thats not what we
see happening in the Message. Followers of the Message have found it
necessary to change the long established Message teaching on the Cloud
precisely because critics--not Message believers--have discovered the errors
of Wm. Branhams claims and made them public. I may be critical of Wm.
Branham's claim to be a prophet and of the unbiblical aspects of his teachings,
but I love the Lord Jesus Christ, the Bible, and those who follow the Message
of Wm. Branham. My desire is that they place their confidence not in those
things which cannot be reconciled with the facts, but in the immutable Truth
of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which has never been disproved by its harshest
critics!
Origin of the Cloud and the Message Believers Response
What caused this unusual Cloud formation over the Arizona desert on
February 28, 1963? It is true that it was located about 26 miles in altitude. It is
not true that clouds do not form this high. However, this cloud was not formed
naturally or even supernaturally; it was man-made. During an investigation of
the Cloud, Dr. James E. McDonald of the University of Arizona Institute of
Atmospheric Physics learned that a series of test missiles were launched from
Vandenberg Air Force Base on the coast north of Los Angeles, California in
1963. Several of those launches left trails in the sky similar to the one that
appeared in the May 17, 1963 issue of LIFE magazine. Trails at the altitude of
the Cloud are not visible during daylight hours because the sky is too bright
for them to be seen (just as stars are not visible during daylight hours). When
the sky is dark, these clouds are so high that they remain illuminated by the
sun which shines directly on them (just as the sun continues to shine on the
moon after sunset). This was a rare phenomenon in 1963 because missile tests
were uncommon. When the clouds formed by the rockets began appearing,
the public did not know what caused them. The formation of such clouds is

now relatively common. I have seen this awesome phenomenon on at least

four occasions during the past 8 years here in Tucson because of our close
proximity to Vandenberg AFB and White Sands Missile Range in New
Mexico. It is a fantastic sight to see a brightly-lit cloud in a dark sky.
Dr. McDonald concluded that the Cloud was the result of a test missile which
was launched from Vandenberg AFB and detonated nearly directly overhead
earlier in the day of February 28, 1963. The steady, high speed stratospheric
wind carried the Cloud to where it was later discovered over Flagstaff,
Arizona after sunset. Followers of the Message, however, continue to insist
that there is no scientific explanation for the Cloud.
Recently, Message believers have attempted to suggest that Dr. McDonald

really wasnt sure what caused the formation of the Cloud based on a six page
document he published in May 1963. In the course of his investigation of the
Cloud, Dr. McDonald amassed a large volume of photographs and weather
data pertaining to the Cloud. On May 31, 1963, he published this six paged
paper which was titled, "Status of Investigation of the Northern Arizona
Stratospheric Cloud of February 28, 1963". This report was not a final
analysis of his investigation, but a progress report of what he had learned to
date. However, Message believers misrepresent this report and refer to it as
proof that Dr. McDonald was not convinced that the Cloud was formed by the
Vandenberg rocket. On page 5 of the report, Dr. McDonald clearly stated, "...
[I]t remains uncertain whether one may conclude that the Flagstaff cloud was
due to the detonation at Vandenberg. It is necessary to seek still further cross-
checks" (emphasis added). It is clear that in this report, Dr. McDonald had not
finished his investigation nor had he drawn a final conclusion of what formed
the Cloud. Some time after he wrote this paper, he became satisfied that the
Cloud was the result of the rocket launched from Vandenberg. This mundane
explanation for the Cloud caused him to loose all interest in publishing any
further articles about it, and he spent the major part of his energies with his
real passion, the investigation of UFO's, of which he was a firm believer. The
Message believers claim that Dr. McDonald was not sure the Cloud was
formed by the rocket at Vandenberg, particularly based on his progress report,
is thus unfounded.
For those who are still inclined to believe that the Cloud was a supernatural

sign sent to confirm Wm. Branham's Message, please consider the following:
1. Why didnt Bro. Branham seem to know anything about the Cloud until
Gene Norman brought the May 17, 1963 issue of LIFE magazine to his
attention (approximately 3 months after his experience with the 7 angels
and his preaching of the Seven Seals)?
2. Instead of appearing over Sunset Peak, why did the Cloud appear over
Flagstaff, Arizona, which is 200 miles to the northwest?
3. Why have followers of the Message claimed for nearly 40 years that the
Cloud appeared during Bro. Branhams visit by the 7 angels while
hunting despite evidence proving the contrary? Some are still
erroneously publishing that Bro. Branhams hunting trip coincided with
the Clouds appearance on February 28, 1963.
4. If the Cloud was a sign that Bro. Branham would soon meet with the 7
angels as Rebekah Branham-Smith has said, why didnt he know that,
allowing his followers to believe that the angels formed it while he met
them at Sunset on February 28, 1963? And why didn't anyone know of
such a sign until long after the event it was supposed to have predicted
had come to pass?
5. Why do followers of the Message continue to say that there is no
scientific explanation for the Cloud?
When the facts are known, we find that there is no connection whatsoever
between the Clouds appearance and Bro. Branham's hunting trip in Arizona.
In fact, there is nothing in common between the Cloud formation and William
Branham at all!
William Branham said that his Message was sent to correct longstanding
doctrinal errors and to reveal the mysteries of the Bible, yet not even his
followers can agree on what he taught. The truth is that Jesus Christ came,
died on the cross to atone for our sins and rose again from the dead. When we
repent and accept Him as our Lord and Savior by faith (not on the merits of
our good works), He saves us by His Grace and lives in and through us. The
Bible says, "That if you confess with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord,' and believe
in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is
with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth
that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, 'Anyone who trusts in

him will never be put to shame.' For there is no difference between Jew and
Gentile--the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him,
for, 'Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.' " (Romans
10:9-13)
That is the Gospel that we are saved by! That is the True Message of the hour!
There is no other requirement or message necessary for salvation. Thank you
for your time in reading my testimony. I would be happy to hear from you if
you would like to discuss these issues further. I pray for the Holy Spirits
guidance in your walk with our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
How To Contact Me:

Email: JohnK63@comcast.net
Or, you may visit my discussion forum at http://forums.delphiforums.com/
kennah
Back to Table of Contents
William Branham's Ministry
William Marrion Branham was a main figure of the healing revivals of the
late 40's and 50's. Many believe that his was the most dramatic healing
ministry of the revivals. His ministry and Church Order are a derivation of the
Pentecostal movement. His followers believe he was a Major, or "Word"
prophet. Mr. Branham's followers believe (based on his teachings, known as
The Message) that he is the fulfillment of Malachi 4:5,6. Mr. Branham taught
that the seven churches in Asia from the book of Revelation represent the
history of the Christian Church in 7 specific segments or ages. William
Branham implied that he was the angel (messenger) to the Laodicean Church
Age.* As such, his followers believe he was the 7th angel in Revelation 10:7,
sounding (i.e., revealing) the mysteries of God that have been previously
hidden to the Church.

Mr. Branham said that the Lord revealed to him that, as John the Baptist came
in the spirit of Elijah to forerun the first coming of Jesus Christ, Mr. Branham
was sent in the spirit of Elijah to forerun His second coming. His Message
was to restore the Word of God that had been twisted and manhandled
through centuries of denominational Christianity. Emphasis is not placed on
evangelizing the lost for Christ but on preparing the Bride for the second
coming of Christ.
Doctrines
Mr. Branham's most controversial doctrines were unorthodox interpretations

of the Scriptures that he said had been lost through the ages. He believed that
God sent him as a prophet to restore these lost "mysteries" to the Church.
Some of his most well known teachings include:
1. God is not a Trinity, but has manifested Himself in three dispensations:

a. As Father in the Old Testament;
b. As Son in the New Testament;
c. As Holy Spirit in His Church.
He taught that God was not omnipresent because, as a being, He could
not be everywhere at once. He also believed that Jesus was not God
until the Holy Spirit incarnated His body at the time of His baptism.
Jesus was again reduced to a mere mortal man when the Holy Spirit
supposedly left His body in the Garden of Gethsemane the night before
He was crucified.
2. The fall in the Garden of Eden was a result of an adulterous affair
between Eve and the Serpent. This doctrine is known as Serpent's Seed.
As a result of this affair, Cain was born (i.e., the Serpent--not Adam--
was Cain's true father).
3. The Catholic Church is the fulfillment of Mystery Babylon from the
book of Revelation. Mystery Babylon is the mother of harlots. Her
children are our present protestant denominational churches. He
believed that Revelation 18:4 was a call for Christians to leave their
denominational churches and come to his Message, the only true
revelation of Jesus Christ.
4. Hell is not eternal.
5. Mr. Branham taught that his Message represents the required truth

necessary for members of the Elect Bride of Jesus Christ to accept in

order to make the Rapture.
6. Members of the Bride are Eternal, having "theophanies" (their glorified
bodies waiting for them in heaven) which had no beginning and will
never die.
7. Christians who reject the Message are lost. Christians who are ignorant
of the importance of the Message may be saved as lower class believers
if they treat Message believers kindly. They will not make the Rapture,
however, but must endure the Great Tribulation while followers of the
Message are Raptured.
Recommended Reading
Informative books that offer objective insight into William Branham's
ministry as it relates to the Healing Revivals and beyond.
Harrell, David Edwin, Jr. All Things Are Possible: The Healing and
Charasmatic Revivals in Modern America, Indiana University Press, 1975.
Moriarty, Michael G. The New Charismatics: A Concerned Voice Responds to

Dangerous New Trends, Zondervan Publishing House,1992.
Weaver, C. Douglas. The Healer Prophet, William Marrion Branham: A

Study in the Prophetic in American Pentecostalism, Mercer University Press,
1987.
________________________
* During a prayer line, Mr. Branham once said, "You, setting here in front,
you believe me to be God's prophet? A prophet is a messenger to an age. You

believe I have God's message?" (Discerning the Body of the Lord, August 12,
1959, tape #59-0812).
Quote of the Week, March 27, 2005

The First Easter According to WMB

Now, notice. It was on this beautiful Easter morning. There'd been a lot of
rumor talk. Some women had come back from the grave and said they saw a
vision of Angels. And they supposed it to be a gardener, Mary, the mother; for
she heard a voice speak behind her, and said, "Who do you seek?" And when
He turned...
She turned and said, "They have taken away my Lord. I don't know where
they have laid Him. If You know, tell me where He's at, and I'll go get Him."
He turned and said, "Mary."
And she looked at Him, and she said, "Rabboni," which means, "Master."
He said, "Don't touch Me, for I've not yet ascended. But I will ascend to your
Father, and to My Father, to my God, and to your God. But go, tell My
disciples I'll meet them in Galilee."
How that seemed to be an idle tale of this Man that they seen embalmed; and
died, buried, and this was the fourth day, or the third day since He was dead.
Peter got discouraged and wanted to go a-fishing. Two of them said, one by
the name of Cleopas, said, "We'll just go back home to Jerusalem." And on
their road, walking along that morning when Peter got his fishing line and
took off fishing, these two were on their road sad. And as they went along the
road, saying, "Well, I guess life is not worth living. Oh, how we believed that
He was the Messiah. How could that Man Who raised the dead ever stand and
let that high priest make fun of Him? How could that Man, Who could see
vision after vision, ever let a Roman soldier put a rag around His face, and hit
Him on the head, and said, 'If thou be a prophet, tell us who hit you'? How
could He scream for mercy on the cross, seeing that He could even raise up
the dead?" Oh, it was discouraging moment.--William Branham
And Their Eyes Were Opened And They Knew Him, April 21, 1957 (tape #57-
0421E)
Click Here to discuss this week's Quote of the Week.
William Branham Discussion Forum

This is an open discussion forum where we address the Prophecies, Doctrine and

Events in the life and ministry of William Branham. This forum is designed for use
as an informational resource for those interested in knowing more about William
Branham and his Message. Message believers and non-Message believers are
welcome to participate.
Background, Divider Bar and Button Graphics at this Site provided by
aaabackgrounds.com
Buttons, Bullets & Backgrounds

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - 2nd Coming of the Lord by

Subscribe
1977 (137 views)
470.21 in reply to 470.19
Hello John,
To answer your question... no, I did not slove the mystery of the phantom poster... It could be taken as a
compliment or an insult that someone would do such a thing. Imitation or impersonation is a form of flattery,
and as WMB stated for every bogus dollar bill there is an original somewhere ,in order that there be a
counterfeit. I claim to be the original Nicknack 7 . Drawing on my fine command of the English language, I
say nothing in this regard.
You are right about the reference from the Third Seal that I was too lazy to post . I would like to comment on
your conclusion from the 1977 quote from Laodicean Church age CPT 9.
<< It is clear that Mr Branham was unequivocal in stating that he knew the end would come in 1977 >>
"Ought to terminate" , indicates to me a degree of uncertainty about his statement. As opposed to "
Definately end the world systems" which he obviously DID NOT say. Also "Terminate the world systems and
usher in the millenium ". You are interpreting that this statement is referring to "the end". If English retains
its' meaning he obviously did not say "THAT "either. "1977 "refers to an entire year, not a month, week, or
day. This implys that ending the world systems would occur over a period of time not a moment or an
instant. I have the conviction that the world systems are disintegrating before our eyes to be replaced by
another era, which WMB calls the Millenium.
He did warn us not to misinterpret , which I believe you are doing here. I don't claim to know exactly what he
meant by this quote but I do believe that his ministry declared the Christ who is here, which is the purpose
and main emphasis of his ministry , The Message foreran the second coming as God spoke it would, in June
1933.
Options Reply Rate


470.22 in reply to 470.17
I note that you avoided including the reference to John the Baptist, probably for good reason. For Branham to
be a forerunner in the same way as John the Baptist was would indicate a close link chronologically between
his ministry and the return of Christ (, the rapture and the final tribulation. Branham himself recognised this
when he described the ministry of the 'Elijah':
"And remember, when this Elijah comes... I'll give you some of his description. When Elijah comes, that's the
messenger to the Laodicean church Age. We find Elijah coming before... Remember, Elijah was the one that
went up on a chariot, never tasted death. And the message of this great messenger that'll come in this
closing day in the Laodicean church Age, the Pentecostal Age, will be the one that'll take the church to the
rapture. Exactly. He was raptured himself, and he will come with the church to the rapture." ('The Messiah',
17/1/61)
"And remember, when he appears on the scene, the time is at hand. Let's pray for God to send him. Time is
at hand. As soon as his ministry was finished, Messiah showed Himself.
As soon as this great one will come in the last days will finish his ministry, the Messiah will show Himself. It'll
be so. The time is at hand, so we better pray. You better start praying."('True Sign That's Overlooked',
12/11/61)
"Where is that one that's going to sow that seed for that end-time church? Where is that ripening seed, that
promised Elijah? And immediately after his days shall the great tribulation set in and burn the
earth." ('Questions and Answers', 27/5/62)
Over 36 years has gone by since Branham's death, a whole generation has grown up since then. The soceity
and culture that exists now is rather different to that which existed during Branham's ministry. Presumably
you would like to reinterpret being a forerunner like John the Baptist as having some sort of ministry at some
point potentially a long time prior to Christ's return, however this does not accord with John the Baptist's
ministry or Branham's expectation.
Options Reply Rate

470.23 in reply to 470.18

Your attempt to redefine Jesus' second coming as only an 'appearance'

reminds me very much of the Watch Tower Soceity ('Jehovah's Witnesses') attempts to redefine what they
predicted would happen in 1914. I think it best to stick with the Biblical description of his return which will not
be hidden but will be unmistakable:
"At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn.
They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. And he will send
his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the
heavens to the other." Matthew 24:30,31
"Then he said to his disciples, "The time is coming when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of
Man, but you will not see it. Men will tell you, `There he is!' or `Here he is!' Do not go running off after them.
For the Son of Man in his day* will be like the lightning, which flashes and lights up the sky from one end to
the other." Luke 17:22-24
Options Reply Rate

To: 8320JOHN (24 of 30)
470.24 in reply to 470.20
William Branham even said he didn't know why he picked 1977:
And here comes around and shows, and then I predicted... I never said the Lord told me that, but
standing that morning in the church, I said, "The way progress..." I got back to one end of the wall
and run to the other end of the wall, and I said, "The way progress is going on, I'll predict that the
time (I don't know why I'm saying it.)--but I predict that that'll all happen between right now,
1933, and 1977 . And not knowing it, God knows my heart, I never knowed it until yesterday, that
1977 is the jubilee, and exactly the same amount of time run out that He give with Israel and
everything at the end.
SEVENTY.WEEKS.OF.DANIEL_ JEFF.IN DA 89-141 SUNDAY_ 61-0806
Mr. Branham often saw spiritual relevance in numbers, such as 5 being the number of grace, 3 being the
number of perfection, etc., etc. My guess is that he may have seen some significance in the double 7's in
1977. Mr. Branham believed that 7 was the number of completion.
Why did it fail to come to pass? Simply because it was a false prophecy.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Reply Rate

470.25 in reply to 470.21
I don't think anyone knows exactly what he meant by his quote. But words mean things, and he had plenty
of time to consider one important sentence before he died. That sentence, in my opinion, has no meaning
unless he believed it was revealed to him that 1977 would be the end of the world:
And though many may feel that this is an irresponsible statement in view of the fact that Jesus said
that 'no man knoweth the day nor the hour.' I still maintain this prediction after thirty years because,
Jesus did NOT say no man could know the year, month or week in which His coming was to
be completed.
LAODICEAN.CHURCH.AGE - CHURCH.AGE.BOOK CPT.9
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

To: philrickerby unread (26 of 30)
470.26 in reply to 470.23

The actual quote (that was the voice of God )who spoke at the appearing on the river in June 1933 ,did not
refer to William Branham as being the forerunner. Words to this effect... As John the Baptist foreran the first
coming of Christ, " YOUR MESSAGE" will introduce Him the second time. His Message being the spoken
WORD, not "him "personally.
Where the great gulf exists between the critics of WMB & the followers of the Message, particularly with
regard to the coming of Christ, is ,in my opinion over the statement he made concerning the shout. He said "
The shout is the message " The Lord descends from heaven with a" shout", according to the scripture. This is
Rev 10.1 -7.
His purpose was to declare Him being present which he did .

<< The time is coming when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man >> Son of Man is
Prophet .
We have seen & heard His Voice. The Message IS CHRIST not William Branham, although I don't believe
there is any other Christ than the one that HE declared. Miss this One & we can look forward to being the
cannon foder he spoke of. I am not saying the Lords' coming is only an appearance, what I am saying is , you
miss the appearing of Christ & you will never have the Coming of Christ. I realise this will be comprehended
by Message people only, not people on the outside trying to look "in"
Options Reply Rate

470.27 in reply to 470.24
You may be correct in your assumption of the double sevens . ( 77) Interesting viewpoint, I never considered
this.
<< Why did it fail to come to pass? >>
<< Simply because it was false prophesy >>
My questions....
What specifically failed to come to pass? We link the end of time to the subsequent coming of the Lord Jesus
Christ for His church. We understand the "appearing" began publicly in June 1933 although this was not
understood or revealed to the church until 1977. We understand that according to the scripture we are in the
dispensation of the fullness of time.
1977 he said is the "Jubilee "... What is this Jubilee ?
He said " I never said the Lord told me that "
Therfore it was the prediction of a man & not false prophesy at all.
He said twice I predict, and another time I predicted. He was entirely fallible as a man but infallible as THE
prophet.
" I don't know why I am saying it" There must be a reason, perhaps he was saying it so that we could talk

about it in the "Jubilee" i.e 50 years down the road. Praise God .
Options Reply Rate
From: luvthecorrs 8/10/2002 8:58 am

470.28 in reply to 470.7
QUESTIONS.AND.ANSWERS_ JEFF.IN COD THURSDAY_ 61-0112

563-Q-118 118. Now, in I Corinthians 14, "Follow--follow after charity and desire spiritual gifts, but rather
that you may prophesy." Webster, saying, "prophesy": "to foretell future events, especially by DIVINE
INSPERATION." Can a message... Now, they... That--that's what Webster said and what the--the brother
asked. Can a message be called prophesy that does not foretell future events?
No, sir. "Prophesy" is "to foretell." See? All right.
322-4 LAODICEAN.CHURCH.AGE - CHURCH.AGE.BOOK CPT.9

Based on these seven visions, along with the rapid changes which have swept the world in the last fifty years,
I PREDICT (I do not prophesy) that these visions will have all come to pass by 1977. And though many may
feel that this is an irresponsible statement in view of the fact that Jesus said that 'no man knoweth the day
nor the hour.' I still maintain this PREDICTION after thirty years because, Jesus did NOT say no man could
know the year, month or week in which His coming was to be completed. So I repeat, I sincerely believe and
maintain as a private student of the Word, along with DIVINE INSPERATION that 1977 ought to terminate the
world systems and usher in the millennium.
ISRAEL.IN.EGYPT_ JEFF.IN IC 1-34 WEDNESDAY_ 53-0325

216 And I'm going to a meeting now where three hundred thousand people will be set. And I say this from
my heart. Did you ever hear me PREDICT anything in the Name of the Lord but what was just exactly that
way? Ask wherever you want to, anywhere through the world. And look at the hundreds and hundreds of
things that He said. Surely, I know what I'm speaking of. Not for myself, Christ in here.
GREEK LEXICON -- STRONG'S NUMBER 4395

4395 propheteuo {prof-ate-yoo'-o} profhteuvw from 4396; TDNT -- 6:781,952; vb
AV -- prophesy (28)
1) to prophesy, i.e. to be a prophet, speak forth by DIVINE INSPERATIONS; to PREDICT
1a) to prophesy
1b) with the idea of foretelling future events pertaining esp. to the kingdom of God
1c) to utter forth, declare, a thing which can only be known by DIVINE REVELATION
1d) to break forth under sudden impulse in lofty discourse or praise of the divine counsels; or under like
prompting, to teach, refute, reprove, admonish, comfort others
1e) to act as a prophet, discharge the prophetic office
Options Reply Rate


To: Bulls_Eye (29 of 30)
470.29 in reply to 470.9
>>You John insists that all trees are to lean in your direction, quite adamantly you wish to enforce your view
as correct on this subject as if Brother Branham never made the other statements. <<
No, I clearly pointed out that Mr. Branham's "Divine Inspiration" 1977 quote was the last one he made before
he died. In light of the fact that this quote came from a book that he spent many hours verifying the
accuracy of its contents, it necessarily supercedes any other statements he made regarding 1977.
>>You really hate him without a cause.<>first I have to state here very clear that I doubt that William Branham wrote the Church Age Book himself.
His sermons provided the basement for the book, yes. But dear Mr. Kennah, you seem to be so good in
analysing grammar and vocabulary and things like that, that you must have noticed that the language in the
Church Age Book and William Branham's language are so far apart, that even the assumption that someone
just corrected it for him is not maintainable.<<
Rebekah Branham-Smith wrote an article called, "Whose Book Is It?" for the June 1991 issue of her
magazine, Only Believe. In it, she points out that Lee Vayle was actually the ghost writer of the Church Ages
book. She makes the definitive case for supporting the fact that William Branham had total control of what
Lee Vayle put into the book. At the end of the article, she writes:
There is no doubt in my mind that An Exposition Of The Seven Church Ages is William Branhams
book. And knowing , first-hand, how hard he struggled to get it published, I cannot remain neutral on
the subject of its authorship.
>>Now to your point about the divine revelation. I didn't hear Br. Branham say that on tape, but I surely
heard him say that it is not in the Name of the Lord that he predicts that. He even said that he could miss it
100 years. So why don't you just accept that he didn't claim to know the year, but that he just expected

certain things to happen before 1977?<<
The quote that I used in the opening post of this discussion were Mr. Branham's final words on the subject.
They necessarily supercede any other statements he made regarding 1977.
>>I bet you even think God was wrong when he said to Abraham that they would be 400 years in a foreign
country. How do you explain the 30 years that they stayed longer than that???<<
Please read http://forums.delphiforums.com/kennah/messages/?msg=513.13.
>>I more and more get the impression that you pathologically search for anything that you could use to
accuse William Branham of false prophesy, even if you have to take Quotes out of context or if you have to
interpret his Words in the way you need them.<<
I have only reported on those things that have caused me to doubt that William Branham was a prophet of
the Lord. If you believe I have taken anything out of context, you are free to correct me.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
Next Discussion>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Navigate this discussion: 1-20 21-30
Rate My Interest:

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - Mr. Branham's Vision: 5 or

Subscribe
7 Angels? (23 views)
To: ALL (1 of 7)
182.1
Wm. Branham claimed to have had a vision on December 22, 1963, in which he said 5 angels appeared to
him in the desert. He said that his son Joseph was also in the vision. In March 1963, Mr. Branham told his
congregation that this vision had come to pass while he was hunting in Arizona. When Mr. Branham described
how the angels appeared to him, he said that 7 angels met with him, not 5 as in his vision. Also, his son
Joseph was not present at the time the vision was fulfilled.
Mr. Branham described this vision in detail in two sermons. The first was in the sermon, Reproach for the
Word, preached on December 23, 1962, one day after his vision. The vision was undoubtedly still fresh in his
mind. He made it quite clear that he saw 5 angels in the vision by saying that the number 5 represented
grace:
And no more than the second group of birds come by, I looked to the west; and it looked like in a
form of a pyramid, like two on each side with one in the top, came five of the mightiest Angels I ever
seen in my life. Such a terrific speed I never seen... Their heads back and their pointed wings just
sailing quickly...
But here they come. And they were so terrifically fast, till I thought when it lifted up... I heard that
explosion like, or like a blast that went out, like a sound barrier; and when it did, I thought, "Well,
this must mean that I'm fixing to be killed (See?) in a blast of some sort." And--and I--and while I
thought on those things, I thought, "No, it wouldn't be that, because if it was a blast, it would've got
Joseph too, because there he is still talking, thinking that I'm there. I can hear him. It wasn't that."
This is all still in the vision. It wasn't... See, it's in the vision. And then all at once, as I realized that I
had been... They were around me. I couldn't see them, but I'd been brought into this constellation of
a pyramid of them, inside this constellation of--of Angels, of five. And I thought, "Now, a death angel
would be one, five would be grace." I was thinking that; I thought, "Oh, it's the--it's coming with my
message. That's my second climax. They're coming to bring me the message from the Lord." And I
screamed out with all of my might, as loud as I could, "Oh Jesus, what would You have me do?" And
when I did, it just--just went away from me.
I--I--I haven't felt just right since. See? I was... All day yesterday, I had to stay in the house, almost
feeling beside myself, I can't make my mind get clear, and the glory and power of the Lord... I was
numb all over when it left me. I was trying to rub my hands, and I thought, "I can't catch my breath."
And I walked around and--through the floor, and back and forth. And I thought, "What does it mean,
Lord? What does it mean?"
And then I stopped and I said, "Lord God, Your servant is... I--I just cannot understand why. What
was that? Make it known, Lord."...
It just seem to just shakes me, that blasting, and that swift coming of those Angels, like that, five of
them together in a constellation of them, like--kind of like a... Like I had that pyramid drawn here. It
looked to be... First it looked like, kind of a... In the distance it looked kind of like that color of doves.
And they were in a--in a--coming from this way. And they were looked like one, two, three, four, and
then one right at the top, making five.
The Reproach for the Cause of the Word, December 23, 1963 (tape #62-1223)
The second time he publicly told of the vision was in the sermon, Is This the Sign of the End, Sir?, preached
on December 30, 1962, exactly a week after Reproach for the Word. In this account he said he was not sure
how many angels he saw in the vision because he didn't have time to count. He said that he knew that the
number was between 5 and 7.
When the vision supposedly came to pass less than 3 months later, Mr. Branham said that 7 angels appeared
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/5%20or%207%20angels1-7.html (1 of 6)4/1/2005 4:18:19 AM

to him according to his vision.
Whenever the testimony of this vision and its fulfillment is told by followers of the Message, without exception
they refer to the sermon, Is this the Sign of the End, Sir?, ignoring Mr. Branham's testimony in the sermon,
Reproach for the Word, where he unambiguously said that 5 angels appeared in his vision. I have yet to
speak with a Message believer who can reasonably explain this glaring discrepancy. Whether 7 supernatural
beings visited Mr. Branham in the desert or not, his vision was truly a false prophecy.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: DFNDRFTHFTH 5/26/2002 9:09 pm

182.2 in reply to 182.1
Dear John,
have you got $5.
Yes!
Thankyou.
Strictly speaking, you're now broke!
What? You've got more?
But you said "I HAVE got $5!"
Options Reply Rate


To: DFNDRFTHFTH (3 of 7)
182.3 in reply to 182.2
I'm not quite sure what your analogy means, but I would ask this: If William Branham did not mean that he
clearly saw 5 and only 5 angels, why did he specifically say that he knew he would not be killed since the 5
angels represented the number of grace? He didn't leave room for the appearance of more than 5 angels in
this vision when he made that statement. One more question: In Sirs, Is This the Time? why didn't he repeat
that he knew he wouldn't be killed because 5 angels represented grace? The answer is obvious. He was in
the process of changing the number from 5 to 7. Note that in his post-Seals sermons he would say that he
saw seven angels in the vision--not 5; not more-than-five-but-less-than-seven. No, after the Seals he was as
adamant about seeing 7 angels in his vision as he was about seeing 5 in Reproach for the Word. These types
of discrepancies are not characteristic of someone giving a truthful testimony.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: DFNDRFTHFTH 5/27/2002 10:22 am

182.4 in reply to 182.3
My analogy merely meant it is not a lie to say you saw, say five angels; when what you meant was "at least
five."
I do believe you fully when you say he misrepresented the number.
But, the question is; are you misrepresenting the facts [with respect] by omitting the following?
REPROACH.FOR.THE.WORD_ JEFF.IN V-2 N-16 SUNDAY_ 62-1223

5-3.......
They were around me. I COULDN'T SEE THEM [my emphasis], but I'd been brought into this constellation of a
pyramid of them
This combined with the description of the speed they swooped down at:

4-6.......
And sound like the sound barrier breaking, that--that a great roar went off way in the distance to the south.
And when I was lifted up, and there was such a terrific speed of the Angels.
5-3 But here they come. And they were so terrifically fast, till I thought when it lifted up... I heard that

explosion like, or like a blast that went out, like a sound barrier;
Options Reply Rate

182.5 in reply to 182.4
>>But, the question is; are you misrepresenting the facts [with respect] by omitting the following . . . <<
How could I be when he clearly said he saw 5 angels? He may not have seen them at the time they lifted him
up, but he said he saw them well enough during the event to say that there were 5 angels.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

182.6 in reply to 182.5
Sophism
Options Reply Rate


To: DFNDRFTHFTH unread (7 of 7)
182.7 in reply to 182.6
All I can say is my explanation is based on what William Branham actually said. Followers of the Message can
only say that Mr. Branham was human and was therefore subject to errors such as this. Let me ask you: Of
what use is a prophet who was not able to prophesy without error?
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
First Discussion>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Is this too complicated? Switch to Basic View
Software 2004 Prospero Technologies LLC. All rights reserved.

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - African Trip Prophecy (8

Subscribe
views)
To: ALL (1 of 1)
1080.1
In another thread, Newclothes made mention of another "Thus saith the Lord" prophecy that failed to come to
pass. She writes:
[William Branham] was making plans for a trip to Africa in fulfillment of a visions of a healing service of
300,000 people in Africa or India.
He said it was written on the flyleaf of his Bible, said it could not fail and was confirmed by a second vision
that told him not to go until September of 1954. He said it was Thus saith the Lord that it would be fulfilled.
He also stated that the miraculous healing of a young girl in 1956 was a sign that the meeting was imminent.
He made final preparations and was stunned when his Visa was restricted to hunting in May, 1965. He went
on a hunting trip, met briefly with some local ministers. No public meeting took place, and he hoped doors
would open later. As you know, he died in December 1965.
RISING.OF.THE.SUN_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-12 SUNDAY_ 65-0418M

51-2 You all know where I'm going, don't you? Africa . I've called for a long time, for years I've tried to get
back. Now, a vision , the Spirit of the Lord has prepared the way. . . . See? If that visa would happen to go
through there and get amongst of them ministers, they'd stop me right there. I have to go in as a hunter.
640 ONE.IN.A.MILLION_ LA.CA V-18 N-1 SATURDAY_ 65-0424

3 And now, I'm certainly soliciting the prayers of the people out in the radio land, as well as here. After I
leave this meeting, I'm going to Europe, down into Africa and around, on meetings. And this is going by a
vision, so it's going to be a great meeting there; I'm sure. And I felt for years that the Lord has wanted me to
come back.
CHOOSING.OF.A.BRIDE_ LA.CA V-2 N-28 THURSDAY_ 65-0429E

37-2 Let us stand to our feet in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ. If you never hear my voice again... If God
willing, I'm sailing to Africa in a few hours; I may never return. I don't know.
(VISA REFUSED)
644 LAST.VISIT.TO.SOUTH.AFRICA_ SOUTH.AFRICA THURSDAY_ 65-0527

E-1 And a few weeks ago, I was under great anticipations, believing that I would get to come and have a
meeting. But when I got the visa, "restricted," I almost had a heart attack. Ha. I wanted to come so bad. But
I do believe that through God I will minister again in the Name of the Lord Jesus among the people of Africa.
(LINKING AFRICA VISION TO TENT VISION)
645 ASHAMED.OF.HIM_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-9 SUNDAY_ 65-0711

16 And now I want to find out, through the elders. I feel led. I've never had such a hunger in my heart for
God in all my life, than--than I have now. See? For... And I--I want to get my own tent and my--my stuff, like
the Lord gave me a vision to, and I believe the time is just now at hand. And I want to see while I'm here,
why we can't get the tent. And then we'll start having our services like that, because that's according to a
vision from the Lord, that it's to be done that way.
ASHAMED.OF.HIM_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-9 SUNDAY_ 65-0711

7 I'd planned on, so hard, coming back, burdened in the heart. I just returned from Africa , as you all know.
And when I got over there, I had a restricted visa, and wouldn't let me, wouldn't let me preach, because it
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/African%20Trip.html (1 of 3)4/1/2005 4:25:34 AM

gathers too many together. And they're expecting an uprise there at any time, and--and they--they wouldn't
let me preach because of that gathering too many people together. The only way I could, would to have some
organization that's represented by the government, in the government, to invite me over, then that would
automatically let the government send out a militia for protection. See, they're just... There's just going to be
an uprise, and that's all there is to it. It's just right in hand. See? That government man said, "The last time
you was here, you had about a quarter of a million people together." And he said, "Then, you see, that'd just
be the very thing that communism is looking for, for an uprise." So I couldn't preach. . . .
But I said, "I don't care what the devil does, I--I can't... I can't voucher for what Brother Jackson said about
yellow-mane lion, and this, that, or the other. I--I can't vouch it. But I do know God told me to see Sidney
Jackson, and go hunting." And I said, "I'm going." And sometime... And I had one of the greatest trips.
I found out what the trouble was. Now, I think, about October, the Lord willing, I can go back and have a
meeting and everything, full cooperation, everything else (See?), in Africa now. I got to the bottom of it and
found out where it was at, what caused it. Up here, writing, this one has got this to say, and something's got
something to say, and this one there. The best thing to do, is go find out, yourself. And I know where the
trouble was, and what the reason of it was; it was because of so many people gathering together, the
government wouldn't let me have it.
THIRST_ TUCSON.AZ V-16 N-6 SUNDAY_ 65-0919

38 I had an experience with that just recently on the road to Africa . If I ever had any time that the devil ever
did press at me, was to go to Africa this last time. It become one of the--the finest meetings and times that I
ever went overseas. I got, I believe, more things accomplished in that little time that I was there, besides my
hunting trip, than I ever did at any time. I always thought that those churches didn't want me there, and
come to find out... I had a letter from someone, that it was, oh, they didn't want me there, all the
association; and found out it was one man with a letterhead from an organization, that said, "We don't want
you," he meant him and his family. See? So then when I got over there, I... See, just "we," that was he and
his family; and it wasn't the people at all. So now it's a great field opened up for us.
John Kennah
Here are some helpful links:

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
Next Discussion>>
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/African%20Trip.html (2 of 3)4/1/2005 4:25:34 AM

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - '64 Alaska Earthquake not

Subscribe
Prophesied (29 views)
From: KENNAH (JohnK63) Feb-2 7:14 am
To: ALL (1 of 6)
1400.1
Followers of the Message often look back to the 1964 Good Friday earthquake in Alaska as on of Wm.
Branham's fulfilled prophecies. However, in his first public comments about the earthquake after it
happened, he makes no indication that he had predicted it in any way:
And we're seeing just the catching of the last part, when we see things happening like's been
happening in the world in the last few days: For instance, the great earthquake in Alaska. Never has
been an earthquake like that in all the world. Did you notice? It come on Good Friday. And you know
the last time the world was shaken was on Good Friday too, when our Master died; and it shook the
whole world. And remember, it might be the sign of Him returning: He said that there'd be
earthquakes in diverse places.
Identified Christ of All Ages, April 1, 1964 (tape #_64-0401)
Note that he did not refer to any previous prophecies of impending judgment in this sermon.
Here's a bit of background leading to this nonpredicted prediction. In March 1964, Wm. Branham was
hunting javelina with several of his friends at Sunset Peak (where he was almost exactly a year earlier when
he said that 7 angels told him to preach the Seals). Javelina season in 1964 ran from February 21 through
March 8. Wm. Branham first describes the following incident which occurred over a two day period from on
February 29 to March 1. Note that this account was given nearly 3 months after the Alaska earthquake:
There's several setting here, a number, that was with us the other day when He came in a whirlwind,
told us the day before, Brother Banks Wood, them, when He said, "Take up this rock; throw it up in
the air, and say, 'THUS SAITH THE LORD. You will see it right away.'" And I picked up the rock up on
top of the mountain, threw it up in the air, and the... 'Course, coming down, it started a whirlwind
(See?), the suction of it.
You have to do something to cause something to follow it. Jesus took a piece of bread and broke it,
then multiplied from that piece of bread. He took water, poured it into a pitcher. Elijah took salt, put
it in a cruse; cut down a stick, throwed it on the water. It's something to symbolize. And picking up
this rock and throwing it into the air, and coming down started the whirlwind...
Brother Roy Roberson from the church here, standing present, I guess all of you know him. Knowing
he was a veteran and knowing what was going to take place, I put my hand on his shoulder, I said,
"Brother Roberson, be careful; watch; something's fixing to happen."
I walked back to where I was supposed to be standing, and out of the air came a whirlwind, down
through a canyon, from above, that was so great till it tore rocks eight or ten inches through, out of
the top of the mountain, and throwed them two hundred yards out in, and clapped three times like
that, and a voice came from it. See?
And all of them standing there... Brother Banks, present now, came up and said, "That was what you
told me yesterday?"
I said, "Yes, sir, that's it."
He said, "Now, what did It say?"
I said, "Now, that's just for me to know, Brother Banks (See?), because it was... It would alarm
people." But It went ahead, it happened just a little... Traveling northward, a little, few days later It
hit in the ocean, and you seen what happened around Fairbanks. It was a judgment sign. Now, we
find that--that God still... You see, it'd throw people into panic.
Unveiling of God, June 14, 1964 (tape #64-0614M)
It's clear from this account that Wm. Branham did not tell anybody about any predictions of impending
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Alaska%20Earthquake1-6.html (1 of 5)4/1/2005 4:54:21 AM

judgment on the west coast at that time. In fact, in this account, he did not say the earthquake was itself the
judgment of God, but only a sign of judgment.
In an article he wrote for the June 1992 issue of Only Believe magazine ("An Angel in the Camp"), Douglas
McHughes described what he saw at the camp while on this hunting trip in 1964. He didn't mention seeing
WMB throwing the rock up in the air the day earlier, but he said on Sunday, March 1, he heard three distinct
blasts, then saw a whirlwind descend on the camp, then raise back up vertically and disappear. He said that
WMB told them, "You know, one time God spoke to Job in a whirlwind." Mr. McHughes said WMB never told
him what, if anything, the incident meant. In fact, he said he never heard Wm. Branham discuss the incident
with anyone who was there. Mr. McHughes did not associate the incident with the Alaska earthquake in his
article.
Roy Roberson described the incident similarly in a 1990 article he wrote for Only Believe magazine ("Soldier",
Only Believe, vol. 3, #2). He didn't mention seeing WMB throwing the rock in the air either, but he said he
heard three loud booms and saw the whirlwind. Mr. Roberson continues,
The wind disappeared just as quickly as it had appeared, and several of the brothers ran up to
Brother Branham and asked him, "What was that?"
He said, "The Lord was speaking to me, but at this time I cannot tell you. You'll know in a few days
what it was all about."
Just a couple of days later we heard that an earthquake had struck in Alaska, and we knew that it
was a part of what had been foretold in the whirlwind at Sunset Mountain.
As I mentioned, this incident occurred on March 1. Wm. Branham and Mr. Roberson both said the Alaska
earthquake struck two days later, when in fact, it didn't happen until March 27, nearly a month later.
It wasn't until long after the Good Friday earthquake of 1964 that Wm. Branham first mentioned that the rock
throwing/whirlwind incident at Sunset Peak was a prediction of judgment. In December 1964 (nearly 10
months after the Alaska earthquake), WMB first publicly said that on that day at Sunset, God told him that
judgment was going to strike the west coast and that the Alaska earthquake was the fulfillment of this
prediction:
Stand there and see a whirlwind come out of the sky. It blowed a mountain half in two, standing
there where we was at; cut the top of trees off and things like that. And a blast of Word come out and
shook there three times, said, "Watch it go to the west coast." Went right over there and shook down
Alaska. And coming right down the west coast now. Just exactly.
Day before, I took a rock and throwed it up in the air, and said, "THUS SAITH THE LORD, The hour is
here; judgments will start into the e ...[Message truncated]
View Full Message
Options Reply Rate

From: NewClothes Feb-2 10:04 am

1400.2 in reply to 1400.1
There's quite a pattern, isn't there, of WMB hearing of a news event, then expanding some past personal
experience into a prediction of it. Reminds me of Bro. Neville telling a family member of mine that "Bro.
Branham was a very dramatic man."
Options Reply Rate
From: SavedKris Feb-2 10:42 am

To: NewClothes (3 of 6)
1400.3 in reply to 1400.2
I agree. And I would love to actually see the fly leaf of his bible, since he had so many "prophecies" and
other things written there.
Kris
"Trust in the LORD with all your heart

and lean not on your own understanding;
in all your ways acknowledge him,
and he will make your paths straight." Proverbs 3:5-6
Options Reply Rate
From: NewClothes Feb-2 12:32 pm

To: SavedKris (4 of 6)
1400.4 in reply to 1400.3
None of which have ever been made public, or were known prior to some claimed fulfillments. You would
think he would've held up that Bible and said Look here! or Bro. Soand so, come read what was written here.
Or, I'm writing this in the flyleaf of my Bible, and we'll wait for its fulfillment.
Options Reply Rate


1400.5 in reply to 1400.2
I think there most definitely is a pattern. I have come to the point where I literally cannot take his word
for anything that cannot be independently corroborated by another unbiased source. I don't think it's just
happenstance that not a single one of his prophecies can be verified.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
How To Become a Christian
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

1400.6 in reply to 1400.3
It's interesting that nobody from VOG, WBEA or Believers International have never published the flyleaf of his
Bible, his prophecy book, nor any hand-written versions of his prophecies made by himself. I've tried to
obtain WMB's specific wording of some of his prophecies from VOG and WBEA more than once in the past,
and their practice is to only refer to sermons where the prophecies were mentioned (as we've pointed out,
those on tape are always after-the-fact). When I've written back and asked for copies that WMB has written
rather than what's on tape, they simply do not write back.
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
Next Discussion>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Home | Membership Options | Search | Create a Forum | Advertising | About Delphi | Help |
Games
Copyright 2004 Delphi Forums LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Service.

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - Brown Bear Prophecy

Subscribe
Unfulfilled (269 views)
To: ALL (1 of 14)
189.1
Most Message followers are familiar with a vision William Branham had concerning his shooting of a grizzly
bear. The bear rug now lies in his Tucson home. What many of his followers don't know is that Mr. Branham
also prophesied at least 3 times that he would shoot a large brown bear as well. He said:
Coming home the other night, or the other day, or just 'fore I come home, I was--fell into a vision; and I
seen some little fellows, thin, looked like young boys or something, had on caps. And we were standing
hunting. And I'd shot a mammoth, big, brown-looking bear. And then, they turned around and said to me,
said, "But there's some confusion about the meeting." And I said, "No matter what the confusion is, if I was
supposed to go, wherever it was, I'll go anyhow. (See?) It doesn't matter." And the vision stopped. I don't
know where that's at, but this is on tape. It's going to happen. See? Just remember; it's going to happen;
it's a vision. . .
WISDOM.VERSUS.FAITH_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-17 SUNDAY_ 62-0401
Many of you remember the vision that I had, where I had shot the grizzly bear, nine-foot grizzly bear (And
the church remembers me telling it here.) and the caribou. I had another. Remember it's on tape here, I seen
a great huge brown bear. That might be a Kodiak and it wouldn't have worked down there in Canada, 'cause
they're not there. You see? But wherever it will be, it'll be. It will be; that's THUS SAITH THE LORD. It will
be.
POSSESSING.ALL.THINGS_ JEFF.IN V-10 N-4 SUNDAY_ 62-0506
Now, I'm going back into the country, that you might know, when I come back next year. I'm going to get a
brown bear that's almost twice that size. You see if it's right or not. I seen it. When we was standing, put my
hands on his haunches laying on the ground, like that. And I could put my hands on his hips like that, and
him laying down. Now, you find out if that's right or not.
PRESUMING_ S.PINES.NC SUNDAY_ 62-0610M
That was not right. This prophecy was never fulfilled before Mr. Branham's death in 1965.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Brown%20Bear.html (1 of 12)4/1/2005 4:57:35 AM


189.2 in reply to 189.1
Could anybody please explain why the following account is not the fulfillment of the vision?
AUDIO.LETTER.TO.LEE.VAYLE_ TUCSON.AZ THURSDAY_ 64-0500

E-62 So when we got within about three hundred yards, or something like that, I said, "We'll raise our head
up over the hill." I said, "There he is." And I put a shell up in the chamber then. I said, "All right, Bud."
And so when I raised up, the grizzly saw me. And he started to make a charge. And when he did, I shot him
right smack in the heart.
Some notes:
IT.BECOMETH.US.TO.FULFILL_ JEFF.IN V-15 N-4 SUNDAY_ 61-1001M
40 Now, that's the famous bear. There's four in the grizzly family. One is the silver-tip, which is the famous.
Next is called, the native name, kadish, which is a black with a round ear; the second. Third is the regular
grizzly, which is between black and brown, a huge bear. And the next is the Kodiak, which is only found on
Kodiak Island and--and western Alaska; he's great, mammoth, biggest of all bears, but he's a grizzly.
APPEARANCE The brown bear (sometimes called a grizzly in North America) is a large animal, usually dark
brown in color, though it can vary from a light creamy shade through to black.
http://www.bearbiology.com/brdesc.html
AUDIO.LETTER.TO.LEE.VAYLE_ TUCSON.AZ THURSDAY_ 64-0500

E-61 He said, "Well, Brother Branham, did you ever shoot a grizzly before?"
I said, "I've shot many bear, but not a grizzly. I've shot brown, and black, so forth, but not a grizzly."
Presumably, he meant he'd shot a brown bear, that wasn't a "Brown Bear," because a "Grizzly" IS a "Brown
Bear?"
Options Reply Rate


189.3 in reply to 189.2
Hello, DFNDRFTHFTH. Forgive me for not welcoming you to the forum before now, but I do appreciate your
comments.
It is very easy to get the bear prophecies confused. I will try to straighten things out. The Audio Letter to
Lee Vayle actually corresponds to his testimony of this same incident as he told it in the sermon, Presuming
(tape #62-0610M). Here is what Mr. Branham said in that sermon:
We goes on down the hill. We was within about--about a half a mile, and he'd been packing, and I'd
had the rifle. So we set down, resting. He said, "Brother Branham, just think. We're only half a mile."
I said, "Bud..." And I said, "He will be there. Don't you worry." And I looked. I said, "Bud, what is that
standing right up there, about two miles up, top of the mountain?"
He throwed the glasses on, said, "Brother Branham, looks like a milk cow." He said, "It's a grizzly
bear, so help me. And look at that white grizzle a-blowing in that sun setting this afternoon. He's a
silver-tip. I never seen it before."
I said, "What are we waiting on?"
He said, "I believe if you'd just shoot him from here; it's two miles away; you will get him."
I said, "But Bud, according to the vision, I was just right close to him."
So tired, worn; we'd done been at least twenty miles that day over those mountains. So then, we
started right back up again. And I got within about five hundred yards, and Bud said, "Brother
Branham," he said, "did you ever shoot a silver-tip before?"
I said, "I've killed many bears, but never a silver-tip."
And he said, "They're the most vicious of all." Said, "They don't know dying."
I said, "No bear does."
So he said, "But the Lord gave you that one, didn't He?"
I said, "Oh, yeah."
So I had a little .270; it's a small rifle. And so, then, I went on up just a little farther. He said,
"Brother Branham, don't you think you'd better shoot him from here? We better not get too close to
him."
I said, "The vision said we was right up on him."
So we went over another little coulee, and come up. And when we did, there, my. Just setting about
two hundred and fifty yards there; I could see his big, yellow teeth mashing down like that. He looked
like a big hay stack, eighteen inches between the ears. And he was a mammoth: foot about that
wide, and claws, you know, and just setting there. Oh, he looked pretty, and mean.
So Bud said, "humph." He said, "Brother Branham, I tell you where to shoot him."
I said, "Yes, brother."
He said, "The back. You see?" Said, "Then they can't get up then. You see?"
I said, "But the vision said shoot him in the heart."
He said, "Then you'd better do it that way."
First shot got him. And as we come down, he said, "Brother Branham..." We was packing them horns,
didn't have a measure. He said, "Them horns look about ninety."
I said, "No, they're just forty-two." He said... And I told Eddie, I said, "Now, watch. The little boy's
going to put his hands right there and measure."
And when we got down to where the packs was... We couldn't bring the bear. We had to go back the
next day. And you can't get a bear... Whew. You can't get a horse near a grizzly bear. You know that.
The smell of it, and he's gone. We tore up two or three strings trying to get him out. And so then, all
we had was panniers laying all over everything, the pack saddles, and they were scattered. Them
horses was scared to death of the grizzly, the smell of them.
So we went on down, and when we stopped, the boys was there waiting, Eddie and his son. And he
said, "I want to measure those horns."
I pulled back to Eddie, I said, "Eddie, watch the boy put his hands around the bottom of the horns,
like I told you before we got here." So he goes down, gets out the tape out of--his little measure. The

little boy come around, put his hands on it.

Eddie said, "Praise be to..." Just exactly. Raised right up like that. He just turned white in the face. He
said, "Brother Branham, looky here. Not one-sixteenth over, exactly forty-two inches on the dot."
Jesus never fails. He said, "Brother Branham, where am I going to be a year from today?"
I said, "Now, Bud, you're just a young convert to Christ. I don't know where you're going to be." I
said, "I can only say just as He tells me. That's what I'll say, and that's all I know. And I don't
know..."
Now, I'm going back into the country, that you might know, when I come back next year. I'm
going to get a brown bear that's almost twice that size. You see if it's right or not. I seen it.
When we was standing, put my hands on his haunches laying on the ground, like that. And I could
put my hands on his hips like that, and him laying down. Now, you find out if that's right or not.
I highlighted the portion of his testimony where Mr. Branham makes another bear prophecy, the one that I've
referred to in my opening post. This prophecy never came to pass.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

189.4 in reply to 189.3
Right, thanks.
Cos I only had the 64 quote and didn't realise he was relating the shooting that happened way back in 62!
I think that helps to clarify that it WAS NOT the fulfillment of that prophecy.
Oh Well! Perhaps he shot another bear, and no-one got to hear about it.
Options Reply Rate


To: bagdasarianx (6 of 14)
189.6 in reply to 189.5
William Branham would have told us if he did. He never told anyone that he did. There is no evidence that
he did. Ed Byskall said that Mr. Branham told him why the vision wasn't fulfilled, despite the fact that he said
he would shoot the bear according to "thus saith the Lord." That's how I know.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: believer67 11/16/2002 10:03 am

189.7 in reply to 189.4
I really don't know what to think about this prophesy , Defender.
I think Bro. Branham has a reputation of holding on to testimonies for a while sometimes, and telling them
straight away on other times.
The Pentacostal people and the tounges and interpretation two men, Bro. Branham didn't tell that one for
years, but this seems more likely that he would have told it straight away.
If he spoke to Bro Byskal and explained it, then that is good enough for me. God doesn't have to say 'IF' for it
to be a conditional prophesy. See Jonah.
Love Believer 67
Options Reply Rate


To: believer67 unread (8 of 14)
189.8 in reply to 189.7
>>If he spoke to Bro Byskal and explained it, then that is good enough for me. God doesn't have to say 'IF'
for it to be a conditional prophesy. See Jonah.<<
I would like to make a contrast between Jonah's prophecy to Nineveh and Wm. Branham's brown bear
prophecy.
God told Jonah to tell Nineveh that they had yet 40 days before destruction would come upon them. Nineveh
took this prophecy seriously and repented of their wickedness. Clearly the prophecy was a warning which
gave ample time for repentence. God could well have sent Jonah to prophesy of sudden destruction. He
didn't. The Bible indicates that a part of God's nature is that if He pronounces judgment on wicked
nations, it is always conditional on whether the nation repents or not:
If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, and if
that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had
planned.
Jeremiah 18:7-8
In other words, God's warnings of judgment always come with a built-in condition whether it is part of the
prophecy or not. Nineveh repented, therefore God spared it.
Wm. Branham's brown bear prophecy does not involve God's judgment of a wicked nation, therefore it did
not include any conditions for reversal. It was simply a false prophecy.
But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a
prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."
You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?"
22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a
message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously.
Deuteronomy 18:20-22
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

From: Batholomew 1/19/2003 9:51 am

189.9 in reply to 189.6
Hi
>>Ed Byskall said that Mr. Branham told him why the vision wasn't fulfilled, despite the fact that he said he
would shoot the bear according to "thus saith the Lord." That's how I know. <<
1. Do you know when this was, and do you know what Brother Branham told Ed Byskall? Is there some way
to contact this Ed? The people that I know who follow William Banham, down here in South Africa, also in
believe in Lee Vale's teaching ministry. Does anyone purchance know what he has to say about this? (I
haven't asked these people yet.)
2. Also, I heard about some prophesy that Bro Branham made that he said (approximately) "just faded back
into the word it came out of" or something like that. Do you or anyone else know anything about this?
3. While we are on prohpesies, I read a story about an ex jesuit priest who believes that the Vatican will soon
(or has already) signed some agreement with Russia and China, and that it expects America to be blown up
in a third world war (i.e. reference to William Branham's 7th of the "7 visions"). Sounds crazy, but the same
guy predicted 15 years ago that the vatican planned to come out and apologise for crimes committed in the
past. That happened in 2000. Unfortunately, I don't know whether or not this guy was telling all truth, and I
could not find out much about him through my limited internet research. His name is Alberto Rivera.
I noticed in the news that the pope has had a lot to say about no war in the middle east (I think specifically
Iraq), though I didn't here any comments on America's invasion of Afghanistan. If anyone knows about any
comments the pope made prior to and regarding the Afghan invasion, please tell me.
4. I just wanted to say somewhere, in connection to point three, that it is my personal opinion that Joseph
Stalin was a type of the Anti-Christ. This jesuit guy also believed that the Vatican would set up the Anti-Christ
(person) as the head of a kind of communist state.
Ok. Just to let everyone know, points 1 and 2 are the one's I am most interested in. Point 3 and 4 don't really
belong to this discussion, Point 3 came in because of the "7th" vision, and we're talking about (controversial)
prophesies here.
God Bless,
Batholomew
Options Reply Rate


To: Batholomew (10 of 14)
189.10 in reply to 189.9
Point 1: I got it from a sermon tape of Ed Byskal's called, "I Am a Witness," preached in April 1976. I
ordered it from his ministry, which you can contact at:
http://www.bibleway.org/
I have no idea what Lee Vayle has to say about this incident.
Point 2: I don't know which prophesy you mean.
Point 3: I own the Alberto comic book series, but I don't know if he is legitimate or not. I was raised a
Catholic and have been in close contact with priests, monsignors and even a bishop. Two of my aunts are
nuns. I have never experienced the kind of behavior among the clergy and nuns of the Roman Catholic
Church that Alberto portrays in his comic books.
I haven't followed the Pope's views on Afghanistan.
Point 4: Although I don't believe Stalin was the antichrist, I believe he was an antichrist. I don't know where
the Antichrist will come from, but I don't believe we can say with all surety that he will come from the Vatican.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

From: Diagg 1/20/2003 9:19 am

189.11 in reply to 189.10
I know this is off the subject but I jus wanted to post this about Alberto that I found on the net, for those who
don't know nothing about him:
Rivera's third Chick comic book, The Godfathers, contains the following claims, presented seriously as solemn
truth:
the Vatican plans to exterminate the Jews and set up the seat of the papacy in the Temple of Jerusalem,
where the pope will reign as God, literally fulfilling the prophecies concerning the "man of sin" in 2 Thess 2:3-
4;
the Vatican financed the Moslem-Jewish wars in the 10th century;
the Jesuits assassinated Abraham Lincoln;
Communist Founders Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were coached and directed by Jesuit agents;
the Jesuits also trained Trotsky, Lenin, and Josef Stalin;
Adolf Hitler was a pawn of the Catholics, while his book Mein Kampf was really written by a Jesuit priest;
the Vatican was behind World War I and II, and the Russian revolution of 1917;
the Ku Klux Klan, the Nazis, and the Masons are all secretly being directed by Jesuit agents;
all the other so-called international conspiracies (the Illuminati, the Communists, the Bilderbergers, the
Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Club of Rome, etc.) were actually created by the
Catholic Church as a smokescreen to direct attention away from the Vatican.
Options Reply Rate


To: Diagg (12 of 14)
189.12 in reply to 189.11
Sounds like unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

189.13 in reply to 189.10
Thanks. I also thought the comics were a bit wild.
1. My message friends told me that when William Branham died, some people expected him to rise out of his
grave, physically, like Jesus. I was wondering if this might be related to a need for prophesies, which included
WB, to be fulfilled.
2. Brown Bear:
>>And then, they turned around and said to me, said, "But there's some confusion about the meeting." <<
This sounds like a pretty strange statement. What if the vision was not literal? For example, WB once had a
dream where he saw himself grow faith muscles. Of course, from what I've read, he offered no interpretation
of the brown bear vision, neither did he speak of its fulfillment.
God Bless
Batholomew

Options Reply Rate

To: Batholomew (14 of 14)
189.14 in reply to 189.13
I believe he meant for us to take the vision literally simply because he said so. There was nothing in the
prophecy that indicated it was symbolic of something else in any way.
There is a faction of the Message movement that believes Wm. Branham will resurrect and complete his
ministry. Whether it includes fulfilling this bear vision, I don't know.
When interpreting biblical prophecy, its important to study not only the prophecy, but the reason for why it
was given in the first place. I don't believe we will find any examples of a prophet who prophesied of an
event just for the sake of prophesying (as with the brown bear prophecies, for example). God always has a
Divine purpose and meaning in them. With Mr. Branham, however, many of his prophecies were nothing
more than random displays of his "gift." His followers believe that these prophecies vindicated that he was
from God. The Bible doesn't say that we are to judge a prophet by his prophecies that come to pass. We are
to judge them by whether they really speak the will and purpose of God or not. Those who don't will never
be 100% accurate in their predictions. Nowhere in the NT do we read that God ever lowered this standard.
Wm. Branham was one of those whose prophetic accuracy fell far below 100%, therefore he is not to be
accepted as a prophet of God.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
Next Discussion>>

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - Does Capernaum Lie

Subscribe
Beneath the Sea? (74 views)
To: ALL (1 of 11)
186.1
William Branham once told of a prophecy he made concerning Los Angeles:
"That's solemn warning. We don't know what time. And you don't know what time that this city one day is
going to be laying out here in the bottom of this ocean. 'O, Capernaum,' said Jesus, 'thou who exalted into
heaven will be brought down into hell, for if the mighty works had been done in Sodom and Gomorrah, it'd
have been standing till this day.' And Sodom and Gomorrah lays at the bottom of the Dead Sea, and
Capernaum's in the bottom of the sea. Thou city, who claims to be the city of the Angels, who's exalted
yourself into heaven and sent all the dirty filthy things of fashions and things, till even the foreign countries
come here to pick up our filth and send it away, with your fine churches and steeples, and so forth the way
you do; remember, one day you'll be laying in the bottom of this sea. You're great honeycomb under you
right now. The wrath of God is belching right beneath you. How much longer He'll hold this sandbar hanging
over that, when that ocean out yonder a mile deep will slide in there plumb back to the Salton Sea. It'll be
worse than the last day of Pompeii. Repent, Los Angeles. Repent the rest of you and turn to God. The hour of
His wrath is upon the earth. Flee while there's time to flee and come into Christ."
(Choosing of a Bride, Los Angeles, CA, April 29, 1965)
Later, Mr. Branham spoke of this prophecy. He explained that after making the prophecy, he had no memory
of it, or of quoting Jesus' prophecy against Capernaum, implying that it was the Holy Spirit speaking through
him at the time. He said:
"And while in there Something struck me; I didn't know nothing for about thirty minutes. There was a
prophecy went out. First thing I remember, Brother Mosley and Billy; I was out on the street, walking. And It
said, 'Thou Capernaum, which calls yourself by the name of the Angels,' that's Los Angeles, city of angels
(See?), the angels, 'which are exalted into heaven, will be brought down into hell. For if the mighty works had
been done in Sodom, that's been done in you, it would've been standing till this day.' And that was all
unconsciously to me. . ."
"And when I understood that, I went; I said, 'There is a Scripture about that somewhere.' And I went and
found it was Jesus rebuking Capernaum by the seacoast. That night I looked up the Scriptures. Come home,
got the history book; and Sodom and Gomorrah was once a--a thriving city, a Gentile headquarters of the
world. And you know that city by an earthquake sank into the Dead Sea. And Jesus stood, and said,
'Capernaum, if Sodom would've had the works done in it that you've had done in you, it would've been
standing today. But now you must be brought down to hell.' And about two hundred or three hundred years
after His prophecy, with all them coastal towns, every one of them still standing but Capernaum, and it lays
in the bottom of the sea. A earthquake sunk it into the sea. (Ashamed of Him, Jeffersonville, IN, July
11, 1965)
It is doubtful that it was the Lord speaking through Mr. Branham during this prophecy because Capernaum
does not lie at the bottom of the sea. Its ruins lay on the northwestern shore of the Sea of Galilee, having
never sunk into the sea.
John Kennah

Contact Me
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Capernaum.html (1 of 7)4/1/2005 4:59:41 AM

Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

186.2 in reply to 186.1
The Times Atlas Of The Bible:

"Archaeological work begun at the turn of the century and still in progress does not yet permit the
establishment of the size and plan of 1st. Century Capernaum"
Who's to say most of it isn't in the Sea Of Galilee?

Only time will tell.
Options Reply Rate

186.3 in reply to 186.2
You are correct. However, there is absolutely no evidence that Capernaum lies at the bottom of the sea.
Jesus most certainly did not prophesy that Capernaum would be cast into the sea.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


186.4 in reply to 186.3
MATTHEW 11:23
And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works,
which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.
I suppose it would depend if you take it to mean hell (hades) literally.
Options Reply Rate

186.5 in reply to 186.4
As far as I know, the Bible does not equate the bottom of the sea with hell. The Greek word for hell in
Matthew 11:23 is hades, a place for the departed souls of the lost, not a physical place on earth as William
Branham implied in his prophecy.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


186.6 in reply to 186.5
NUMBERS 16:33
They, and all that [appertained] to them, went down alive into the pit, and the earth closed upon them: and
they perished from among the congregation.
"pit"=
HEBREW LEXICON -- STRONG'S NUMBER 7585
Click here to view all verses that use this Hebrew word.
7585 sh'owl {sheh-ole'} or shol {sheh-ole'} lAa.v from 7592; TWOT -- 2303c; n f
1) sheol, underworld, grave, hell, pit

1a) the underworld
1b) Sheol -- the OT designation for the abode of the dead
1b1) place of no return
1b2) without praise of God
1b3) wicked sent there for punishment
1b4) righteous not abandoned to it
1b5) of the place of exile (figurative)
1b6) of extreme degradation in sin
Options Reply Rate

186.7 in reply to 186.6
You are giving definition of the Hebrew word for "pit," which is literally where Korah went, but Jesus was
talking in Greek. Capernaum was not literally cast down into a pit. Even if you were to say that part of it
was submerged (again, I say that there is no evidence to suggest so), the city would still be so close to sea
level--some or most of which never submerged--that I doubt you could even compare it to the earth
swallowing it up as in Numbers 16.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Reply Rate

186.8 in reply to 186.7
Intellectualization
Options Reply Rate

186.9 in reply to 186.8
Is that supposed to be a bad thing or is it a compliment? Please explain.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

From: NewClothes 5/30/2002 11:08 am

186.10 in reply to 186.8
I believe Paul enjoined the church to be children in malice but men in understanding.
Options Reply Rate

To: urim_thummim (11 of 11)
186.11 in reply to 186.1
In another thread you said,
>>he compared LA to capernaum, which doesn't make sense on the surface. Yosimite is a giant
supervlocano. When LA goes down, the volcanic events will be like those at capernaum. <<
Not only didn't it make sense, but he said it was the Holy Spirit speaking through him Who said that
Capernaum lies at the bottom of the sea, which it doesn't. Therefore, it could not have been the Holy Spirit
speaking through him as he told us it was.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Edited 1/16/2003 7:04:56 PM ET by KENNAH (JOHNK63)
Options Reply Rate
Next Discussion>>

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - Communist Russia Will

Subscribe
Destroy Vatican (35 views)
From: KENNAH (JohnK63) Aug-2 10:34 pm
To: ALL (1 of 10)
1520.1
And I said, "There'll be three great isms, Communism, Fascism, and Nazism." And I said, "They'll
wind up in one ism, and that one ism will dominate the world and will burn the Vatican City."
Israel at the Red Sea #1, tape #53-0326
Now, if you'll give me one more night, if God does, I'll prove to you that communism is working
straight in the hands of Almighty God to destroy the Roman... And remember, I say this as God's
prophet: The Russian empire will drop an atomic bomb of some sort on the Vatican City and destroy it
in one hour. THUS SAITH THE LORD.
The Mark of the Beast, tape #54-0513
Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, I said, "Now, there's going to be three great isms. Which is
now in existence. One of them is in Rome, which is--is Fascism, and one of them is in Germany which
is Nazi--Nazism. And the other one is in Russia, which is communism." I said, "Those three great isms
is the unclean spirits that went out of the mouth of the false prophet, and the dragons, and so forth
that will unite themselves together, speaking things that they should not, and they'll all beat at one
another, until they'll finally wind up in one ism. And I predict that that will be communism. And
communism will burn the Vatican city.
Faith Once Delivered to the Saints, tape #55-0501
These predictions are variations of one of Wm. Branham's famous 7 Major Visions of 1933.
Communist Russia ceased to exist in 1991, never achieving world domination as WMB predicted above (not to
mention that the true "Russian Empire"--which WMB erroneously identified as dropping an atomic bomb on
the Vatican--had been defunct since 1918). Russia is now "a democratic federative state based on rule of law
and a republican form of government (see http://president.kremlin.ru/eng/articles/institut01.shtml) and can
no longer be called a Communist nation.
This is yet another example of Wm. Branham's failed "thus saith the Lord" prophecies which indicates that,
according to Deuteronomy 18:22, we are to have no confidence in anything Wm. Branham has presumed to
say in the name of the Lord.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Communist.html (1 of 9)4/1/2005 5:01:52 AM

Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: NewClothes Aug-3 7:30 am

1520.2 in reply to 1520.1
I did a search that is related to this. His early sermons said it was the iron Catholic spirit opposed to the clay,
meeker Protestant spirit, and that Catholicism expected to triumph by requiring that children born to any
Catholic parent become Catholics. At the height of the cold war, he changed his statement to the iron & clay
representing the East (with Kruschev as the big toe) and West (Eisenhower as that toe), although he still
maintained that both would be controlled by Rome.
SERPENT'S.SEED_ JEFF.IN V-2 N-4 SUNDAY_ 58-0928E

3-3 . . . In each one of those ten kingdoms that was to rise, there was iron and clay mixed together. And that
iron come from the legs which was Rome, and there's a streak of Romanism mixed in every nation there is
under heaven through the Catholic church. That's exactly right. And they would not mix anywhere, and they'd
intermarry among one another. The Bible said they would, and look at them today.
3-4 Your boy goes with a Catholic girl. When they go to get married, they have to promise to raise the
children Catholic (See?), vice versa.
CONFERENCE_ SHREVEPORT.LA FRIDAY_ 60-1125

E-62 Now, did you notice? Did you know what the name Khrushchev means in Russia? Dirt or clay . He was a
heading up of them kingdoms. You know what Eisenhower means, the head of this? Iron . Iron and clay and
they couldn't mix together. He took his shoe and beat it on the... There's no mixing together. They can't mix.
They won't cleave one to the other.
Do you see friends? The next thing left is the stone to be cut out, the coming of the Lord, to roll into this
image and mash it into pieces, and all these kingdoms will be ground and blowed away like the chaff on a
summer's thrashing floor. We're at the end time, brother, sister. Can't you see where we are?
Listen THUS SAITH THE LORD. Repent. I predict three curtains. In the Name of the Lord, there's one called
the Iron Curtain, which will be Russia. Watch Red China. That'll be the Bamboo Curtain. They're horrible, but
watch that Purple Curtain that's rising in the United States and over the world, the Roman Empire, the
cruelest of all of them.
UNCERTAIN.SOUND_ CHICAGO.IL SATURDAY_ 61-0429E

E-20 Here the other day, these conferences they been having... There was Mr. Eisenhower and--and
Khrushchev met up here in the United States. Eisenhower was, represented all the western nations. And
Khrushchev represented all the eastern nations. And did you notice, there was nothing they could say they
could get along. Khrushchev took his shoe off and bit it--beat it on the desk and everything.
Well, don't you know that exactly fulfills what the prophet said? Do know what "Khrushchev" means in
Russia? Means " clay ." Do you know what "Eisenhower" means in English? " Iron ." Iron and clay , the east
and west, them two big toes of the vision of Daniel... We're already at the end, friends.
237-1 THYATIREAN.CHURCH.AGE - CHURCH.AGE.BOOK CPT.6

Now along with what I have just said, recall the vision of Daniel. The last part of the image, the last world
power was in the feet. That was iron and clay . See the iron is the Roman Empire. But now it is no longer
solid iron . Clay is mixed in it. Yet it is there and running world affairs in both the democratic nations and the
more despotic ones. The Romish church is in every nation. It is mixed up in it all.

237-2 THYATIREAN.CHURCH.AGE - CHURCH.AGE.BOOK CPT.6

Let me give you a little something on the iron and clay . Remember when Khrushchev beat his shoe on the
desk at the U.N.? Well, there were five eastern nations there and five western. Khrushchev spoke for the East
and President Eisenhower for the West. In Russian, Khrushchev is clay and Eisenhower means iron . The two
main leaders of the world, the two big toes of the feet of iron and clay , were side by side. We are in the end
of it all.
Options Reply Rate
From: KENNAH (JohnK63) Aug-7 7:38 am

1520.3 in reply to 1520.2
Thanks for the quotes. I thought one statement he made was particularly interesting:
Did you know what the name Khrushchev means in Russia? Dirt or clay . He was a heading up of
them kingdoms. You know what Eisenhower means, the head of this? Iron. Iron and clay and they
couldn't mix together. He took his shoe and beat it on the... There's no mixing together. They can't
mix. They won't cleave one to the other.
Do you see friends? The next thing left is the stone to be cut out, the coming of the Lord, to roll into
this image and mash it into pieces, and all these kingdoms will be ground and blowed away like the
chaff on a summer's thrashing floor. We're at the end time, brother, sister. Can't you see where we
are?
Conference, tape #60-1125
He apparently didn't see that "the next thing left" was really that the US would defeat Communist Russia (the
Soviet Union) and that the country of Russia would become closer to being an ally to the US than the
aggressive adversary it had been under Khrushchev! The world has moved on, leaving
this prophesy unfulfilled. "Iron and clay" (that is, Eisenhower and Khrushchev, as WMB interpreted it) have
passed on and no longer play any role whatsoever in world events while we still await the coming of our Lord
and Savior.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Reply Rate
From: NewClothes Aug-9 10:56 am

1520.4 in reply to 1520.3
<<He apparently didn't see that "the next thing left" was really that the US would defeat Communist Russia
(the Soviet Union) and that the country of Russia would become closer to being an ally to the US than the
aggressive adversary it had been under Khrushchev! The world has moved on, leaving this prophesy
unfulfilled. "Iron and clay" (that is, Eisenhower and Khrushchev, as WMB interpreted it) have passed on and
no longer play any role whatsoever in world events while we still await the coming of our Lord and Savior>>
Right, that's what seems important to me about this.
His "prophetic vision" lost any significance with the change in world events, leaving message followers in the
same boat with everyone else :) guessing at how endtime events are going to play out. I am very suspicious
of anyone who claims to know.
Options Reply Rate

1520.5 in reply to 1520.4
I agree!
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."

(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: heb138 Aug-14 12:47 am

1520.6 in reply to 1520.1
John?
Do you really think that Communism in Russia is gone?

When was the last time you were there?
Dont you find it more interesting that he said Russia back when it was called the USSR?
It is Russia now though isnt it?
What has happened to all the Russian Bombs? They are still there!
MOSCOW (AFP) - President Vladimir Putin (news - web sites) said that Russia would boost its military
procurement budget by 40 percent next year, news agencies reported.
MOSCOW (AP) The leader of the Russian Orthodox Church emphasized Friday that Pope John Paul II is not
welcome in Russia, reiterating that an icon the pontiff once hoped to return personally in a conciliatory
gesture is a copy of a revered 16th-century work.
Just be patient...its all coming.
Mark
Options Reply Rate

From: SavedKris Aug-14 3:39 pm

To: heb138 (7 of 10)
1520.7 in reply to 1520.6
Dont you find it more interesting that he said Russia back when it was called the USSR?
It is Russia now though isnt it?
Most of us called it Russia while it was the USSR. And some the Soviet Union. But Russia was the chief part
of the Soviet Union and that is what most of us called it.
Kris

Options Reply Rate
From: KENNAH (JohnK63) 8:15 am

To: heb138 unread (8 of 10)
1520.8 in reply to 1520.6
>>Dont you find it more interesting that he said Russia back when it was called the USSR?<<
Not really. I remember that most people called the Soviet Union "Russia". The Soviet Union was not Russia.
Russia was one of many republics that made up the USSR. The Soviet Union wasn't the Russian empire, as
WMB called it. It was the Soviet empire.
WMB said that Communism would dominate the world and destroy the Vatican. The Soviet Union is long
gone and Russia is not much of a factor in world events today, except for it's veto power in the UN and its
possession of a nuclear arsenal. It's not even a Communist country.
WMB said that Eisenhower and Khruschchev represented the feet of iron mixed with clay from Daniel's vision
of the end times. They are both dead now, and the country that the clay portion of this vision supposedly
represented ceased to exist when the Soviet Union collapsed back in 1991. The "ism" that overtook Nazism
and Fascism has died, having never achieved world domination as Wm. Branham prophesied. This part of his
vision just fizzled out. There is no way that it can be fulfilled in the manner it was predicted.
Furthermore, WMB has been dead for nearly 40 years. He said himself that church-age messengers always
appeared at the end of their ages. Well, more time has passed since WMB's death than the duration of his
ministry. It is all too clear that we're long past the timely fulfillment of WMB's end time prophecies.
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: atHisfeet 2:00 pm

To: KENNAH (JohnK63) unread (9 of 10)
1520.9 in reply to 1520.8
Furthermore, WMB has been dead for nearly 40 years. He said himself that church-age messengers always
appeared at the end of their ages. Well, more time has passed since WMB's death than the duration of his
ministry. It is all too clear that we're long past the timely fulfillment of WMB's end time prophecies.
Well actually John, he didn't always say that.....
COUNTDOWN JEFF.IN V-11 N-3 62-0909M

76 And remember, the messenger comes at the end of the former message, always. We've proved that
there. Now, we're on the astronaut line. Amen and amen! God has!
So, then the messages overlap the ages?
IS.THIS.SIGN.OF.THE.END.SIR JEFF V-2 N-11 62-1230E

33-1 They should've knowed it. They should've knowed Him. Remember Paul come at the end of the age.
All messengers come at the end of the age. It's at the end-time when these things are--are brought forth.
No, the messenger comes at the end of the age.....
EVENING.MESSENGER MESA.AZ V-8 N-5 63-0116

79 We even found in the church ages (and tonight we'll go back in the Old Testament and find that it's the
same thing) that God sends the messenger of that age at the end of the time; always at the end, never at
the beginning, at the end!
Now, as Luther's age faded out, then Wesley come in. And when Wesley's sanctification faded out,
Pentecostal age come in. See? It's always the messenger opens up the new message at the end of the old.
FIRST.SEAL.THE JEFF.IN 63-0318

127-6 We found in the studying of the Scripture that the messenger to the age come right at the end of the

age every time. Paul come at the end of the age. We find out that Irenaeus come at the end of the age.
Martin, end of the age. Luther, the end of the Catholic age; and what?--Wesley, at the end of the Lutheran
age; and Pentecost, at the end of the age of sanctification through the baptism of the Holy Ghost.
QA.ON.THE.SEALS JEFF.IN 63-0324M

489-3 17. Brother Branham, is the Seventh Angel with the spirit of Elijah, the same man as the Elijah sent to
the hundred and forty-four thousand Jews during the three and one-half years after the rapture? Some of us
are mixed up in this.
No, he isn't the same (See?); it's two different men. The Elisha that come in the form of Elijah was not Elijah.
And the spirit of Elijah who came upon a man called John the Baptist, was not Elijah. And the man of the
seventh angel messenger at the end of the Laodicean Age, will not be the literal Elijah. He will be a Gentile to
his people.
So, yes, he specifically said that the seventh angel would come at the END of the age. Didn't the age
supposedly begin in 1906?
PALMERWM.CANKRWRM.CATRPLR.LOCUST CONNERSVILLE.IN 53-0612

E-1 Get them ourself, it's a copyright. That same Light come in that little cabin and stood over the bed, a
little corn shuck bed, where I was born in a cabin in Kentucky, on April the sixth, 1909.
So, he came at the beginning of the age... and preached from 1933 (or 27 years after the age began) thru
1965. He has since been gone for 40. So, should he be considered at the end of the age??
- God Bless -
atHisfeet
1 Corinthians 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit
which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father
will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all
things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
Options Reply Rate

From: Jeena (jeena_el) 4:53 pm

To: atHisfeet unread (10 of 10)
1520.10 in reply to 1520.9
Great POINT. Thanks!

Love,
Options Reply Delete Edit Rate
Next Discussion>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Games

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - Death of Marilyn Monroe

Subscribe
(539 views)
To: ALL (1 of 128)
935.1
I was in the mountains a few weeks ago. And way back when I was coming home, we went back (the family
and I) to rest a little, where we're going again, the Lord willing, next week. And then, back there one night, I
saw a vision. And it was a--a lovely, pretty woman, looked young woman running; she had her hand here,
and she was perishing with a heart attack, a beautiful woman. And she dropped and was gone. And the Angel
of the Lord said, "Now, when you hear of this, remember, they're going to say that she committed suicide,
but she died in a heart attack. And it's almost 4:00, so you just say 4 o'clock," and then He left me.
And I didn't wake the family up in the little cow camp (or where the cowboys stay, where we'd go back there
to round up the cattle), I--I just let them sleep until morning. And then, the next day I mentioned it, and I
said, "Some young woman, very attractive, is going to die in a heart attack." And on the road out two days
later, there it come in on the radio that this Miss (I can't think of her name.) Monroe, Mrs. Monroe. I think
that was her stage name, or whatever it was; her name was something else. And she had died, and they said
she committed suicide.--William Branham
One Mans Influence on Another, October 13, 1962 (tape #62-1013)
Options Reply Rate

To: ALL (2 of 128)
935.2 in reply to 935.1
At the time Wm. Branham supposedly had his vision, he had no idea who the woman who died of a heart
attack was. It's interesting that he would say that Marilyn Monroe was the woman he saw in his vision after
he learned of her death. In spite of the plethora of conspiracy theories concerning her death, almost nothing
in Mr. Branham's vision is consistent with any of the events, whether factual or speculative, surrounding
Marilyn Monroe's death. For example:
Mr. Branham said she died of a heart attack. There is no evidence whatsoever that she died of a heart
attack. One fact that is accepted by the official coroner's report agrees and conspiracy theorists alike is that
Marilyn Monroe died from a drug overdose--more specifically, acute barbiturate poisoning - combination of
Nembutal and Chloral Hydrate, both prescribed for insomnia. The only disagreement is whether her death
was a result of an accidental overdose, suicide or murder.
In an interview (http://www.omnimag.com/archives/interviews/noguchi.html), Thomas Noguchi, the coroner

who performed her autopsy, said, Monroe's liver actually had a level of stored barbiturates three to four
times that of her blood. Yet her blood level was high enough -- equivalent to about forty or fifty capsules of
regular-strength sleeping pills. For the average person, ten to fifteen are potentially lethal.
Mr. Branham said that she died a few seconds before 4:00 AM. Most estimates I've found place the time
of her death at anywhere between shortly before midnight to 3:00 AM. She was pronounced dead at 3:40
AM, well before 4:00!
So why would Mr. Branham insist that Marilyn Monroe was the woman he saw in his vision? What is the
relevance of Mr. Branham's alleged vision? It would seem this vision does more to cast doubt on
Mr. Branham's prophetic gift than to vindicate him as a true prophet.
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversi...0Prophecies/Death%20of%20Marilyn%20Monroe1-20.html (1 of 15)4/1/2005 5:05:42 AM

John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: 8320JOHN 3/26/2003 7:46 am

935.3 in reply to 935.2
One continuing theory is that it was a "mob hit" by one of the crime families which had connections to
Kennedy Senior. Word had it that Bobby was ready to do a very big number on organized crime apparently
forgetting the alledged "markers" help by a few of the godfathers owed by the old man. And this is not the
stuff of movies, tho it has found its way onto the Silver Screen in various forms.
Peace and Blessings,
Options Reply Rate

From: Jeena (jeena_el) 3/26/2003 11:11 am

To: 8320JOHN (4 of 128)
935.4 in reply to 935.3
There is another theory which suggests that she never died at all and is alive and well in a mental
institution. :)
It seems none of the theories say she died of a heart attack - whether it was suicide or murder.
But, there are certain types of drug overdoses which technically do cause heart failure - so is a heart attack
the same thing medically as heart failure? I have no idea.
Love,
From: urim_thummim 3/26/2003 2:39 pm

935.5 in reply to 935.2
She died of a heart attack. He did not say what caused it did he. it could have been sodium-potassium
acetate, which is a favourite CIA trick. The body excreets it and then dies of a heart attack. Remember her
relationship with the President.
But she died of a heart attack.
Options Reply Rate


935.6 in reply to 935.5
>>She died of a heart attack.<<
That cannot be true for two reasons:
1. A Heart Attack (myocardial infarction) is defined as, "a medical emergency in which some
of the hearts blood supply is suddenly severely restricted or cut off, causing heart muscle
(myocardium) to die from lack f oxygen (Merck Manual of Medical Information, page
126).
Heart Failure (congestive heart failure), on the other hand, is a serious condition in which
the quantity of blood pumped by the heart each minute (cardiac output) is insufficient to
meet the bodys normal requirements for oxygen and nutrients."
Merck says, "Any disease that affects the heart and interferes with the circulation can lead
to heart failure. Diseases may selectively affect the heart muscle, impairing its ability to
contract and pump blood. By far, the most common of these is coronary artery disease,
which limits blood flow to the heart muscle and can cause a heart attack" (Merck, page
87).
Marilyn Monroes autopsy gives no indication that she suffered a heart attack.
2. Marilyn Monroe died from an overdose of Nembutal (a barbiturate) combined with chloral
hydrate (a popular sedative prescribed for insomnia). An overdose from Nembutal does
not cause the loss of blood supply to the heart leading to a heart attack, but rather effects
the nervous system in such a way that breathing problems develop. The lungs fill will
fluid and blood pressure drops. An overdose may cause a coma and death by
shock (blood pressure is too low to sustain life, Merck, page 111). Marilyn Monroe had
moderate congestion and edema in her lungs, according to the autopsy.
In an interview, Thomas Noguchi (the county medical examiner who performed Monroe's autopsy) said:
The autopsy found a large amount of Nembutal and chloral hydrate, but the case wasn't typical
because the stomach was empty. I did not see any residue, although the stomach and gastric lining
were much reddened. But this is standard for barbiturate abuse. And this was not the first time we'd
seen an empty stomach. Like the liver, it gets used to handling the drug and passes it quickly into the
small intestine. Because I couldn't find needle marks, I still believe the drugs were swallowed.
Monroe's liver actually had a level of stored barbiturates three to four times that of her blood. Yet her
blood level was high enough -- equivalent to about forty or fifty capsules of regular-strength sleeping
pills. For the average person, ten to fifteen are potentially lethal.
http://www.omnimag.com/archives/interviews/noguchi.html
Marilyn Monroe died from a drug overdose, not a heart attack.
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.7 in reply to 935.6
There are several types of heart attacks. A myocarial infarction is only one, and usually seen in people with
preexisting cardiovascular deseases usually related to cholesterol. Coronary heart disease results from the
coronary arteries becoming narrowed with fatty deposits on the inside wall. This narrowing reduces flow of
blood to the heart and increases the chances of a blood clot blocking the artery, resulting in a heart attack.
There are many other causes like cardiac myopathy or arytmias such as PVC(premature ventricular
complexes).
Congestive heart failure is often the end stage of another form of heart disease. Its many causes include
coronary heart disease; hypertension; heart valve disorders (including rheumatic heart disease); congenital
heart disorders; cardiomyopathy (disease of the heart muscle); myocardial infarction (heart attack); cardiac
arrhythmias (problems with the heart rate and/or rhythm), and toxic exposures, including excessive intake of
alcohol. Hyperthyroidism, diabetes, and chronic lung disease are also risk factors for congestive heart failure.
All of these disorders may lead to congestive heart failure by weakening the heart muscle and/or increasing
the heart's workload.
God told brother branham it was a heart attack, and warned him that they would say it was something else.
Options Reply Rate

From: Eaglerock22 (AFlyingEagle) 3/27/2003 2:01 pm

935.8 in reply to 935.7
<<God told brother branham it was a heart attack, and warned him that they would say it was something
else.>>
Mr Kennah needs definitions and backup please...He can't simply believe a Prophet..
Noah said it was going to rain...a flood in fact...Mr. Kennah says..PROVE IT..smile...
"So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy" Romans
9:16
Options Reply Rate

To: Eaglerock22 (AFlyingEagle) (9 of 128)
935.9 in reply to 935.8
2 thes 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the
love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that
they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in
unrighteousness.
pretty much sums it up.
When I heard the prophet likening that scripture to the jubilee I remembered my baptism. I entered a
church, sometime after I had heard a couple of message tapes, and they were having a baptism. And for the
first time in my life I saw acts 2:38. It was contrary to everything I had ever heard, so I asked god for
revelation. It came to me that this was my shot, if I reject it, it would be my last. So I got up and went to the
water. The preacher was waiting still in the water, the night before god told him that there would be two.
If I had rejected that word, the devil would have pierced my ear and I never would have been able to receive
the word again. That scripture would have been about me. Praise God for all his mercy. He pulled me out of
the fires of hell.
And after someone asked me how I felt. For the first time in my life, I felt clean.
Options Reply Rate


935.10 in reply to 935.7
I'm sorry, brother, but you're wrong. Heart failure does not mean that the heart stops. Heart failure simply
means that the heart has a diminished ability to efficiently pump blood. There is only one type of "heart
attack," which I described above (myocardial infarction). The other "heart attacks" that you described are
not true heart attacks, but conditions of the heart that can lead to heart failure (not a heart attack) if not
properly treated. Coronary artery disease is the cause of heart failure which can lead to an actual heart
attack.
In any case, Marilyn Monroe's autopsy makes no mention of her having experienced a heart attack or heart
failure.
>>God told brother branham it was a heart attack, and warned him that they would say it was something
else. <<
Wm. Branham said that she died of a heart attack, not suicide. So what? What lesson are we supposed to
learn from it? Why did God supposedly warn Mr. Branham "they" would say that she committed suicide?
What purpose did this vision serve at all? What was the relevance of knowing that an unidentified woman
would die of a heart attack? What benefit is it to anyone that Wm. Branham said (after the fact) that he
predicted Marilyn Monroe's death before it happened? How does it vindicate him as a prophet of the Lord if
there is no evidence to verify that his vision was true?
When it comes down to it, Wm. Branham's vision of a woman running and dying of a heart attack at 4:00
AM doesn't match any of the facts and details surrounding the death of Marilyn Monroe in any way!
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


935.11 in reply to 935.8
>>Mr Kennah needs definitions and backup please...He can't simply believe a Prophet..<<
Can you give me any good reasons why I should believe him?
>>Noah said it was going to rain...a flood in fact...Mr. Kennah says..PROVE IT..smile...<<
Where have I ever said that? Now if Noah said it was going to rain and it didn't, I would have a problem with
that. That is precisely the type of problem I have with Wm. Branham's prophecies, though. He prophesied
of events in the name of the Lord that did not happen as predicted. He often told of prophecies that he made
after the fact. To this day, I have not found one example of where William Branham ever prophesied of an
event before it happened that can be proven to have later come to pass as he predicted. I have asked many
Message believers to give me just one example. I have never received a single response from this request.
Now how can you say he was a vindicated prophet when there is no verifiable evidence that he was?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


935.12 in reply to 935.11
<<Can you give me any good reasons why I should believe him?>>
No Mr. Kennah, I can't give you one good reason, as you have made your decision...To believe a Prophet
takes simple FAITH.. To the Scribes and Pharasees, Jesus word DID NOT LINE UP WITH THE OLD TESTAMENT
SCRIPTURE...Because they were blind....
>>Noah said it was going to rain...a flood in fact...Mr. Kennah says..PROVE IT..smile...<<
<<Where have I ever said that? Now if Noah said it was going to rain and it didn't, I would have a problem
with that. That is precisely the type of problem I have with Wm. Branham's prophecies, though. He
prophesied of events in the name of the Lord that did not happen as predicted.
JESUS PROPHESIED "DESTROY THIS TEMPLE AND IN THREE DAYS I WILL RAISE IT UP.." To the scribes and
Pharasees he was a "False Prophet" because in their carnal understanding it "didn't happen"..Just one of
many examples...
<<He often told of prophecies that he made after the fact. To this day, I have not found one example of
where William Branham ever prophesied of an event before it happened that can be proven to have later
come to pass as he predicted. I have asked many Message believers to give me just one example. I have
never received a single response from this request. Now how can you say he was a vindicated prophet when
there is no verifiable evidence that he was?>>
There will NEVER be VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE to an unbeliever...
Mr. Kennah, the problem you would have in believing NOAH after the fact is that it would be TOO LATE..By
your intellectual reasoning and definitions you have "disproved" Bro. Branhams ministry, as I believe you
would have done the same in Noah's day...That is my point..
In Christ,
Eaglerock22
9:16
Options Reply Rate


935.13 in reply to 935.12
>>No Mr. Kennah, I can't give you one good reason, as you have made your decision...<>To believe a Prophet takes simple FAITH.. <<
Faith is only as good as the object in which it's placed. I can have all the faith in the world that my Geo Prizm
will fly as I drive off the edge of the Grand Canyon. But I will fall just as sure as a rock. Mormons have faith
that Joseph Smith taught them the truth, but that won't save them. It may take simple faith to believe a
prophet, but it doesn't mean the prophet in whom one places his faith is a true prophet!
>>JESUS PROPHESIED "DESTROY THIS TEMPLE AND IN THREE DAYS I WILL RAISE IT UP.." To the scribes
and Pharasees he was a "False Prophet" because in their carnal understanding it "didn't happen"..Just one of
many examples... <<
The difference between Jesus and Wm. Branham is that Jesus told His disciples what He meant whereas Wm.
Branham did not. As far as I know, all of Mr. Branham's prophecies that were left unfulfilled when he
died were re-interpreted by his followers when they failed to come to pass.
>>There will NEVER be VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE to an unbeliever... <<
With all due respect, that answer is a cop-out. I'm giving you the opportunity to identify even one instance
where Mr. Branham prophesied of an event before it happened and later came to pass as predicted. If not for
me, how about for any potential Message believers who may be reading this?
>>Mr. Kennah, the problem you would have in believing NOAH after the fact is that it would be TOO LATE..
<<
Noah's covenant with God isn't the same as the New Covenant He made with the Church. He has given the
world 2,000+ years and counting to enter in. By God's grace, I have accepted that New Covenant.
You seem to be implying that we need to accept the Message of Wm. Branham quickly without verifying
that it's compatible with the Scriptures or it may be too late! As Peter said, "His divine power has given us
everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and
goodness" (II Peter 1:3). If the Gospel was everything Peter and the early Church needed, what gives
anyone the right to say that we must blindly accept a man who says he's a prophet with another Message in
order to be a part of the Church?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: MJN777 3/28/2003 5:44 am

935.14 in reply to 935.1
God bless you all hope everything is well with you
I have posted a few messages before on this post and am very interested to read some of the discussions
here.
In my message church which seems the same in all you were not allowed to discuss anything you had to take
every word of W Branham and your pastor as gospel and could not think for yourself.
Therefore I am glad of these discussions done openly and as long as we all keep our faith and integrity and
do not personally attack others i believe we will all be better off in the end.
As far as this quote goes it seems very minor and is not very specific to who was involved etc.
As a small point after Princess Diana was killed i was discussing at work the situation with a colleauge who
was upset and suddenly something came over me and i said its not the end someone else universally know
and loved will also die shortly.
Soon after mother theresa sadly died and this girl i spoke to suddenly held me up as some kind of prophet or
guru.
I claim nothing of the sort it could be coincidence confusion or some kind of spiritual insight but i never give it
a thought. However had i been W Branham this would have been discussed preached and taken to extremes
so maybe this case of M Monroe is similar.
I think too many message believers get carried away with W Branhams stories and visions and should rather
concentrate on solid biblical principle and teaching instead especially as we see many thing W Branham said
are unclear and some are obviously confused or wrong example this case of M Monroe or the man on the
discernment line having received various curses for trying to trick Branham by writing false diseases on the
prayer card.
In my own experience message believers are very sincere dedicated people well certainly the laity but
because of their zeal and zealous stand they often come across as the least examples of a good christian and
are usaually first to deride attack and hound others and often the last to show genuine christian virtues such
as caring and loving and understanding others.
I hope i have not upset anyone by this post but thats the truth as i see it and have spoken it do you have any
comments please

Options Reply Rate
From: nurse841 3/28/2003 10:47 am

To: MJN777 (15 of 128)
935.15 in reply to 935.14
MJM777,
I can feel the sencerity in your statement, and from my own previous experience of being born and raised in
the Message, for the first 27 years of my life and the next 10 years wandering around searching for some
peace. I can say that a majority of thepeople in the Message are very nice and sincere people, but probably
at least 1/2 never where esposed to Gods word, I know from experience that we only listened to message
tapes and read the books, no one even bothered to carry a Bible to church. My parents to this day who are
still in the Message have those Spoken Word books lying around, but thier Bible has dust an inch thick on it,
and they still drive 2 hours one way every Sunday to worship at the Branham Tabernacle in Jeff, Ind. For the
last three years I have started to read the Bible and I have been very confused about a number of issues.
Since I never was allowed to read the Bible, I find it hard to study Gods word and I am ashamed to say I
probably know more about whats in the Seventy Weeks of Daniel and the Revelation of the Seven Seals than
Gods word. God has blessed me with three sons, that I am responsible for and I am making sure they know
what in Gods word and not a man. Man can be wrong, but Gods words never fail us.Please forgive me for my
Biblical unknowledge, because I was a women in the Message and thats a whole different issue.
Gob Bless you! I believe if we are striving for the ultimite goal tht is to spend eternity with Christ,we are on
the right track, but there are those stumbling blocks that can set you way back,sometime can even get you
off track completely.
Nurse
Edited 3/28/2003 10:37:41 PM ET by NURSE841
Options Reply Rate

935.16 in reply to 935.13
>>No Mr. Kennah, I can't give you one good reason, as you have made your decision...<<
<>
Mr.Kennah, the Lord Jesus himself could not say enough to the Scribes and Pharasees to convince them
otherwise..and they studied the Old Testament with as much enthusiam as you claim to..
9:16

Options Reply Rate

935.17 in reply to 935.16
Then why are you even bothering to post here?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.18 in reply to 935.17
<<Then why are you even bothering to post here?>>
If you would rename your forum correctly to "Unbelievers Anonymous", I would be happy to discontinue
posting...
9:16
Options Reply Rate

From: Jeena (jeena_el) 3/29/2003 7:00 pm

935.19 in reply to 935.16
And they rejected the Lord Jesus Christ. We have not.

Love,

935.20 in reply to 935.18
<<<<If you would rename your forum correctly to "Unbelievers Anonymous", >>>>
I doubt that you even realize how hateful this statement was.
Sad, very sad.
Love,


Subscribe
(540 views)
935.21 in reply to 935.18
I asked why you bother posting here if you're not going to stand up for what you believe. It seems the only
reason you're here is to criticize me. The purpose of this forum is to discuss Wm. Branham's Message, not
the forum host (please read my Start Page).
Getting back to the issue at hand, would you, as a Message believer, care to comment on how Marilyn
Monroe's death fulfills Wm. Branham's vision of a woman running and dying of a heart attack at 4:00 AM?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: Diagg2000 3/30/2003 7:45 am

935.22 in reply to 935.21
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversi...Prophecies/Death%20of%20Marilyn%20Monroe20-40.html (1 of 14)4/1/2005 5:12:18 AM

<<She was pronounced dead at 3:40 AM>>
On August 5, 1962, film star Marilyn Monroe was found dead in her home in Los Angeles at the age of 36.
She was discovered lying nude on her bed, face down, with a telephone in one hand. Empty bottles of pills,
prescribed to treat her depression, were littered around the room. After a brief investigation, Los Angeles
police ruled her death a suicide.
"Death Report:
Death was pronounced on 8/5/62 at 3:45 a.m., possible accidental, having taken place between the time of
8/4 and 8/5/62, 3:35 a.m., at residence located at 12305 Fifth Helena Drive, Brentwood, in Rptg. Dist. 814,
Report #62-509-463
Marilyn Monroe on August 4,1962 retired to her bedroom at about eight o'clock in the evening; Mrs. Eunice
Murray of 933 Ocean Ave., Santa Monica,Calif., 395-7752, CR 61890, noted a light in Ms. Monroe's bedroom.
Mrs. Murray was not able to arouse Miss Monroe when she went to the door, and when she tried the door
again at 3:30 a.m., when she noted the light still on, she found it to be locked. Thereupon Mrs. Murray
observed Miss Monroe throught the bedroom window and found her lying on her stomach in the bed and the
appearance seemed unnatural. Mrs. Murray then called Miss Monroe's psychiatrist Dr. Raplh Greenson of 436
North Roxbury Drive, Beverly Hills, Calif., CR 14050. Upon entering after breaking the bedroom window, he
found Miss Monroe, possibly dead.
Then he telephoned Dr. Hyman Engelberg of 9730 Wilshire Boulevard, also of Beverly Hills, CR 54366, who
came over and then pronounced Miss Monroe dead at 3:35 a.m."
Housekeeper Eunice Murray tried MMs bedroom door at 03:30hrs, it was locked. She then went to the
bedroom window and seen her lying on the bed, she comes back in the house and telephones Dr. Ralph
Greeson. (A psychiatrist, of all people to call!!)
Dr. Greeson lived 5 miles away, approximate time to travel to MM house is 11mins. Okay, he has to get up,
get dressed, get the car keys, (get the car out of the garage?) and drive over to MMs house. He then has to
break the door down before gaining entry, probably after a quick conversation with the housekeeper. He
examines her and then make the telephone call to Dr. Engelberg.
Dr. Hyman Engelberg lived 4.8 miles away, approximate time to travel to MMs house is 10mins. He probably
has to go through the same procedure as Dr. Greeson (getting up, etc) and arrives at MMs house where he
pronounces her dead at 03:35hrs and calls the Police, according to the filed Police Report
Sorry none of this adds up. Minimum time for these events to transpire is around 25mins! How could a Dr
pronounce someone dead at 03:35hrs when he is not even there to confirm the death? Greeson wasn't even
there at that time!
Police sergeant Jack Clemmons was on watch at the West L.A. substation, less than three miles from
Monroe's home, when, at 4:25 A.M., the telephone rang. At first the caller, Dr. Ralph Greenson, was so
agitated that Clemmons couldn't understand him. "Marilyn Monroe is dead," the psychiatrist said, "she just
committed suicide."
When Clemmons arrived at the scene, Eunice Murray led him to the bedroom and gestured toward Monroe's
bed. "Marilyn was lying face down in what I call the soldier's position," said Clemmons. "Her hands were by
her side and her legs were stretched out perfectly straight. It was the most obviously staged death scene I
have ever seen The pill bottles on her bedside table had been arranged in neat order and the body
deliberately positioned, It all looked too tidy."
Edited 3/30/2003 9:23:13 AM ET by DIAGG2000

Options Reply Rate

To: Diagg2000 (23 of 128)
935.23 in reply to 935.22
I found the same death report you did last night. I got the time of 3:40 from a biography of Marilyn Monroe.
When I saw the time of 3:45 listed on the supposed "death report," I decided to follow up and determine if
this report is authentic. I'll post an update later. In any case, it's a stretch to say that 3:45 AM is just a "few
seconds before four," as Wm. Branham said the Lord told him.
None of what you posted demonstrates in any way that Mr. Branham's vision accurately predicted Marilyn
Monroe's death. The whole point he made of his prophecy was to indicate that she did not commit suicide,
but died from a heart attack. The former point is not provable, the latter has been proven false by her
autopsy.
Conspiracy theorists continue to cloud the facts of Marilyn Monroe's death. Your post only reflects how
effective they've become. However, because of the lack of evidence, it is impossible to prove that she did not
commit suicide as Mr. Branham maintained. The autopsy report proves that she did not die from a heart
attack. So what is the point or lesson that we are to learn from a prophecy so inconsistent with the
known facts of its supposed fulfillment?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

From: Diagg2000 3/30/2003 9:59 am

935.24 in reply to 935.23
Hi John, do you know what was the final verdict of the autopsy report? probable suicide - not definite. I don't
know much about the case and have only done a quick search on the net regarding it. What verdict did the
Coroner record?
As to the time of death, what I was trying to show was that if you use the 4:25am time as a start point and
work backwards based on the apporoximate times for the necessary people to travel, make the calls, etc,
then around 4pm for the death occuring would be in line with what Bro Branham said.
But as you said there is a lot of conspiracy surrounding her and I believe a lot of cover-ups that the true time
and cause will never come to light.
If she was committing suicide, then why was she naked? Why was she found on the bed reaching for the
telephone? Where was the suicide note? In all my working years working I have not once come across a
woman who committed suicide whilst being naked (not to say that it doesn't happen but it is very rare). I
would beg to differ on the autopsy report and in light of today's forensic medicine I am sure the probable
verdict would be different. Lesson - known facts can be doctored and they may not necessarily be the facts?
Options Reply Rate

To: Jeena (jeena_el) (25 of 128)
935.25 in reply to 935.19
<<And they rejected the Lord Jesus Christ. We have not.>>
I would not be so sure about that..Christ is the Word...When you reject truth you reject Christ..
9:16
Options Reply Rate


935.26 in reply to 935.20
<<<<If you would rename your forum correctly to "Unbelievers Anonymous", >>>>
I doubt that you even realize how hateful this statement was.
Sad, very sad.>>
What is sad is the way you all blast a Prophet of God who is not here to defend himself..Easy to run someone
down when they are off the scene..Sad very sad...and the OUTRIGHT HYPOCRICY expressed here.
ACTS 5:34
34 Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation
among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space;
ACTS 5:35
35 And said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these
men.
ACTS 5:36
36 For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men,
about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and
brought to nought.
ACTS 5:37
37 After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him:
he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.
ACTS 5:38
38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of
men, it will come to nought:
ACTS 5:39
39 But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.
9:16
Options Reply Rate


935.27 in reply to 935.21
<<I asked why you bother posting here if you're not going to stand up for what you believe. It seems the
only reason you're here is to criticize me. The purpose of this forum is to discuss Wm. Branham's Message,
not the forum host (please read my Start Page).>>
What an OUTRIGHT HYPOCRITE...The only reason for this forum is to critisize Bro. Branham...Who is not here
to defend his ministry personally...It only take an OUTRIGHT COWARD to do what you do here...
Your CARNAL MIND will always blast what you will never understand..
As I said already...Our Lord Jesus himself could not convince you nor do I believe would waste his time with
your WILLFUL BLINDNESS..
When the blind lead the blind, they both fall in a ditch...
9:16
Options Reply Rate

935.28 in reply to 935.25
I am very sure I have not rejected Christ, nor the Word of God.
Love,


935.29 in reply to 935.26
Rom:16:17: Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the
doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
Love,

To: Diagg2000 unread (30 of 128)
935.30 in reply to 935.24
The questions that surround the death of Marilyn Monroe are irrelevant to the fact that Wm. Branham's vision
has nothing to do with any of the known facts regarding the death of Marilyn Monroe. The autopsy would
have determined if she died of a heart attack. There is no mention in the autopsy of Monroe having
had coronary heart disease that would have brought on a heart attack. Her blood tests showed that she had
ingested a lethal dose of Nembutal and a toxic amount of chloral hydrate, neither of which cause the blockage
of arteries to the heart necessary to trigger a heart attack. The time of death may be at question (only on
account of the conspiracy theorists), but it is impossible to determine whether she did or did not commit
suicide. Again I ask, what would God's point be in giving Mr. Branham a vision that does not correlate with
the facts and isn't relevant to anything? I don't see God working like this in the Bible. This prophecy seems
more similar to how astrologers predict events than how God revealed His will in the prophecies of biblical
prophets.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."

(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: SavedKris 3/30/2003 9:39 pm

935.31 in reply to 935.30
It doesn't matter. She could have been shot, decapitated, or asphyxiated. The Branhamites would still find a
way to make it fit WMB's "prophecy".
Kris
Options Reply Rate

935.32 in reply to 935.31
During Clinton's presdidency, when he skirted the truth, beat around the bush and redifined words to his
own benefit, it sometimes reminded me of the way many of Wm. Branham's followers interpret
his predictions to sound more accurate than they really were.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


935.33 in reply to 935.10
You see you are making, once again, an interpretation. You assume he was talking of something specific. To
Brother Branham a heart attack was death by heart. No more, no less. And it was God who said she had a
heart attack, Brother Branham just reported it.
Options Reply Rate

935.34 in reply to 935.33
>>You see you are making, once again, an interpretation. You assume he was talking of something specific.
To Brother Branham a heart attack was death by heart. No more, no less.<<
That's your interpretation. There are many reasons for a heart to stop beating. For example, it can be
seriously damaged by something like a bullet. That's not a heart attack. It can stop beating because it
cannot pump efficiently to keep the rest of the body, including itself, alive. The term for this is heart failure.
It is not a heart attack. The heart can stop beating because of the effects of certain drugs. That is not a
heart attack. It can stop beating because one of the arteries supplying blood to its tissue is blocked, killing
part of the heart itself. The resulting failure of the heart to pump blood is, by definition, a heart attack.
Marilyn Monroe did not die of a heart attack.
>>And it was God who said she had a heart attack, Brother Branham just reported it.<<
William Branham reported the following:
And then, back there one night, I saw a vision. And it was a--a lovely, pretty woman, looked young
woman running; she had her hand here, and she was perishing with a heart attack, a beautiful
woman. And she dropped and was gone. And the Angel of the Lord said, "Now, when you hear of this,
remember, they're going to say that she committed suicide, but she died in a heart attack. And it's
almost 4:00, so you just say 4 o'clock," and then He left me.
The only aspects of this supposed vision that bears any resemblance to the events surrounding Marilyn
Monroe's death is that Monroe was beautiful, and they say she committed suicide. That's it. She wasn't
running when she died. In fact, she was found nude on her bed with a phone in her hand. After a complete
autopsy, there is no evidence whatsoever that she died of a heart attack. She had a lethal dose of a
barbiturate in her body. She did not die a few seconds before 4:00 AM, but at least a full 15 minutes earlier
(that's when she was pronounced dead. She may have actually been dead longer).
I'm still waiting for an answer to my observation that, if this was a vision from God, nobody seems to know
how it is relevant to anything. In the Bible, we don't see God giving prophets visions for no apparent reason.
There was always a purpose for the visions of biblical prophets. There is nothing whatsoever to be learned
from the Marilyn Monroe vision. If there is, I haven't heard anyone venture an opinion on what God was
trying to say. In my opinion, it couldn't be more obvious that this was not a vision from God.

John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.35 in reply to 935.34
you are an unbeliever, and as such you must disbelieve every thing.
Options Reply Rate

935.36 in reply to 935.34
Mr. Kennah, THE FEAR OF GOD IS THE BEGINNING OF WISDOM..How many dreams and visions and
supernatural manifestations have you had personally that makes you an expert witness in these matters?? By
your website you IMPLY YOURSELF TO BE A PROPHET..I think I know the answer...
In Christ,
Eaglerock22
9:16

Options Reply Rate

935.37 in reply to 935.36
>>How many dreams and visions and supernatural manifestations have you had personally that makes you
an expert witness in these matters??<<
Where does it say in the Bible that one has to have had dreams, visions and supernatural manifestiations to
recognize when a prophet speaks falsely in the name of the Lord? And how is that relevant to the fact that
his supposed vision did not come to pass the way it was predicted?
>>By your website you IMPLY YOURSELF TO BE A PROPHET...<<
You misunderstood something if you came away with that idea. I don't caim to be a prophet. In fact, I've
often said that if Wm. Branham didn't claim to be a prophet, his errors would not be so serious. I probably
would never have started this forum if he didn't claim to be the last prophet to the gentiles in the order of
Elijah and Moses. What makes you think I've implied that I'm a prophet?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

From: Eaglerock22 (AFlyingEagle) 4/5/2003 7:40 am

935.38 in reply to 935.37
>>How many dreams and visions and supernatural manifestations have you had personally that makes you
an expert witness in these matters??<<
You didn't answer my question..
>>By your website you IMPLY YOURSELF TO BE A PROPHET...<<
<<You misunderstood something if you came away with that idea. I don't caim to be a prophet. In fact, I've
often said that if Wm. Branham didn't claim to be a prophet, his errors would not be so serious. I probably
would never have started this forum if he didn't claim to be the last prophet to the gentiles in the order of
Elijah and Moses. What makes you think I've implied that I'm a prophet?>>
By claiming to have the CORRECT INTERPRETATION vs FALSE PROPHESY, you imply yourself to be a Prophet,
and will give account to that on judgment day..If you can stand the test, that is your right..
9:16
Options Reply Rate
From: _Acolyte_ (LilEaglet) 4/5/2003 8:56 am

935.39 in reply to 935.2
"Most estimates I've found place the time of her death at anywhere between shortly before midnight to 3:00
AM."
How is that? I read that she called her psichiatrist at around 3:00 a.m. Also, it said that at 4:25 a.m. she was
pronounced dead. However, 3:40 a.m., 4:25 a.m., don't matter, still 4:00 a.m. to me.
"There is no evidence whatsoever that she died of a heart attack."
I read multiple pages that said she died of a heart attack.
[Editorial Comment: It must be noted that I have asked Acolyte repeatedly throughout this
thread to identify where these "multiple pages" can be found. To date (May 25, 2003) he has
yet to provide a single source outside of Wm. Branham's own comments that indicate that
Marilyn Monroe died of a heart attack--John Kennah, forum host]
This is a site put together by a Message believer that gave a couple accounts of it.
http://www.biblebelievers.org/lmonroe.htm
I also read that there was something like four different death certificates, and so on. Fact is, it is still
shrouded in so much mystery, we may never really know the time of her death, other than what he said

about it. The FBI released all their information, however, I don't have the time to sit and read 96 pages about
it. If you wish, you can, however I have more important things to do.
May God richly bless you,

Shaun
II Timothy 4:2 - Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long-
suffering and doctrine.
Isaiah 60:1 - Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee.
Options Reply Rate

To: _Acolyte_ (LilEaglet) (40 of 128)
935.40 in reply to 935.39
>>I read multiple pages that said she died of a heart attack. This is a site put together by a Message
believer that gave a couple accounts of it. <<
William Branham's statements don't count since they are the ones in question for purposes of this discussion.
I'm still waiting for any reasons why God would have revealed such an irrelevant event to Mr. Branham in the
first place.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)


Subscribe
(541 views)
935.41 in reply to 935.38
And it's your right to misjudge me.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.42 in reply to 935.40
I am just giving that to show a bit more on what he said, calm down.
I don't know why God would show it to him, does it really matter? You didn't answer what I said about the
different death certificates, or the fact that she had called her psychiatrist at 3:00 a.m., or that I found it said
she was pronounced dead at 4:25 a.m. So, tell me, why is there such a mix up over how she died, when she
died? (As I said, I found places where they said she died of a heart attack.) What does this really have to do
with ones salvation? Or, what bearing does any of this have to do with the Message?
The problem is, you are now down to nit-picking, trying to find every little thing you think is wrong. However,
the truth is, nobody knows when she died, there is so much confusion over it, it will never be cleared. From
what I have read, I believe Brother Branham hit right on the head with what he said, sorry.

Shaun

Options Reply Rate

935.43 in reply to 935.42
>>I am just giving that to show a bit more on what he said, calm down.<>I don't know why God would show it to him, does it really matter? <<
Yes, God doesn't speak to us in vain.
>>You didn't answer what I said about the different death certificates... <<
There is only one official death certificate. It says she died of an overdose of barbiturates, not a heart attack.
>> ...or the fact that she had called her psychiatrist at 3:00 a.m....<<
That's what they say. I don't know if that's a fact, but I'm more or less inclined to believe it.
>> ...or that I found it said she was pronounced dead at 4:25 a.m.... <>So, tell me, why is there such a mix up over how she died, when she died? <<
That is irrelevant to Mr. Branham's vision. What you should be asking is, "If this was a vision from God, why
do all the known facts surrounding her death contradict his vision?" It still hasn't even been established that
Wm. Branham really had this vision before she died. Like nearly all of his predictive visions and
prophecies, there are no recorded instances where he spoke of this vision until after Marilyn Monroe died.
>>As I said, I found places where they said she died of a heart attack. <<
As I said, Wm. Branham's statements don't count. Those are what we're trying to verify.
>>What does this really have to do with ones salvation?<<

Nothing.
>>Or, what bearing does any of this have to do with the Message? <<
It has much to do with establishing whether Wm. Branham was a prophet or not. Since this is one example
of many where Mr. Branham supposedly prophesied of an event that did not come to pass as predicted, then
we are instructed by God's Word not to even listen to him.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.44 in reply to 935.43
>>As I said, I found places where they said she died of a heart attack. <<
"As I said, Wm. Branham's statements don't count. Those are what we're trying to verify."
I guess you missed what I was getting at, I found OTHER sources that said she had a heart attack, not an
overdose. These sources were NOT Message related.

Shaun

Options Reply Rate

935.45 in reply to 935.44
>>I guess you missed what I was getting at, I found OTHER sources that said she had a heart attack, not an
overdose. These sources were NOT Message related.<<
OK, what are your sources?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


935.46 in reply to 935.45
I have to find them, and right now, I have I have to get ready to go down and get an MRI on my knee, got
other things I really have to do today. Hoping to be returning to work soon, though I don't know what the
verdict will be. I figure they are going to find damage in my right knee, and want to operate, though I hope it
is only bruised ligaments inside.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

935.47 in reply to 935.46
James 5: 14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him,
anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: 15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord
shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
1Pe 2:24
Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto
righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
Options Reply Rate


935.48 in reply to 935.47
It seems I shall have to just point out your misapplication of Scripture as it comes up more frequently:
<1Pe 2:24
righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.> I appreciate that you used this to comfort Acolyte,
however this clearly refers to spiritual healing.
But I have prayed myself for the healing of his knee, and I hate to use this as an example for you, but you
asked me to show you...
Kris
Options Reply Rate
From: _Acolyte_ (LilEaglet) 4/7/2003 4:27 pm

935.49 in reply to 935.47
1Pe 2:24
righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
Careful, you might be accused of quoting that out of context, John don't think it means that....
Anyways, I know, however, it's all in how He chooses to heal me. Either by doctors, or miracle, He does the
healing anyways.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


935.50 in reply to 935.48
Then you must not have ever been healed, huh? I guess not, maybe you have never been sick..... And with
his stripes we are healed. It does not specify whether physical, or spiritual. If it is spiritual only, then we have
no physical healing. Think about it....
And I appreciate the prayers. However, the doctor had never set up the MRI appointment like he was
supposed to, so now I have to go Wednesday, so I have to reschedule the doctors appointment, and physical
therapy. What a pain.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

935.51 in reply to 935.50
<<<Then you must not have ever been healed, huh? I guess not, maybe you have never been sick..... And
with his stripes we are healed. It does not specify whether physical, or spiritual. If it is spiritual only, then we
have no physical healing. Think about it....>>>
The problem with that statement is that it is not the ONLY verse that deals with healing. And it refers back to
a previous Scripture in the OT. There are enough verses I can refer to for physical healing that I do not need
to take that one out of context. It's not as big of a mistreatment of God's Word as I have seen, but he did
challenge me to prove that he took verses out of context, so that is just one example among many.
Kris
Options Reply Rate


935.52 in reply to 935.51
My friend,
Healing is healing, so, I don't think that there is anything that makes it mean one type of healing over
another. That's my opinion on it all.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate
From: Diagg 4/8/2003 2:53 pm

935.53 in reply to 935.43
About this Marilyn Monroe, when she died, they'll never believe but what that girl committed suicide, but she
did not commit suicide. She died in a heart attack. I seen it days before it happened, and told them about it;
but they wouldn't listen to me. QUOTE of Bro Branham
>>That is irrelevant to Mr. Branham's vision. What you should be asking is, "If this was a vision from God,
why do all the known facts surrounding her death contradict his vision?" It still hasn't even been established
that Wm. Branham really had this vision before she died. Like nearly all of his predictive visions and
prophecies, there are no recorded instances where he spoke of this vision until after Marilyn Monroe died.
It has much to do with establishing whether Wm. Branham was a prophet or not. Since this is one example of
many where Mr. Branham supposedly prophesied of an event that did not come to pass as predicted, then we
are instructed by God's Word not to even listen to him.<<
Are all the known facts known to everyone? There could be facts that are known to only a certain no. of
people but we are not privvy to them. Again, here we find you implying that Bro Branham was a liar. Just
because there are 'no recorded' instances of him telling people about the prophecies does not mean he never.
Not everything that Bro Branham preached and prophesied is recorded.
Then again, if nobody heard these prophecies before the fact how can you call them false? Did Bro Branham
make this prohecy in the Name of the Lord?
On a final note, you are not nor ever will be in a position to judge it. The Scripture distinctly says that man
cannot judge God. Man cannot even judge a prophet, because a prophet has "Thus saith the Lord." The

prophet becomes the judge via the Word of God.
Options Reply Rate

To: Diagg unread (54 of 128)
935.54 in reply to 935.53
<<<The Scripture distinctly says that man cannot judge God. Man cannot even judge a prophet, because a
prophet has "Thus saith the Lord." >>> Okay, but God's Word does say we can judge if he is a prophet or a
false prophet, and I think it has been pretty well shown that he is/was false. I am sure you didn't mean that
we cannot judge a false prophet, right?
Kris
Options Reply Rate

935.55 in reply to 935.48
once again you make an interpretation that is not there
every person who came to Jesus was healed. He is the same yesterday today and forever.
2Ti 3:5
Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
No child of God will deny his power, we rejoice in it. But the miracles signs and wonders are for "them that
believe". When unbelievers pretending to be christians hear of these things they deny them and say that the
miracles are passed. Because to admit that God still works those miracles, and that those miracles are not
happening in their organizations, would be admitting that they do not know God.
Jesus Christ the same yesterday today and forever. James didn't say are any spiritually ill. He asked are any
sick. Jesus said they shall lay their hands upon the SICK and they SHALL recover.
He said:
Joh 14:12
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater
works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

Mt 18:20
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
Mark 16: 17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall
speak with new tongues; 18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt
them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover
Joh 14:13
And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
Joh 14:14
If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.
Joh 15:16
Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and
that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
Joh 16:23
And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in
my name, he will give it you.
Ex 15:26
And said, If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his
sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases
upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the LORD that healeth thee.
And yet you still deny it? I was healed by Jesus. The big ones were a
1)dislocated knee
2)broken ankle
3)crippled and could not walk(spine injury)
4)the end of my thumb grew back(took it off in a 60 ton press).
You might be able to tell others that Jesus is not the healer, but that stuff won't fly with me; I am a walking
testament, a written epistle. GLORY AND PRAISE BE TO GOD. JESUS CHRIST HAD HEALED ME.
Options Reply Rate

935.56 in reply to 935.51
It is not out of context, you are just making assumptions, carnal ones at that.
Options Reply Rate


935.57 in reply to 935.46
Shaun, I am very sorry you are having knee problems. I will help you pray that the Lord will heal it.
Love,

935.58 in reply to 935.53
How many things would a prophet have to make that did not come to pass to discredit him as a prophet, in
your opinion?
Love,

From: SavedKris 4/9/2003 9:49 am

935.59 in reply to 935.55
<<<And yet you still deny it? I was healed by Jesus.
You might be able to tell others that Jesus is not the healer, but that stuff won't fly with me; I am a walking
testament, a written epistle. GLORY AND PRAISE BE TO GOD. JESUS CHRIST HAD HEALED ME. >>>
This is completely manufactured by you. There has never been a place where I have even IMPLIED that Jesus
did not have the power to heal people. Nowhere have I denied the power of God to physically heal people. I
was only talking about a verse you had taken out of context to refer to physical healing when it refers to
spiritual healing. I have, in other threads, shown me belief in the power of the Holy Spirit through his gifts,
among other things. Keep your slander to yourself.
Kris
Edited 4/9/2003 10:52:01 AM ET by SAVEDKRIS
Options Reply Rate

935.60 in reply to 935.46
I hope things went well with your Dr.'s appointment. I look forward to reading what your sources have to say.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)


Subscribe
(542 views)
935.61 in reply to 935.49
>>Careful, you might be accused of quoting that out of context, John don't think it means that....<<
It might be more helpful to U&T if you also told him why I think that verse is quoted out of context. Do you
remember why?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.62 in reply to 935.50

>>And with his stripes we are healed. It does not specify whether physical, or spiritual. If it is spiritual only,
then we have no physical healing. Think about it.... <<
Why would the fact that this verse applies to spiritual rather than physical healing preclude the fact that God
can and does heal people supernaturally?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.63 in reply to 935.53
>>Are all the known facts known to everyone? There could be facts that are known to only a certain no. of
people but we are not privvy to them.<<
Whether all the facts are known or not is irrelevant. The official death certificate and autopsy reports indicate
she died of a drug overdose, not a heart attack. Until there is some evidence that conclusively contradicts
them and supports Wm. Branham's prophecy, there is no reason to believe his vision pertained to Marilyn
Monroe. I've said this earlier and nobody seemed to pick up on it, but God does not do anything in vain.
From all we can gather, there is no rhyme or reason to Mr. Branham's vision, nor have Mr. Branham or his
followers proposed any spiritual lesson to be learned from all this. This supposed vision is no more edifying
or accurate than anything Miss Cleo has to offer.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.64 in reply to 935.55
>>You might be able to tell others that Jesus is not the healer, but that stuff won't fly with me... <<
Here are some statements that Wm. Branham made that may surprise you:
Even Jesus Himself: He never took credit for healing anybody. Is that right? He said, "It's not Me that
doeth the works; it's My Father that dwelleth in Me."
ANGEL.OF.GOD_ PHOENIX.AZ THURSDAY_ 48-0304
Now, the way this works, is not to heal anybody. There's no mortal ever lived on earth that was a
Divine healer. If anybody could have taken credit for being a Healer, would've been our Lord Jesus
Christ. But He said He wasn't no Healer. He said, "It's not Me that doeth the works; it's My Father
that dwelleth in Me; He doeth the works."
GIFTS.CALLINGS.WITHOUT.REPENTANCE_ CARLSBAD.NM 50-0300
There's no man can heal, not even Jesus. Jesus didn't claim to be a Divine Healer. He said, "It's not
Me that doeth the works; It's My Father that dwelleth in Me; He doeth the works."
EXPECTATIONS_ NEW.YORK.NY WEDNESDAY_ 50-0405
There's no one that's a Divine healer. No man can heal you. There's o... Even Christ, the Son of God,
did not claim to be a Divine healer. He said, "It's not Me that doeth the works; it's My father that
dwelleth in Me, He doeth the works."
MINISTRY.EXPLAINED_ MINNEAPOLIS.MN TUESDAY_ 50-0711
And now, Jesus said in the Scriptures here... Now, when He was here on earth, He did not claim to be
a healer. How many knows that's the truth? Jesus was not a Divine healer. And if Jesus did not claim
to be a Divine healer, how much more ought we to claim not to be a Divine healer? Jesus said, "It's
not Me that doeth the works; it's My Father that dwelleth in Me; He doeth the works."
BELIEVE.YE.THAT.I.CAN.DO.THIS?_ LA.CA WEDNESDAY_ 51-0509
And remember that there's only one Divine Healer, and that is Almighty God. Even Jesus Christ is not
a Divine healer. He said, "It's not Me that doeth the works; it's My Father that dwelleth in Me; He
doeth the works." Is that right?
SECOND.MIRACLE_ ERIE.PA SUNDAY_ 51-0729E

Now, the Scripture says that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. He did not claim
to be a healer, He said, "It's not Me that doeth the works; it's My Father that dwelleth in Me; He
doeth the works." He did not claim to be a great person, but what He did claim to be, He was; and
God vindicated it, that He was what He claimed to be.
OUR.HOPE.IS.IN.GOD_ NEW.YORK.NY SATURDAY_ 51-0929
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.65 in reply to 935.62
There are gifts of healing, it does not say that the healing itself is a gift. Healing is the promise of that gift.
I don't see the need in continuing this with you. Deny what you will, it doesn't bother me. I give warning after
warning about speaking out against God's people, and you go right over top of it. Have fun. You have missed
the point of what I saw saying, over, and over. And the reason is, you just won't open your eyes to what I am
saying.
Honestly, John, from what I have seen, I like you as a person. However, I totally disagree with what you are
saying. I have made my case on many different things, and you will turn around, and ask me the same
question I already answered, because you didn't like my answer, or are trying to get me to say something
different. Sorry, but it don't work like that.
You can run along, and think what you want. As for me, and my house, we will serve the Lord.

Shaun

Options Reply Rate

935.66 in reply to 935.61
Because you have your blinders on, and can't see the full meaning of healing.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

935.67 in reply to 935.60
Well, tomorrow I know the results of the MRI, and whether I need surgery or not.

Shaun

Options Reply Rate

935.68 in reply to 935.67
You're in my prayers.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.69 in reply to 935.68
Appreciate it.

Shaun

Options Reply Rate

935.70 in reply to 935.59
It does not refer to spiritual healing because that is the verse that healed my back. Oh and people in glass
houses...
Options Reply Rate

935.71 in reply to 935.70
<<< It does not refer to spiritual healing because that is the verse that healed my back. Oh and people in
glass houses...>>> A verse does not heal your back. The power of God through the Holy Spirit does that.
And what does the "glass houses" thing mean?
Kris
Options Reply Rate

935.72 in reply to 935.71
People who live in glass houses should not cast stones.

Shaun

Options Reply Rate

935.73 in reply to 935.68
I have very good news. I got the results of the MRI, they said I just have a bruised bone. Which, I guess is
serious, but does not require surgery. It sounded like that pressure was almost almost enough to break
things, but didn't.
Anyways, another week at home, and then off to work again. I know these things about the injury..
1. The therapist heard the popping, and observed the difference in my knees, and said that I tore the
miniscus. (Cartilage)
2. That the pain was intense, and more than just a bruised bone.
Either way, praise the Lord, I am healed.
It turns out that I will have been out for 15 days, which puts me to where workmans comp will go back, and
pay me for the first 7 I missed, which is a blessing. Anyways, just thought I would share that.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


935.74 in reply to 935.73
evidently bruised bones hurt more than broken ones.
James 5:14
Options Reply Rate

935.75 in reply to 935.71
By his stripes we WERE healed. Jesus Christ is the word of God. So the scripture, being the testimony of
Jesus, healed me, through faith in that word.
James 3: 8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. 9 Therewith bless we
God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. 10 Out of the
same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be. 11 Doth a
fountain send forth at the same place F14 sweet water and bitter? 12 Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear
olive berries? either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh.
Options Reply Rate

935.76 in reply to 935.73
Thanks for sharing that with us. Praise and Glory to Jesus' name!
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."

(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.77 in reply to 935.72
<<<People who live in glass houses should not cast stones.>>> Thanks, I am aware of the saying :) I
meant, what is the point of it?
Kris
Options Reply Rate

935.78 in reply to 935.73
Awesome news! Although I still hope the pain goes away quickly, and it's as good as new asap.
Kris
Options Reply Rate


935.79 in reply to 935.77
Oh, I don't know what he meant, I just thought you didn't know the saying.

Shaun
Edited 4/12/2003 11:50:36 PM ET by _Acolyte_ (LILEAGLET)
Options Reply Rate

935.80 in reply to 935.64
Oh that's right, you are an idolater. Three god's Mary and a few "saints" the popes have murdered. Well we
Christians believe in one God and his name is Jesus. For in that body dwelled the fullness of the Godhead
bobily. so once you get over your idea of multiple gods, then you will see that the bible does indeed say:
"by his stripes we were healed"
And peter when talking of the lame man said:
Acts 4: 8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel,
9 If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole;
10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth,
whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
Or was Peter wrong too?
Options Reply Rate
Keep Reading>>


Subscribe
(543 views)
935.81 in reply to 935.80
I don't see what your response has to do with the quotes I posted. It seems that you're upset over the
contents of those quotes. Wm. Branham is the one who made those statements, not me.
BTW, I'm not an idolater and I don't believe in three gods. That is a misrepresentation of the Trinity doctrine
that Wm. Branham taught that has no basis in fact. I am also not a Roman Catholic.
We've already discussed Isaiah 53:5, and you apparently didn't get what I said. Please read I Peter
2:24 again and compare it to Isaiah 53:5. Both are in agreement that by Jesus' stripes, we were healed from
sin. This isn't to say that we will not eventually be redeemed physically as well as spiritually as a result of
Christ's atonement. But our physical redemption will not be evident until our mortality has put on
immortality. I believe that Jesus Christ still heals, but I believe it is a misapplication of Scripture to say that
53:5 means that all of our physical ailments were healed by His stripes.
All Christians get sick and die. To say that the only reason we still get sick is because we lack faith opens the
door for a much more serious problem: Since none of us has the faith to stay free from sickness, how much
more do we lack the faith to attain to spiritual salvation?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversi...rophecies/Death%20of%20Marilyn%20Monroe81-100.html (1 of 14)4/1/2005 5:19:13 AM


935.82 in reply to 935.44
In case you've forgotten about it, I'm still interested in knowing what your other sources are in regards to
Marilyn Monroe's alleged heart attack.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: MJN777 4/23/2003 4:30 am

To: nurse841 (83 of 128)
935.83 in reply to 935.15
Thank you so much for the beautiful and sincere reply you gave to my post.
I am very sorry I have not answered before but have been so busy I did not get chance to go on line.
I feel from your words your heart is very close to God and feel happy and blessed that you replied to my
message.
I try my best to follow Gods word and pray his grace and love would help us go forward in life and our faith
knowing by his grace we have a bright and happy life followed by a glorious eternity to look forward to
God bless you again hope to speak to you again soon
Michael
Options Reply Rate


935.84 in reply to 935.44
>>I guess you missed what I was getting at, I found OTHER sources that said she had a heart attack, not an
overdose. These sources were NOT Message related. <<
I have asked you at least three times what your sources were and you have yet to provide a single one. In
fact, the last two times I asked, you didn't even respond. Your credibility would be less in jeopardy if you
didn't say anything rather than to say that you have other sources then fail to produce them when requested.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.85 in reply to 935.84

Hey, how about you come and try and answer this, and also take care of a wife near the end of her term, and
now, take care of her, and a baby.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

935.86 in reply to 935.85
When I first asked you, your excuse for not producing your sources was that your knee problem didn't allow
you the time. I was patient and waited until you announced that your knee was healed before asking again.
Since I first asked you for your sources, you have posted nearly 100 messages here to date, not to mention
those you've posted at other forums. I can appreciate how busy you've been with your new addition, but
you've even posted 9 more messages at this forum since you had your baby.
First you say you have evidence of Marilyn Monroe's death by heart attack, but hesitate when asked
to identify your sources. Then you say you're too busy to post your sources, while in the process
of posting 100 messages at this forum plus the many messages you've posted at other forums. With all due
respect, your credibility is wearing awful thin with me.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Reply Rate

935.87 in reply to 935.86
As I have said, John, if you really wish to know all about it, you can read what the FBI has since released
concerning the death. However, you will find that there are many paragraphs that have been blacked out. I
have read some, and found nothing to specifically indicate that she died of a drug overdose.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

935.88 in reply to 935.87
I don't really feel a need to "know all about it." I would just like to know where you've found
any source (besides Wm. Branham's claims) that indicates that she died of a heart attack rather than a drug
overdose. You say you have found many sources. I've searched this issue exhaustively on the Internet and
in several books and have read the autopsy report. Not a single source even hints that she may have died of
a heart attack. Even all the conspiracy theorists have no argument with the fact that she died of a drug
overdose. The only mystery in their minds is how the barbiturates got into her bloodstream. Now, do you
really have any credible sources that attest to Wm. Branham's claim that she really died of a heart attack? If
yes, please name them. If no, then... well, I'll leave that up to you and your conscience.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.89 in reply to 935.88
As I have stated, if you want, read the FBI report. It's public domain, it's free for you to look over. If you
don't, then that's your own choosing. As I said, there is no evidence in there of a drug overdose.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

935.90 in reply to 935.89

Is the FBI report your "many sources" that indicates that she died of a heart attack and not a drug
overdose?
I have no idea who you are, Shaun, so please don't take it personally if I don't accept what you say at face
value. One cannot expect me to just believe anyone who wants to say they have evidence that supports Wm.
Branham in but fails to produce it when asked.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.91 in reply to 935.90
That's just one of them, I don't have time to go and do all the research and find all the others. You might
have read the autopsy report, but, which one? There was several. The fact is, it's shrouded in mystery, and
nobody really knows, not even the FBI. As I said, the sources indicated she was alive after the time you said
she had died, substantiated by a phone call to her psychiatrist. There are other things, however, look into the
FBI report, that's just one I looked over quickly, and moved on.

Shaun

Options Reply Rate

935.92 in reply to 935.91
>>That's just one of them, I don't have time to go and do all the research and find all the others. <<
I perused over the FBI Report and saw plenty about her drug overdose, but nothing about a heart attack.
References to her death usually, if not always, described it as a suicide. If you know what page you found
any allusions to her death being the result of a heart attack, please let us know, otherwise I'll have to assume
you misunderstood something somewhere, or read more into it than was written.
>>You might have read the autopsy report, but, which one? <<
The official one conducted by LA County Deputy Medical Examiner, Thomas Noguchi, M.D.
>>As I said, the sources indicated she was alive after the time you said she had died, substantiated by a
phone call to her psychiatrist. <<
I'm not really that concerned about the exact time of death because it is impossible to prove except to rely on
official police reports. I read a death report by Sgt. R.E. Byron, #2730, of the W.L.A. Detective Division
which indicates she was pronounced dead at 3:35 AM by a Dr. Hyman Engelberg.
I don't consider vague memories of unnamed conspiracy theorists as credible evidence of anything. And as I
previously said, even they have no contention with her death having been caused by an overdose of sleeping
pills. Barring anything more specific from your research, I will have to assume there is no evidence that
indicates Wm. Branham's vision was an accurate prediction of Marilyn Monroe's death in any way.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Reply Rate

935.93 in reply to 935.89
Could you tell us how to access this report? I don't know how.
Options Reply Rate

935.94 in reply to 935.93
I don't have any of the URLs that I had liked at. Sorry, all I did was a search with Copernic, and also on
Yahoo. It's in there somewhere.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


935.95 in reply to 935.93
The FBI report can be seen at http://foia.fbi.gov/monroe.htm. You need Acrobat Reader to read it, though.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.96 in reply to 935.95
Because we can trust the FBI ;)
Options Reply Rate


935.97 in reply to 935.96
The issue is whether or not she died of suicide. If the FBI is lying:
What was their motive?

What is incriminating about a heart attack?
It would make far more sense that the FBI was lying to cover up a murder.
It actually appears that WMB COULD HAVE had a vision about a nameless woman, which actually confirmed
President John F. Kennedy was NOT guilty of murder, and allowed him to cover up an illicit affair with Marilyn
Monroe. That's strange, since WMB believed President Kennedy was totally evil.
Love,

935.98 in reply to 935.96

Whether you trust the FBI or not, I only brought up the FBI report because Shaun, one of your brothers in
the Message, suggested that it would support Wm. Branham's claim that Marilyn Monroe died of a heart
attack and not a drug overdose. It did not. I suppose if it did, you would be shouting, "Vindication!"
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.99 in reply to 935.98
And then we may have shouted, "And you believe the FBI???" hehe.
Love,


935.100 in reply to 935.98
Sorry....I couldn't resist that. :)
I'm still wondering what the world a prophecy about Marilyn Monroe would have done to edify the church
anyways....sigh.
Love,
Keep Reading>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Navigate this discussion: 1-20 ...41-60 61-80 81-100 101-120 121-128
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8


Subscribe
(544 views)
935.101 in reply to 935.98
I did not suggest that it would... However, I said that it wasn't conclusive on what happened...

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

935.102 in reply to 935.101
>>I did not suggest that it would... <<
In post #935.90, I asked you, "Is the FBI report your 'many sources' that indicates that she died of a heart
attack and not a drug overdose?"
In post #935.91, you responded, "That's just one of them, I don't have time to go and do all the research
and find all the others."
So now we're back to square one, waiting for you to produce even a single source which indicates that
Marilyn Monroe died of a heart attack.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversi...ophecies/Death%20of%20Marilyn%20Monroe101-120.html (1 of 16)4/1/2005 5:20:35 AM

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

935.103 in reply to 935.102
I never said that it showed that she had a heart attack. I however had not made myself clear, and said that it
wasn't conclusive. Sorry about that.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate
From: halekahonu 5/14/2003 9:33 pm

935.104 in reply to 935.20
Actually, not if you really stop and think about it.
When tacking on the term 'anonymous' to something it implies that those involved are seeking support from
others like them. Like, Alcoholics Anonymous or Gamblers Anonymous. They are looking for "true life" without
whatever it was that had a hold on them.... So, perhaps we are "unbelievers" in Wm Branham, seeking
support from others like ourselves, looking for 'true Life" without whatever else had a hold on us.
:-) Aloha, Renee

Options Reply Rate

To: halekahonu (105 of 128)
935.105 in reply to 935.104
I think your post may have been to the person in whom I quoted in my post :) Hope they read it...
Love,
From: halekahonu 5/14/2003 9:58 pm

935.106 in reply to 935.105
Maybe - but until I upgrade I cannot post to a specific person. However, sometimes I post it to you because
the person I would have posted it to I know will either read and ignore, or read and rail.
Aloha!!! Renee
Options Reply Rate


To: halekahonu (107 of 128)
935.107 in reply to 935.106
Well, I don't mind one bit. I get notified everytime a post is specifically addressed to me, and I love to get
notified. :)
Love,
From: Simon3014 12/25/2003 3:46 pm

935.108 in reply to 935.2
On TLC back in July, they interviewed several doctors who performed autopsys on Marilyn Monroe. Their
interviews were completely different from that of Thomas Noguchi. They stated that Ms. Monroe's stomach or
throat contained no evidence of any drug whatsoever. But, (this is not a joke either) the only traces they said
they could find was in the anal region. That's all I remember. I haven't checked but if you go to the TLC
website I'm sure they can find out info on what they showed back in July. I remember it being July because
my wife and daughter were in Alaska and our church was having its annual revival. Now we have three
different accounts of her death. The autopsies vary and one man says he has a vision of the account. So who
do you go with? The doctors can't seem to make up their minds. You yourself said that the time of her death
was estimated between midnight and 3 a.m. but then pronounced her dead at 3:40. Someone seems to have
trouble making up their minds.
Options Reply Rate

From: believer67 12/26/2003 1:08 am

935.109 in reply to 935.21
Dear John,
I have only read as far as post 21, but I have some thoughts.
1. People do not run in a bedroom.
2. If she was running, then she was placed in the bedroom by someone else.
3. Her position is compatable with having been placed there by someone else, if she was in fact in the 'soldier
position'.
4.
She could not be in both the soldier position, AND reaching out for the phone.
5.
If she was running, and died only seconds, or minutes, away from 4:00 am, then how did 'they' get her back
into her bedroom, and arranged, for 3:45 [or there abouts].
6.
It certainly does seem that the autopsy disagrees with Bro. Branham's prophesy, but then he said it would.
7.
Anyone who is dead, their heart has stopped for some reason or other, so 'drug overdose, and 'heart attack'
seem to be mutually exclusive in one sense. However, Bro. Branham said the report would be false, so....?
8.
If she died of a natural heart attack, I cannot think of a single reason to make it look like murder or suicide.
It doesn't make any sense to 'cover up' a natural death with suspicious looking scenario.
8A.
If I wanted her dead, and she conveniently died of natural causes while she was out running, then I have got
what I wanted, so why complicate the issue with a cover up story of suicide. And if she died while out
'running', how did she end up discovered before the prophesied death at 4:00.
8B.
If I killed her by a lethal cocktail of drugs, which caused the fatal heart attack, while she is out jogging, [This
is my best attempt to reconcile the prophesy to the autopsy.], then she is dead out on some street
somewhere, and it looks a lot less suspicious than taking her back to her appartment, and faking a suicide.
And I have still got the problem of 1/ finding her out on some street. 2/ Taking her back to the apartment. 3/
Arranging a suicide scene...all BEFORE the 4:00am prophesied time of death.
This is all supposing that the reported facts of her death are the real facts. That is a big supposition, given the
American Govts. record of assasinations, and coverups.
9.
Let's not forget the link with Marilyn Munroe, to the Kennedys, and particularly to the then-President. So is a
cover-up out of the question? I think not.
10.
IF a coverup is involved, and I repeat, "IF", then we can forget ALL and ANY details of her death, as reported

by the Govt. and we have only Bro. Branham's prophesy of her death to go on, and we only have his word on
it Post-mortem. So it is of no value in proving his standing as a Prophet.
11.
This incident, including the 'post-mortem-TELLING-of-the-prophesy', and the actual-death, has the potential
to prove that he did NOT accurately prophesy on this occasion, but it does NOT have the ability to tell us if he
IS a prophet, unless we have already made up our minds to believe his word concerning events which cannot
be independently verified. In other words, it CAN prove the negative, but not the positive, unless we already
blieve his words.
Those of us who believe that Bro. Branham IS a prophet, will need more than this to go on, and those of you
who have already judged him to be false, will no-doubt be strengthened in your minds as to the correctness
of your view.
It is an intesting case, and you have my attention on this one John, and I agree with you that it IS possible to
ascertain whether a man is a prophet or not, based solely on his prophetic gift, otherwise Deut 18 is
nonsense.
Unfortunately, given the nature of the prophesy, [which the general public didn't hear about until after the
event], which says that the true facts will be shrouded in mystery, and the nature of the U.S.A. Govt, and
Miss M's closeness to the President, this prophesy is not much good to anyone as an indicator of Bro.
Branham's status of Prophet. I wish it was, either way.
12.
You have asked why God would bother to tell a Prophet about M.M's death. May I venture an answer?
M.M. was a very loose immoral woman, just the type that Bro. Branham preached about/against. She
personified Hollywood, and all it's evils. Hollywood personifies the 20th Century's technological evils,
undreamt of in previous Centuries. The Television and Movie medium of mass broadcasting has been a
MAJOR contributer to the decline in morality in my lifetime, and in my parent's. It is all personified in this
woman.
Just as a prophet foretold the ignominious death of Jezebel in the days of Elijah, and of her husband Ahab, so
it would be perfectly reasonable to expect God's attention, and indeed 'judgement', in the life of Marilyn
Munroe. Why this was only made public after the fact, is up to the individual to mull over. I would say
however, that Bro. Branham often had prophesies which he held on to for a while, and even years, so it is not
out of character for him to do this. Especially since he didn't know the identity of the woman.
Did he say that he told those around him before the death? If so we would have to ask them as to the
veracity of his account.
That is a lot of IFs, isn't it?
May I make one more point John?
This is a "Thus saith the Lord" prophesy, and it is right and proper for you to examine it in the light of events.
I agree with you, and disagree with the Mesage folk that I have read on this stream, when you are debating
with them, as to whether it is a valid thing to discuss or not. I also congradulate you for your even-ness of
temper when doing it.
If you stuck to discussions of obviously-identifiable, and widely accepted prophesies of Bro. Branham, (Such
as this one.) my considerable-respect for you would only increase. I refer, of course, to your inspection of the
1977 prediction, regarding which I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Respectfully,
Believer67
Options Reply Rate

To: Simon3014 (110 of 128)
935.110 in reply to 935.108
I looked this program up on the Discovery Channel Website (TLC is a DC station) and found that it will be
aired again tomorrow night, December 27, on the Discovery Channel. I think the title of the program is, "The
Death of Marilyn Monroe." I'll plan on watching it and will comment later. Thanks for the tip!
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

From: wytattpn 12/26/2003 8:28 am

935.111 in reply to 935.1
Marylin Monroe died of a heart attack because Bro. Branham said so. You understand that when a prophet
speaks, it is God speaking. If he said she died of a heart attack, that is what happen. God can't lie. I will take
God's Word for it and not some unbeliever like you. Your unbelieving poison doesn't hurt God's children, it
only poisons you.
wytattpn
Options Reply Rate

To: wytattpn unread (112 of 128)
935.112 in reply to 935.111
Marylin Monroe died of a heart attack because Bro. Branham said so. You understand that when a prophet
speaks, it is God speaking.
But you said yourself that you have no way of knowing for sure that William Branham is a prophet. You only
rely on your subjective senses and refuse to hold his teachings up to the light of the Word and his prophecies
up to the light of Truth.
Kris

Options Reply Rate

From: nickonack7 12/26/2003 12:48 pm

To: urim_thummim unread (113 of 128)
935.113 in reply to 935.7
WMB said in the vision he saw a lovely young woman , running, evidently grasping her chest , then she fell.
Unusual to be running at 4.00 a.m. unless she was running to get to a phone perhaps.
I agree with you that it was a heart attack, whatever brought it on.
Options Reply Rate
From: Simon3014 12/26/2003 1:06 pm

935.114 in reply to 935.110
No prob. Let me know what you find out. I may have some of my facts misconstrued because it's been so
long so bear with me if I have.
Options Reply Rate

To: believer67 (115 of 128)
935.115 in reply to 935.109
Good to hear from you again, B67!
You certainly have put a lot of thought into this, and you've made some good points.
>>It certainly does seem that the autopsy disagrees with Bro. Branham's prophesy, but then he said it would.
<<
Yes, he did say that--two months after her death and autopsy! I wonder how soon after her death the various
conspiracy theories began popping up. Maybe I'll find out tonight on the Discovery Channel.
>>If I killed her by a lethal cocktail of drugs, which caused the fatal heart attack, while she is out jogging...
<<
The drugs she had in her system would not have caused a heart attack. See post #6 in this thread. Besides,
there is no evidence whatsoever that she died of a heart attack, even among the many conspiracy theorists.
>>I would say however, that Bro. Branham often had prophesies which he held on to for a while, and even
years...<<

How would you know this? It seems to me that the only way one could even make such a statement is
because Wm. Branham so often never told of visions or prophecies until after they allegedly came to pass. To
me, that doesn't suggest that he kept them to himself until a later date. It implies he fabricated them.
>>Did he say that he told those around him before the death? <<
In the sermon, "All Things" (tape #1124E), he said he told the vision to his son, wife and daughter-in-law a
couple of hours after seeing it and two days before Marilyn Monroe died.
Your suggestion as to why Wm. Branham may have had this prophecy of Marilyn Monroe seems plausible.
The main problem I have with it is that Wm. Branham didn't say so while he was alive. In fact, as far as I
know, he never gave a reason for the vision. Furthermore, why would God have given him a vision in which
the details contradict every theory out there, particularly that she died of a heart attack? In my opinion, the
purpose of this whole event serves only to exalt Wm. Branham's stature among his followers as a prophet.
The nature of this vision and its supposed fulfillment is more similar to those of the false prophets of TBN and
modern astrologers than of biblical prophets.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controvers...phecies/Death%20of%20Marilyn%20Monroe101-120.html (10 of 16)4/1/2005 5:20:36 AM


To: wytattpn unread (116 of 128)
935.116 in reply to 935.111
>>You understand that when a prophet speaks, it is God speaking.<<
And when a false prophet speaks, one doesn't know who is speaking. Many think it is God when it's not.
How do you know it was God speaking through Wm. Branham? The evidence suggests that it this vision was
a false prophecy and not from God (see Deuteronomy 18:20-22).
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

To: Simon3014 (117 of 128)
935.117 in reply to 935.108

Well, I just watched the Discovery Channel show, Unsolved History, in which the featured story was, "The
Death of Marilyn Monroe". If this is the same show you saw, it presented a much different picture than you
seem to remember.
>>On TLC back in July, they interviewed several doctors who performed autopsys on Marilyn Monroe. <<
On the show I saw, they interviewed several experts, one of whom was an assistant to Thomas Noguchi, the
official coroner who performed the autopsy. There were no other doctors who were said to have performed
independent autopsies on Marilyn Monroe.
>>They stated that Ms. Monroe's stomach or throat contained no evidence of any drug whatsoever. <<
Which is what the official autopsy also found. Unsolved History sponsored an experiment by a toxicology
expert in which they determined that there was ample time between the ingestion of the pills and
Monroe's death for the pills to have been completely dissolved in her stomach, emptied into her small
intestine and the drug absorbed into her system. That's why there was no evidence of drugs in her
stomach. But the lining of her stomach was inflamed, which suggested that she indeed ingested a large
quantity of pills.
>>But, (this is not a joke either) the only traces they said they could find was in the anal region. <<
Unsolved History did not say that any drugs were found in her "anal region". However, the assistant to Dr.
Noguchi said he believed the drugs were administered to Monroe via enema because her lower colon was a
dark purple color and was empty. No toxicological tests were performed on her GI tract below her
stomach, including her lower colon, which might have showed whether or not drugs were present. Experts on
the program indicated that an enema would have been unlikely since a person could not contain the contents
of an enema long enough for pills to have been dissolved and absorbed into the system before being
naturally evacuated. There was no sign of any force or struggle on her body which would have indicated that
someone forcefully kept her body from evacuating the contents from the enema.
The program mentioned several possible explanations for her death, from suicide, to accidental overdose and
even murder by injecting Nembutal into her by a syringe. Unsolved History was able to virtually disprove
every explanation for her death except suicide by voluntary overdose of Nembutal.
Having said all that, there was no indication whatsoever during the course of the program that Marilyn
Monroe suffered a fatal heart attack. In fact, the toxicologist on the program confirmed what I had earlier
posted, that she died when the overdose of Nembutal in her system caused her to go into respiratory failure
(she stopped breathing). Marilyn Monroe died of a drug overdose, not a heart attack.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me

Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: Simon3014 12/28/2003 8:07 pm

935.118 in reply to 935.117
Thanks for the response, I wasn't sure if you caught the program. I didn't know about this website back in
July or I would have watched it thoroughly. I do have some questions that maybe you can answer. Is it
possible to detect if someone had a heart attack in an autopsy, and if so, how? I know that question may
seem wierd, but I just don't understand how they can tell if someone's body has had an internal reaction. Is it
possible that Ms. Monroe did take drugs and in the process have a heart attack? I have not read all the posts
so I don't know what everyone has already written.
This may seem off the subject but please hear me out. Is it possible that they might be covering up
something about Ms. Monroe's death? (Why? I don't know, just asking) If you saw the History Channel back
in November, they were airing a program called, "The men who killed Kennedy" and I was amazed by it. If
you'll remember, they had so much evidence tallied against the Secret Service that it blew my mind. They
showed how the Secret Servicemen were being waved back from the front of Kennedy's vehicle and the police
squadron was moved back (all this was actual footage) leaving Kennedy out in the opening. They said
Kennedy was shot from behind when in reality he was shot from the front and a coverup of the car was
conducted. There was even more than that but that's barely scratching the surface. So that's why I ask if it is
even remotely possible that some of the evidence about her death is being hid. It is possible for doctors to
make mistakes. I broke my toe and even with X-rays was told by a doctor that there was absolutely nothing
wrong with my foot only to be told the next day by another doctor viewing the same results that it was
broken. Any response you can give would be helpful.
Options Reply Rate


To: Simon3014 (119 of 128)
935.119 in reply to 935.118
>>Is it possible to detect if someone had a heart attack in an autopsy, and if so, how?<<
Yes, but I don't know specifically how. The whole purpose of an autopsy is to thoroughly examine the
deceased in order to learn what the specific cause of death was. In Marilyn Monroe's case, it was indisputably
a drug overdose. Here is Dr. Noguchi's description of Marilyn Monroe's heart from the autopsy:
Cardiovascular system: The heart weighs 300 grams. The pericardial cavity contains no excess of
fluid. The epicardium and pericardium are smooth and glistening. The left ventricular wall measures
1.1 cm. and the right 0.2 cm. The papillary muscles are not hypertrophic. The chordae tendineac are
not thickened or shortened. The valves have the usual number of leaflets which are thin and pliable.
The tricuspid valve measures 10 cm., the pulmonary valve 6.5 cm., mitral valve 9.5 cm. and aortic
valve 7 cm in circumference. There is no septal defect. The foramen ovale is closed. The coronary
arteries arise from their usual location and are distributed in normal fashion. Multiple sections of the
anterior descending branch of the left coronary artery with a 5 mm. interial demonstrate a patent
lumen throughout. The circumflex branch and the right coronary artery also demonstrate a patent
lumen. The pulmonary artery contains no thrombus. The aorta has a bright yellow smooth intima.
(http://marilynmonroepages.com/autopsy.html)
If there was anything unusual about her heart, it would have been noted in this section of the autopsy. If a
heart attack occured, that would have been noted here. Nothing in this report indicates that she suffered a
heart attack.
>>Is it possible that Ms. Monroe did take drugs and in the process have a heart attack?<<
A heart attack occurs when the blood supply to the heart is suddenly severely restricted or cut off, causing
part of the heart to actually die. There is no indication that this happened to Marilyn Monroe. As far as I
know, Marilyn Monroe didn't take any type drugs that could cause this to happen. The drugs she took effect
the respiratory system, not the cardiovascular system.
>>Is it possible that they might be covering up something about Ms. Monroe's death? <<
I suppose anything's possible, but I'm not one to believe in unsubstantiated conspiracy theories. Even so,
why would someone want to cover up a heart attack and make it look like a drug overdose?
The simple fact is, when you examine the details of Wm. Branham's alleged vision, his description of what
happened to Marilyn Monroe is the only one of all suggested theories which has zero substantiation.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: cmadwolf 12/29/2003 10:52 am

To: Simon3014 (120 of 128)
935.120 in reply to 935.118
There is an excellent reveiew of the events surrounding the death of Marilyn on the following website. I have
posted the link to the complete autopsy, and you can follow the links to the full story there (it's about 12
pages long). It is VERY GRAPHIC, and may offend some, so I just posted the autopsy.
Here you go.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/celebrity/marilyn_monroe/autopsy.html?sect=26
Also, yes, an autopsy would reveal evidence of a heart attack and shows how old or recent the heart attack is
(I am a research nurse who works with cadavers, sigh, my secret is out)
Options Reply Rate
Keep Reading>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Navigate this discussion: 1-20 ...61-80 81-100 101-120 121-128
Rate My Interest:


Subscribe
(545 views)
935.121 in reply to 935.59
Kris, if it is Isiah 53 in question, then the Bible records in Matthew chapter 8 that it is speaking of physical
healing. Forgive me for speaking out of turn if this is not the scripture debated.
Love Believer67
Options Reply Rate

935.122 in reply to 935.121
Do you see that I posted this way back in April of last year? I don't remember what we were talking
about! :-)
Kris

Options Reply Rate
From: believer67 1/13/2004 2:59 pm

935.123 in reply to 935.122
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversia...rophecies/Death%20of%20Marilyn%20Monroe121-128.html (1 of 6)4/1/2005 5:28:43 AM

Kris,
The scripture was 1 Peter Chapter something, where Peter was quoting Isiah 53, which says, "By his stripes
ye are healed."
I think you are making the point that this scripture is only speaking of spiritual 'healing', ie; Salvation. But
Matthew quotes the same scripture in Chapter 8, to explain the validity of Christ's physical healing ministry.
I wondered about this scripture, myself, untill I read this verse.
I didn't realize that the thread was so old, sorry about that.
Love Believer67
Options Reply Rate

935.124 in reply to 935.123
Okay :-)
I admit that it could be physical or spiritual healing. I'd have to go back and read the whole point and thread
to be sure.
Kris

Options Reply Rate


935.125 in reply to 935.123
I went back and researched the thread a little more, and I still lean toward the spiritual healing side that 2
Peter 2:24 is referring to. Matthew 8:17 refers to Isaiah 53:4 not 53:5. And Isaiah 53:5 is what 2 Peter
2:24 is in reference to. Here's Isaiah 53:5 "Isaiah 53
5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our
peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed."
It is through the death and resurrection of Christ that we are healed ultimately (eternal life with God). Jesus
healed the people in Matthew 8 before he suffered and died.
I looked at several translations (NIV, KJV, and NASB), and they all agree that Matthew 8:17 is referring to
Isaiah 53:4.
Kris

Options Reply Rate
From: believer67 Mar-14 6:07 pm

935.126 in reply to 935.125
Dear Kris,
I realise that Matthew is quoting verse 4, and not verse 5.
The fact remains that I am not jumping from one end of the Bible to the other, it is the very next verse, AND
they are connected by a "BUT".
My old primary school teacher told me to never start a sentence with either 'and' or, 'but'. And just because I
didn't listen doesn't mean that it is OK to do it.
Whether one can start a sentence with a 'but' isn't even the point, really. One can NEVER start a POINT with
a 'but'.
'But' is a conjunction, a joining-word. The same as 'with' and 'and' etc.
The thought goes like this in the original Bible scroll that Isaiah and Matthew knew, the one without the
verses and Chapters:

"...we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted [ . / , ] but he was wounded for our
transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and WITH HIS
STRIPES WE ARE HEALED."
The whole, uninterupted point is that Jesus didn't go through his sufferings, from 'gabbatha' to 'Golgotha', for
his own sins,and his own needs, but for US and OUR SINS AND NEEDS. [Despite what his mockers thought.]
ie;
WE thought it was like 'A'
*****BUT*****
it was reallly like 'B'.
The verse inventer was seperating the two conflicting sub-points of the one overall thought, with a verse
change. It is common in our Bible.
My knowledge of the exact teachings of every man of God with a healing ministry is, of course, limited; BUT I
would bet London to a brick, that every one of the succesful ministies reads this scripture this way. Ie, "
'stripes' are for physical healing."
Yes, Jesus and the disciples and the seventy were healing BEFORE the sacrifice for sin on Calvary. And John
was baptising for the remission of sin BEFORE Calvary too, but this 'remmision of sin' was only good for this
world, and not the world to come, just as healing is not an eternal thing, but a temporal one. Jesus said 'It is
better to ENTER life maimed...' He didn't say that it is better to LIVE forever maimed than to enter Hell whole.
In eternity, there are no blind or crippled or leprous in Heaven.
Only perfection and bliss, and peace. I am sure that you believe this too. So the effects of healing are only
'good' for this world. If my good friend who is blind doesn't get healed this side of the Rapture, the translation
will take care of him, I am sure. At least, that is what I believe, and what I have told him.
Perhaps that is why it didn't take the death of Christ to effect healing, [but only the eternal remmission of sin
did]. It took his stripes. I have heard that there are 39 main types of affliction that the medical establishment
recognises, one for each stripe, but I have no substantiation for this.
I am totaly satisfied with the link between the stripes on the back of my Lord, and the healing of myself and
others who put their faith in him.
Leviticus 14:3 speaks of the leprous man being 'healed' and uses the same word as Isaiah 53:5. THis signifies
that it CAN be physical healing, and Matthew's use of the chapter 53 for physical healing shows that Matthew
takes the passage to DEFINATELY mean it.
To borrow one of John Kenna's phrases; it's like this;
The stripes were for healing.
The death on the cross was for sin.
The crown of thorns was for the Curse.

[Thorns are part of the Genesis curse.]
I do not say that this thought is complete in all aspects, but I believe it is correct as far as it goes.
Love Believer67
Options Reply Rate
From: Jeena (jeena_el) Mar-15 10:21 am

935.127 in reply to 935.126
I also believe in healing for God's children. BUT, I do not think healing is confined to healing in this fleshly
life. All believers, are HEALED at some point, are they not? Dying, having not yet seen the fulfillment of a
promise, is not to be misconstrued as having NOT TAKEN PLACE. Most of the heroes cited in the N.T., died
without having yet seen the fulfillment of their promises -- yet, they received them ALL. Great faith, is
believing without not yet SEEING. Many believers in Christ die, having not YET received their complete
manifestion of all promises-- but they still HAVE THEM ALL by faith. FAITH in and of itself is a SUBSTANCE of
things HOPED FOR. The faith itself is as real and sure/certain as the promise fulfillment itself.
Love,

From: believer67 Mar-15 5:45 pm

935.128 in reply to 935.127
Dear Jeena,
Good point about recieving our healing after death. I hadn't seen it like that before.
Love Believer67
Options Reply Rate
Next Discussion>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Navigate this discussion: 1-20 ...81-100 101-120 121-128
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Games

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - Discernment Errors in

Subscribe
Prayer Lines (473 views) (Closed for Posting)
To: ALL (1 of 107)
187.1
It is often said by those who follow Wm. Branham's Message that he never made an error in discernment.
Here are a few known examples where Mr. Branham, supposedly led by his angel, made some blatant errors
in discernment:
You believe? If thou canst believe, all things are possible. You're from out-of-town too, but do you
believe? You're scared, aren't you. You are to be mother, and the reason you're scared, you got a
rupture; and you are afraid of this baby whether it'll be right or not. Only if you won't doubt, Mrs.
Hoffman--Huffler, then you can believe--healed. You believe it? How does He know your name and
know who you are? Do you believe it with all your heart? All right, Mrs. Huffler, you can go home and
bring forth the baby in peace.
Jehovah-Jireh, January 6, 1957 (tape #57-0106)
If God will reveal to me what you were praying about, will you receive it? Your a praying for your son.
And your son has a heart trouble. And he's got a black shadow over him, for death. No, I beg your
pardon, lady. He's a sinner. The dark shadow, you are praying for the salvation of his soul. That's
what that dark shadow is. Raise your hand if that's true. Hallelujah! I challenge your faith in God. Ask
the woman. What did she touch? Nothing. What caused it? Was it that faithful pastor setting there
praying? I don't think so. It was her faith that did that. You just believe.
Christ Outside the Door, March 30, 1958 (tape #58-0330E)
There is a man standing before me, he's had a operation for hemorrhoids; didn't do any good. Mr.
Day, I beg your pardon, Mr. Short, stand up and receive your healing.
Abraham's Grace Covenant, March 17, 1961 (tape #61-0317)
We're strangers, aren't we? Lay your hand on that woman behind you, call her Mrs. McAlister. She
don't know me. McAllen, rather.
Only Believe, April 27, 1961 (tape #61-0427)
You're near Bedford, Springville, something like. That's where it's at, Springville. Mrs. Burton...
not... I beg your pardon; I didn't mean it. Mrs. Parker, that's your name, isn't it?
He That is In You, November 10, 1963 (tape #63-1110E)
Now, when He [Jesus]come to Simon, He told him who he was. You believe God can tell me what
your name is? Would it make you believe more? It would? Mrs. Strong... [The sister says "Stout"-
Ed.] Stout, would you believe? Go and believe and you... It's all over.
A Testimony on the Sea, March 7, 1964 (tape #64-0307)
Mr. Branham has said that his gift of discernment was actually the Holy Spirit speaking through his lips. Since
God does not make mistakes, these incidents invalidate any such claim. We will probably never know how
many times Mr. Branham has made such errors in "discernment" because they were not caught on tape as
these incidents were. This post will be updated as more examples are discovered. For further insight
into possible reasons for Mr. Branham's discernment errors, see http://forums.delphiforums.com/kennah/
messages?msg=879.4.
John Kennah
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Discernment%20errors%201-20.html (1 of 12)4/1/2005 5:32:43 AM

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate

187.2 in reply to 187.1
Simple fatigue.
Somewhere between "seeing" her name, and WMB's lips, the message got scrambled.
Also WMB (The Spirit) correctly discerned three? conditions she had, and one from her husband also:
TESTIMONY.ON.THE.SEA_ DALLAS.TX V-19 N-11 SATURDAY_ 64-0307

185 Come. You believe? I'm also a stranger to you. I don't know you. God does know you. You believe that
He can reveal to me what your trouble is? And if He does, then the Lord God be blessed. Is that true? Now,
don't--don't have to be worried (See?); that's--that's Him, that you feel that. All right. You are suffering also
from a nervous condition, mental nervous. You get tore up easy. And you're suffering with a bladder trouble,
something wrong with the liver, and you're anemia. That is right. You got something, it keeps being a man
appearing here.
Do you believe that God can heal you? Heal your husband too, make him well? Do you think the stomach
trouble will leave, and he'll be all right? That's what he's suffering with.
Edited 5/26/2002 9:19:39 PM ET by DFNDRFTHFTH
Options Rate


187.3 in reply to 187.2
The Bible does not allow fatigue to get in the way of a prophet speaking accurately in the Name of the Lord.
It simply says that if a prophet says anything in the Lord's name that the Lord did not say, then the prophet
is false (Deuteronomy 18). The Bible also does not say that a false prophet cannot sometimes be correct (cf.
Deuteronomy 13).
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate

187.4 in reply to 187.3
Legalism
Options Rate


187.5 in reply to 187.4
Please explain.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate
Messages 6 through 7 of 107 were Deleted

187.8 in reply to 187.5
I hope I'm not sending a duplicate post - I'm having trouble getting things sent today.
You have hit upon a very interesting point with the duplication of names/illnesses from people earlier in the
prayer line. I wonder if this sometimes occured with names/illnesses further down the line?
Also, declaring that someone is healed is far from proof that they have been healed. A sincere person in a
prayer line isn't likely to say, "Sorry, I still feel the same way." Ever hear anyone say that to Benny Hinn or
Oral Roberts? If they did, they would get shocked looks and be told they didn't have enough faith.
Remember the "third pull" miracle of Hattie Wright being given the salvation of her two sons? Last I heard,
not many years ago, neither had ever experienced a change in their lives.
Edited 2/6/2003 12:23:52 PM ET by NEWCLOTHES
Options Rate

From: 8320JOHN 2/6/2003 2:22 pm

187.10 in reply to 187.8
Good point, but the message fanatics will never admit to error of their icon. It is unthinkable. They have
invested all their capital in WMB rather than Yeshua. Therefore if WMB falls, they fall with him.
Errors of discernment, visions, prophecies, predictions have all been errant in one degree or the other. And
that seems to be more apparent as the years pass.
Options Rate

To: 8320JOHN (11 of 107)
187.11 in reply to 187.10
I don't know if you ever heard the tape Standing in the Gap (ca 62, I think) - in it WMB tells of a vision of
heaven and meets a huge group of people who were his converts to Christ. He says "I taught the same
gospel Paul taught" and the group screams, "we're resting on that!"
I'm afraid that most really are resting on WMB rather than Christ, and if so may be unsaved.
Options Rate
From: 8320JOHN 2/7/2003 9:22 am

187.12 in reply to 187.11
Oh, yes...many years ago...'60's actually. And yes, it would seem the focus is on a man and not the True and
Living God for such a reception. I have always found that to be suspect.
Options Rate


187.13 in reply to 187.6
>>I never heard Bro. Branham make such statement. The Holy Spirit showed him visions, and he verbalized
what the Holy Spirit showed him in the vision. <<
Now, it isn't me. You say, "Brother Branham, can you tell me what's wrong with me?" No, sir, I
cannot. That's right. But if--if you will believe it with all your heart, now, not imagine it, but believe it
with your heart, God will tell you about it. But now, I don't know what I'm saying. I can hear myself,
but I'm in another world--another... It's a--it's a sixth sense, or a fourth dimension, it's--or whatever
it is.
Come, Let Us Reason Together, October 4, 1955 (tape #55-1004)
>>How did he correct himself? Did he guess the right name starting with H? How did he know he was wrong?
<<
I believe you're asking the wrong questions. The question should be, "Who gave him the wrong discernments
in the first place?" Certainly not God. Do you think God is the only being in the spiritual realm who could
have corrected him? My opinion is that Mr. Branham was either reading the prayer cards for his information
or that some other entity (whether his own imagination or something far worse) had sometimes given him
wrong discernments. God does not give his prophets false information.
>>As i said in an earlier post, i do know not of any person that challenged the accuracy of his discernments
when he was alive. <<
But there were many who did not receive their healing after he predicted it. A false pronouncement of
healing during a prayer line is nothing less than a false prophecy. The Bible does not say that a false prophet
cannot accurately call out people's names and addresses during a prayer line. But it does say if a prophet is
ever wrong, he is a false prophet.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate


187.14 in reply to 187.7
>>You should let the man finish the discernment, have his final say, then judge the accuracy of his
statements. <<
The instant he called out an incorrect name, it was a false discernment.
>>Regarding fatigue associated with visions, that is a scriptural reality, you do not want to take into account.
It is real. <<
What are you talking about? A scriptural reality? As far as I know, only mediums and astrologers have been
known to become physically weak after experiencing visions or spiritual encounters.
>>If you are a very good expert at work, and you do thing well, and one day you are sick and and make a
mistake, do you want your supervisor to call you incompetent? That is your viewpoint on this matter. <<
It's not my viewpoint, it's God's:
But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him
to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die...
When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that [is]
the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, [but] the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou
shalt not be afraid of him.
Deuteronomy 18:20,22
I don't see any room for exceptions or corrected mistakes here. I would remind you that we have given
several examples of his false prophecies at this forum besides the few errors of discernment that appear in
this thread.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Rate

187.15 in reply to 187.8
>>You have hit upon a very interesting point with the duplication of names/illnesses from people earlier in
the prayer line. I wonder if this sometimes occured with names/illnesses further down the line? <<
That is a good question. These are all I've found doing a limited search. I plan on doing more detailed
searches in the future.
>>Also, declaring that someone is healed is far from proof that they have been healed. A sincere person in a
prayer line isn't likely to say, "Sorry, I still feel the same way." Ever hear anyone say that to Benny Hinn or
Oral Roberts? <<
Excellent point!
>>Remember the "third pull" miracle of Hattie Wright being given the salvation of her two sons? Last I heard,
not many years ago, neither had ever experienced a change in their lives. <<
That's interesting. I wonder if it's possible to follow up on this somehow.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate


187.18 in reply to 187.16
I'm not being unreasonable at all. I posed a very reasonable question which you seem to be avoiding: Where
did Wm. Branham's wrong discernments come from that needed correction? You seem to be implying that
the Holy Spirit made the mistake and that I'm not giving the Spirit a reasonable amount of time to finish.
>>If mediums and astrologer become physically weak after demonic visions, why do you find it difficult to
accept that prophets become weak as God shows them visions? <<
Because the Bible never suggests in any way, shape or form that prophets ever got weak as a result of
having a spiritual encounter. That sort of thing is only found in the occult.
The examples you gave from Daniel do not suggest that Daniel lost strength simply because he saw visions,
but because of what he saw in the visions. Read the passages in context and I'm sure you'll see what I mean.
>>There were thousands of discernments, and you bring to the table 6 discernments where the Holy Spirit
corrects William Branham, before the end of the discernment for that individual, and call it error. <<
First, there is no way one can ascertain that Wm. Branham had thousands of discernments. Second, there is
no way you can verify that it was the Holy Spirit correcting Wm. Branham's mistakes. You only presume He
did because you think Mr. Branham was a prophet of God. The Bible goes far to show that men of God are
capable of errors in judgment. However, not once does the Bible ever indicate that a prophet made a
mistake in discernment or prophecy that the Holy Spirit needed to correct.
Also, I have only presented 6 errors that I know about. I haven't seen the last of them, I'm sure.
There is no way that we can confidently conclude that even his corrections were accurate. I'm not convinced
they all were.
Finally, during these prayer lines, Wm. Branham also discerned that those whom he discerned would be
healed. Many were not, and some even died. That's above and beyond the 6 examples I presented above.
You are free to hide your head in the sand and pretend that Wm. Branham was a vindicated prophet, but to
those of us who are willing to look at all the facts objectively, we see that the opposite is true.
As I indicated earlier, it looks more like Mr. Branham was reading (and misreading) what was on the prayer
cards than receiving revelations from above!
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me

Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate

187.19 in reply to 187.17
>>What is the point you are trying to make? <>Again, discernments are given by visions; He sees things in the vision, and he verbalizes what God is
showing him in the vision.
If he got a detail wrong (for whatever reason) and is corrected, that does not make the vision or the prophet
wrong. <<
How does can one see the name "Parker" in a vision and read it as "Burton"? How is it possible to see a
vision of one needing salvation and verbalize it as someone dying from a heart ailment? You're in denial, Mr.
Bagda.
>>How can you tell it was not God from a scriptural stanpoint? <>The accuracy rate was phenomenal. <<
So was Senor Lopez the magician's.
>>Show me this phenomenal rate of accuraccy with an astrologer, medium or any other demonic human
outlet, and you would contradict scriptures
that state plainly, satan is the father of all lies; he cannot speak the truth for very long. The rate of accuray
for demonic human outlets
is marginal at the very best. You have examples that contradict this point, i would like to see them. <<
The Bible says a prophet only has to make one mistake in speaking for the Lord to be considered false. Mr.
Branham made far more than one false discernment/prophecy. His accuracy rate is therefore irrelevant.
>>1. A "thus saith the Lord " is a Word from the Lord that will become reality. <<
William Branham said that he would shoot a large brown bear according to "Thus saith the Lord." It never
happened.

>>2. Anything as, " Go, believe the Lord has made you well" or any other promise that is from the Bible,
reiterated to the person what God had done for them under the New Covenant. <<
William Branham said that, "With faith in Gods power, and help from the medical world, your little son
[Donny Morton] will live," according to "thus saith the Lord." Little Donny died from his illness even after
Mr. Branham's conditions were met.
>>Where in the Bible do you see the gift of discernment operating in a false prophet? Any examples? <<
We don't have to look in the Bible. False prophets are doing it all over TV.
>>Again, are we nitpicking and scrutinizing every word of the prophet

according to our human understanding to find fault, or do we accept God's servant by faith based on the
evidence God has provided us. <<
How else is one to know if a prophet is false or not without examining what he said? The evidence couldn't
be more clear that Wm. Branham was a false prophet. What followers of the Message are guilty of is
changing the biblical standard for identifying false prophets in order to exclude Wm. Branham from among
them. In other words, it's OK to judge a false prophet by the evidence as long as his name isn't William
Branham. If the evidence indicates that Wm. Branham was false, then it must have been misinterpreted!
That's called "wishful thinking."
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate
Keep Reading>>


Subscribe
From: NewClothes 2/11/2003 2:40 pm

187.22 in reply to 187.19
You had an earlier post referring to meetings in Lausanne and Karlsruhe. I skimmed through the prayerlines
at those meetings (about 1953-1955) to see if the manifestations of healing or discernment were hindered as
Mr. Koch said. In a couple, WMB talked about the governmental interference and questioning he faced but the
prayer lines seemed pretty much as usual - EXCEPT - he gave no names and almost no places (in one place
says, "you're from a place like Hamburg, something like that"). It kind of had a difference rhythm that I
noticed. Then I read his explanation:
WILLIAM.BRANHAM.SPEAKS_ LAUSANNE.SWITZERLAND FRIDAY_ 55-0826

E-20 Those things are true. You believe now? Who knows your life but God? It's His love to you. Do you
speak English? [The woman says "Yes."--Ed.] I hear someone say, "Alice." Your name, your name is Alice,
and your last name is Humberg. Amen
. I hear the names of the people, but I can't say those French names.
If he typically HEARD a voice give the names, how could he mistake one in the examples you gave? If a voice
said the German or French name, why couldn't he repeat what he heard? Was it really that he could not READ
the French names?
Options Rate

187.23 in reply to 187.20
>>1. The discernments were triggered by visions from the Holy Spirit. <<
Newclothes gave an interesting example where Mr. Branham said he heard the names he was discerning, not
saw them in visions.
>>2. The prophet of God verbalized the details of the vision. <<
Details that weren't even close to the truth at times.
>>3. if he made any mistakes regarding some details, the Holy Spirit corrected him. <<
Wishful thinking. As I said, true biblical prophets never made errors in discernment and prophecy like Wm.
Branham did. And you claim to base your opinioins on the Bible?

>>Daniel fainted and was sick because of the duration, glory and intensity of the vision.<<
Wrong.
>>Why would Daniel say he retained no strength? Why can't you believe the Word of God? <<
Why wouldn't he? I believe the Word of God. I just don't believe it is proper to twist the Scriptures like you
do to make a false prophet appear more like a prophet of God.
>>If you have any tangible data i would like to see it. If not, what you are saying is anecdotal and mere
speculation. <<
No, you're the one who's spreading the fallacy that he saw thousands of visions. It's up to you to prove he
did. Since you have failed to do so thus far, it is obvious you don't know what you're talking about. You just
take Wm. Branham's word for it. We've shown many times what his word is worth by pointing out several
examples where he was caught exaggerating, bending the truth or outright making things up.
>>Why not? If something was inaccurate they could have said something. <<
We have shown at least one example where someone did. In the other examples, it may well be that they
did and that's why Mr. Branham gave a second glance at the prayer cards to see that he read the wrong one.
>>Standing on the Word of God and understanding spiritual knowledge, does not constitute hiding my head
in the sand...<<
But ignoring the facts as you do does. Besides, you don't stand on the Word of God. You reinterpret it to say
something it doesn't. That's called manipulating the text.
>>Maybe you can detail your version "reading/mireading prayer cards". <>I cannot say, since i did not see the visions in the matter.
It is possible the Holy spirit showed him multiple visions at one time, and he lost track of associating the
vision with the right person. <<
Yeah, right. You are in a serious state of denial!
>>I did not ask for your opinion, i asked for scriptural documentation validating your statement. <>I expect spiritual minded answers. I don't have time for nonsense. <<
Neither do I. Good day.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate

From: 8320JOHN 2/12/2003 7:09 am

187.25 in reply to 187.23
You said he was in denial...they all are in denial.
Visions that did not come to pass

Errant discernments
Failed predictions
An alleged TSTL (if a vision is a TSTL) that failed
But still they plunge on as tho they are holding aces...someone ought to tell them the score...oh, I see you
are, but they are not listening. :)-
Options Rate
From: Diagg 2/12/2003 11:38 am

To: 8320JOHN (26 of 107)
187.26 in reply to 187.25
:) John you probably would have said the same of Isaiah if you were living in his day.
Options Rate
From: 8320JOHN 2/12/2003 12:25 pm

187.27 in reply to 187.26
Not hardly..
Options Rate


To: 8320JOHN (28 of 107)
187.28 in reply to 187.25
I think you are probably right. They remain true to their faith, yet demonstrate that in order to defend that
faith, they must become intellectually dishonest. That's not the kind of faith Jesus and the apostles taught us
to have (John 17:17; I Timothy 2:15; I Peter 3:15; Titus 1:9). Without including our minds in stating our
reasons to believe, faith is nothing more than the will to believe that something is true whether it is or not.
We see this type of faith demonstrated all around us in all of the false belief systems in the world.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate

187.29 in reply to 187.28
I wish we could find out what happened to Hattie Wright's sons. I have found myself thinking about that a lot
lately, even before reading this thread. To this day, if I am talking to some of my message relatives about
my kids who are not serving the Lord, they tell me to not lose the faith, because "remember Hattie Wright's
sons". It seems like it would be possible to follow up on this somehow....
Love,

Options Delete Rate

187.30 in reply to 187.29
I'd be interested in knowing that, too.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate
From: nurse841 3/14/2003 5:28 pm

187.31 in reply to 187.29
J,
Have you did any more research on Hattie Wright's son. I'd be interested to know what you found out!
Nurse
Options Rate


To: nurse841 (32 of 107)
187.32 in reply to 187.31
I have not - but if I find out anything, I will certainly post it.
Love,
Options Delete Rate
From: nurse841 3/14/2003 6:42 pm

187.33 in reply to 187.32
J,
I'd be interested to know because I have often heard people refer to that statement.
Nurse
Options Rate


187.34 in reply to 187.28
" And your son has a heart trouble. And he's got a black shadow over him, for death. No, I beg your pardon,
lady. He's a sinner. The dark shadow, you are praying for the salvation of his soul."
Funny, when I read that, I see that someone really did have a big heart problem. Or, maybe that's just the
way I see things. However, I think someone who isn't a Christian has a really big heart problem. Not to
mention that the wages of sin are death, are they not? Soooo, I don't think that he missed that one, either.
Shaun
Edited 3/21/2003 5:09:37 AM ET by LILEAGLET
Options Rate

187.35 in reply to 187.34
Then why did Mr. Branham correct himself?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate


187.36 in reply to 187.35
...laughing... You said yourself that God don't correct a false prophet. For one, he is a man, when he sees
something, he calls it as he sees it, but if that is not what the vision was, God would correct him. If you look,
you will find where he said that he was going to say something one way, and then the Angel would come and
set it straight. He went with what he knew visions like that usually were, however, the Angel corrected him. If
you see something in the Bible, and you start "preaching" it a certain way, and you are wrong, and God tells
you, wouldn't you set it straight? Say you are in front of a group, and you are talking about Paul, and you say
Peter, and the Holy Spirit moves on you, and you say, "I'm sorry, I mean Paul," that is the same thing.
Shaun
Options Rate

187.37 in reply to 187.36
>>For one, he is a man, when he sees something, he calls it as he sees it, but if that is not what the vision
was, God would correct him. <<
One characteristic of the Bible which sets it apart from the writings of other world religions is that it usually
portrays the flaws of some of its most godly men. Can we find a biblical example where one of God's
prophets ever misunderstood a Word from the Lord and had to be corrected? No, because that was not a
characteristic of God's prophets. There is not one example in the Scriptures where a prophet had to correct
himself when giving a message from the Lord. Men make mistakes. Prophets speaking under the
anointing of the Holy Spirit, so to speak, do not.
Some of Mr. Branham's errors in discernment can be easily explained, as I illustrated in my post at http://
forums.delphiforums.com/kennah/messages?msg=879.4.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Rate

187.38 in reply to 187.11
I just read what you had said, and I am afraid that is in error. What it is saying is that they are resting on the
fact that he preached what Paul had preached, the same Gospel. Remember, Paul said that if any Angel,
HEAVENLY or EARTHLY preach anything else, let him be accursed. Hmmm, so what's that mean for
denominations, OR churches, with women preachers? Anyways, like I was saying, he said that he preached
what Paul had, and they said that they were resting on that, not the man.

Shaun
Options Rate

187.39 in reply to 187.37
My friend,
The church I had gone to, the pastor was just a little baby when Brother Branham was around. His dad had
started attending the Branham Tabernacle around the late '60's I think it was, but had followed his teachings
for a few years before. Anyways, they had gone to see one of the meetings in Alabama, when he had
preached Spiritual Amnesia, and the following sermon there was a prayer line. He had desired to get into the
prayer line, and see the discernment first hand. Now, his son was at home, in a crib with a skin disease. His
face oozed puss, and blood. Every morning he would be stuck to his pillow, and his mother would sit for hours
with a damp cloth to seperate the skin from the pillow. The doctor's said that there was no hope, he would
always have that problem, and that if it ever went away, he would always be scarred.
That night, Brother Branham said that there wouldn't be a discernment line, they were just going to pass by,
and lay hands on the people as they went. Well, he thought, "No, that's not what I wanted." The prayer line
started moving, and as he was passing Brother Branham, he caught his sleeve, and said, "You believe, don't
you son?" What could he say, God was answering his desire, he said, "Of course."
That night they had called back home to check on their son. The woman, I think his aunt, had answered the
phone. She said, "The strangest thing happened, around "this certain time" his face started drying up." (I
used "this certain time" because the time escapes me right now, and is really beside the point.) Anyways,
they were a time zone away, and it was exactly the time he went through the prayer line.

Shaun

Options Rate

187.40 in reply to 187.38
What they were resting on was the assumption that WMB preached the same gospel that Paul taught. If you
read every word that Paul taught (it won't take long) you will see that that assumption is very wrong. WMB
vastly added to and changed the direction of Paul's teaching from God working directly through individuals to
God working through a prophet for the church age to interpret the gospel to the individuals - in effect, two
mediators between God and man; Jesus and the church age messenger.
Options Rate
Keep Reading>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Navigate this discussion: 1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 ... 101-107
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Games


Subscribe
187.41 in reply to 187.40
Where do you see that?
I believe that you are mistaken. Brother Branham had never indicated that, nor ever came right out and said
such.
Shaun
Options Rate

187.42 in reply to 187.41
I wouldn't think anyone could miss his teaching that each of the seven early churches represented a church
age, and that each age was assigned a prophet-messenger to interpret the word of God for the age, and that
to reject one word spoken by that prophet was rejection of God, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, etc.
I guess if you don't think WMB said that I could look up some quotes.
Options Rate

187.43 in reply to 187.42
He did not say each had a PROPHET messenger, but that they had a messenger.

Shaun
Options Rate


187.44 in reply to 187.43
Right, he said Luther, Wesley and two others (can't remember which ones) were reformers, not prophets. But
the point remains, that he put them in the place of God to the people in that era, right?
Options Rate

187.45 in reply to 187.44
Not really, he said that they were a mouthpiece, like a microphone, that God used to speak. There is none
that can take the place of Jesus Christ.

Shaun
Options Rate

187.46 in reply to 187.45
So is God not able to speak to his people directly, either through prayer or His Word?
SavedKris
Options Rate


187.47 in reply to 187.43
Dear Shaun,
Having recently been reading the Seals, he did (according to my menory) call the 7 messengers, prophets,
though I think he also said that they were not. Just to be technical, though I am sure this will not make any
real difference to you. I am not sure how to distinguish the difference between a spirit-messenger and a spirit-
prophet, though maybe one conciously relies more heavily on the work of the Holy Spirit?
God Bless
Batholomew
Edited 3/26/2003 3:13:50 AM ET by BATHOLOMEW
Options Rate

187.48 in reply to 187.45
WMB said LOTS of different things at different times about his position. Here are some he said late in his
ministry:
TOKEN.THE_ JEFF.IN V-2 N-19 SUNDAY_ 63-0901M

32-5 And I've preached it to you and showed it to you by everything that Christ said. Is that right? . . .You
say, "What about the mark of the beast?" Those who reject the Holy Spirit, is already marked by the beast.
The punishment will come later. See?
WHO.DO.YOU.SAY.THIS.IS?_ PHOENIX.AZ V-6 N-9 SUNDAY_ 64-1227

70 . . . But God in every age has had His Messiah. To reject Noah's Message was to rejecting God. To reject
Noah was to perish. To reject Moses was to perish. It was... They were the anointed messiah's for that age,
the Word that was promised for that age.
LEADERSHIP_ COVINA.CA V-7 N-7 TUESDAY_ 65-1207

160 He said, "What was left over, don't let it stay till morning, to come into this other age, burn it with fire;
be destroyed." That the age that you're living in, the Message of this age, It's got to be brought out of the
Scriptures and vindicated and proved by God that it's God doing so. Then you either receive That or reject It.
Options Rate


187.49 in reply to 187.48
"o reject Noah's Message was to rejecting God. To reject Noah was to perish. To reject Moses was to perish."
In all, he was not saying his message, or any thing like that, just Christ. These two I want to take specifically.
I said this somewhere else, and will say it again.
Noah had a simple message, "It's going to rain, get in the ark." The ark was a type of Christ. So, he was
saying, "Get in Christ, or persish."
Moses had a message, "Slay a lamb, and mark the lintel and doorposts of your homes, the death angel
comes, and any without that blood perish." The blood was a shadow of Christ.
To reject that, Christ, was to perish.

Shaun
Options Rate

187.50 in reply to 187.49
Again, Shaun - please give CLEAR definition of what you believe the "token" to be, the blood over the
doorpost, the "ark" which carries the believers through the judgment.
We also believe in the blood over the doorpost - the "token". We also believe we must believe we must be
born again into Christ's Body and have HIS Holy Spirit within us. We merely differ in our belief as to how one
receives the token, how they get into the ark, or how they receive the Word of Jesus Christ.
Today, what exactly do you believe this to be and how do you believe one is saved from the
judgment which is being released on this world?
Love,

Options Delete Rate

187.51 in reply to 187.49
<<In all, he was not saying his message, or any thing like that, just Christ. These two I want to take
specifically. I said this somewhere else, and will say it again. >>
Shaun, in all honesty, what do you think he was saying in "The Absolute"? or "Thinking Man's Filter" or almost
any of his later sermons? Sure, he meandered around the subject, but the point was that to reject him or
anything he said was to reject Christ. Its hard to pull up short direct quotes because of the roundabout way
he preached; you would really have to post & read large segments of sermons and that is pretty unwieldy in
this setting. A couple of examples:
QUESTIONS.AND.ANSWERS_ JEFF.IN COD SUNDAY_ 64-0823E

1002-44 Now, that's no evidence of the Holy Ghost . See? You can't rely upon that. You can't rely upon the
fruit of the Spirit, because the first fruit of the Spirit is love. And the Christian Science exercise more love
than anybody I know of , and they even deny Jesus Christ being Divine. See? There's only one evidence of
the Holy Spirit that I know of , and that is a genuine faith in the promised Word of the hour.
143-2 SMYRNAEAN.CHURCH.AGE - CHURCH.AGE.BOOK CPT.4

In every age, (and every age is the age of the Holy Ghost for the true believer)--I say, in every age the
evidence was the same. Those who had the Spirit, the Teacher, heard the Word, and that Spirit in them took
the Word and taught it (revealed it) to them; and they were of the group that heard the messenger and his
message and took it and lived it.
Can we at least admit that was his intention?
<<Noah had a simple message, "It's going to rain, get in the ark." The ark was a type of Christ. So, he was
saying, "Get in Christ, or persish." >>
What was WMBs ark? What constituted the blood on the doorpost for WMB?
Options Rate


187.52 in reply to 187.50
I thought I made it clear.... It's either Christ or perish. If you can't accept that, then I don't know what else
to tell you. I have said it repeatedly. The blood was just a shadow of Christ.

Shaun
Options Rate

187.53 in reply to 187.52
Again, evasion. I have not problem with your statement. I agree. BUT, anyone who has studied the
message knows that it makes it very clear that to reject William Branham as the endtime prophet is to reject
Jesus Christ. If you truly believe this, then why can't you admit it?
Love,
Options Delete Rate


To: ALL (54 of 107)
187.54 in reply to 187.1
Due to some additional info provided by another member of this forum, the following example has
been removed from my list of discernment errors. See update at http://forums.delphiforums.com/
kennah/messages?msg=187.83
___________________________________________
Here's another error in discernment that I heard while listening to a tape the other day:
Now, I want to just--just to contact your spirit, lady, just to talk to you. Do you believe that these
things are true? You believe that the Lord Jesus could reveal to me what you're here for? You also
have tumor. That's right. You believe He could reveal to me where it's at? It's in the female glands.
And what gland it's in? It's in the womb.
Identified Christ of All Ages, April 9, 1964 (tape #64-0409)
The female reproductive glands are the ovaries. The womb (uterus) is not a gland, but a muscle. They are
two entirely separate structures in the female anatomy. It is unlikely (correction, impossible) that God would
confuse the two. From where did Mr. Branham get this incorrect discernment?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate

From: CajunBaby (Gsplgrl02) 3/28/2003 11:00 am

187.55 in reply to 187.53
You are right Jeena, we know what they really believe. They forget that we were once in the message. I can't
count how many times I heard it preached in the message church that apart from believing the message
there was no other way to be saved. They even used that comparison of noah.. and they believe that the
message of William Branham and the Bible are one and the same. So to reject the message of William
Branham is to reject Christ, in their eyes.
Also, before I had completely left the message, I was over at a message sisters home and this very subject
came up. She was talking about a sister who had left our message church and was now 'out in the world', and
how burdened she was for this sister," because you know", she said, "that there is no other hope for her to
be saved outside of the message". When she said this to me it was like the lights came on! I knew that was
not what the Bible said! This lady is a deacons wife in the message. There is no mistaking that this is what
they believe. I don't know why they try to cover it up in public. To them the message of William Branham
and the Bible are one and the same. They know that this is what is taught and so does everyone else that has
been in the message.
GSPLGRL
Options Rate

187.56 in reply to 187.54
It isn't a reproductive gland? Maybe I should go and talk with my biology teacher that called it a reproductive
gland too, right? I don't know, I think my biology teacher was more qualified, and he called it a gland, so, I
will take his word, it's a gland. Maybe you should put out word to all the companies that produce biology
books that called it a gland as well, and have them correct it, ok?
Keep trying.
Funny, though, you still listen to the tapes? Sound just like Billy Graham, at least you admit it though.

Shaun

Options Rate

187.57 in reply to 187.56
The uterus (womb) is not a reproductive gland.
Ovary-one of the two female sex glands; they produce egg cells, estrogen and progesterone.
Uterus-the hollow pear-shaped organ in which a baby develops before it is born; also womb
REPRODUCTION GLOSSARY
---------------------------
Ovary: The female gonad, the ovary is one of a pair of reproductive glands in
women. They are located in the pelvis, one on each side of the uterus. Each ovary is
about the size and shape of an almond. The ovaries produce eggs (ova) and female
hormones.
Uterus: The uterus (womb) is a hollow, pear-shaped organ located in a woman's

lower abdomen between the bladder and the rectum. The narrow, lower portion of
the uterus is the cervix; the broader, upper part is the corpus. The corpus is made
up of two layers of tissue.
MedTerms.com Medical Dictionary
Yes, I still listen to tapes. Are you saying that Billy Graham listens to Wm. Branham
tapes?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Rate

187.58 in reply to 187.57
Surprising, isn't it? If you ask him, though, he will tell you that he never even knew Brother Branham, at
least that's what he told my grandmother. Although, Brother Branham greets him in the meetings how many
times? Why do you think he owns the complete set of tapes, along with Orall Roberts?
Endometrium - The glandular mucous membrane that lines the uterus.
What do you know, a gland? In the uterus? Oh my. Oh, and if you read the REST of the information on the
uterus, it is clearly called a gland.
Keep trying.

Shaun
I guess Biology did pay off, huh?
Options Rate

From: 8320JOHN 3/30/2003 6:58 pm

187.59 in reply to 187.58
Are you saying Billy Graham told your grandmother he had all the Branham tapes along with those of Oral
Roberts??
Sounds rather unlikely. Will you scan and post a letter from your grandmother to that effect?
Options Rate

To: 8320JOHN (60 of 107)
187.60 in reply to 187.59
...laughing... You calling me a liar? I don't believe this. You misread what I said too. Billy Graham has the
complete set, I did not say that my grandmother said that he had it. She told me that he told her that he
never knew Brother Branham, which is a flat out lie. Go check out Oral Roberts library, and see if you don't
find the complete set of books and tapes.

Shaun
Options Rate
Keep Reading>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On


Subscribe
From: 8320JOHN 3/30/2003 7:10 pm
187.61 in reply to 187.60
How do you know BG has the complete set of tapes? And even so, what does that prove? I suspect he was a
vast library.
Where did your grandmother meet BG when the alleged discussion occurred?
Oral Roberts would of course have the set, but that is not BG. The Roberts Pentecostal Library has many
works of the Pentecostal Movement.
Options Rate

To: 8320JOHN (62 of 107)
187.62 in reply to 187.61
I don't think it really matters when my grandmother met him, or had any correspondence with him. The fact
is, that is what he told her, she told me herself. It seems that you hold Billy Graham in high regards, does it
crush you to think that he listens to the tapes?

Shaun
Options Rate

From: 8320JOHN 3/30/2003 7:58 pm

187.63 in reply to 187.62
I don't hold BG any higher than I would WMB...but I seriously doubt he listens to the tapes of WMB. I believe
that's part of the continuing fantasy of the message.
Options Rate

To: 8320JOHN (64 of 107)
187.64 in reply to 187.63
Is it? Then why would he own them? ...shrug... Seems to me that he would listen to them. Even John K
listens to them.

Shaun
Options Rate
From: 8320JOHN 3/30/2003 8:29 pm

187.65 in reply to 187.64
The point is, I am not sure he does own them, but if so, I hardly expect them to be on his "things to do" list.
Certainly not at this stage of his life. Why would he?
John Kennah listens to them because the was part of the cult in times past. As he exited the cult, it seemingly
befell him to counter the various errant arguments of the cult, such as serpent seed (WMB model), "created"
Jesus, errant prediction by Divine Inspiration, etc. It's very common for one who was intimately involved in a
sect or cult when exiting to have a burden to advise others of the errors he encounted and the remedy.
BTW, Neanderthal Man is still very much a theory. Not only so, but the serpent is certainly not to be equated
with this theoretical character. The link you posted was interesting but it does not in any way prove Eve had
sex with two males. We're back to the imagination stage again..."Bro Branham said..." :)-

Options Rate

187.66 in reply to 187.58
I don't know where you're getting your biological info from, but I've searched 3 sources and none of them
define endometrium as a gland. It's a mucous membrane, not a gland.
Endometrium: The uterine lining; the cells that line the uterus (the womb); the inner layer of the uterus.
This tissue is shed monthly in response to the hormonal changes of the menstrual period. The endometrium
then grows back and slowly gets thicker and thicker until the next period when it is once again sloughed off.
The uterus is your baby's home during gestation. Also referred to as the womb, the uterus is hollow with a thick,
muscular wall, and is considered the strongest muscle in the human body. In the pre-pregnant state, your uterus is
the shape and size of a small pear, and is about one inch thick. It grows from two ounces to about two pounds
during pregnancy. In the weeks after birth, it will retreat back into your pelvis and will shrink to almost pre-
pregnancy size. The cervix is at the bottom of the uterus. http://pregnancytoday.com/resource/definitions/
uterus.htm
No mention of a gland at all in these two definitions, or even in the dictionary.
Billy Graham owns and listens to Wm. Branham tapes? How regurlarly does he listen to them, and why?
What's your source? What does it matter? Assuming he does, why do you say he denies it?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate


187.67 in reply to 187.64
>>Even John K listens to them. <<
I listen to them to keep in touch with the Message. I don't want to rely only on my memory or on individual
quotes as I continue this ministry. I think it's my responsibility keep the tapes as fresh to me as it is to
those with whom I'm discussing it. I don't listen to them as a source of sound biblical teaching.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate

To: 8320JOHN (68 of 107)
187.68 in reply to 187.65
Hmmm... did he say that? No, I just have done studies to find out things such as that myself. The fact is,
there are two ways you can go with this Message, either in, or out. I tried to study, and prove it wrong, and
the more I studied, the more it was proven. The Bible said to try the spirit. I did, and I had found it was true.

Shaun
Options Rate


187.69 in reply to 187.66
http://www.e-uterus.com/index.html
Go read that. About the endometrium, just go and read the definition. Go to www.dictionary.com it's defined
there. It's a gland. While you're at it, look up gland. It is a secreting organ, though sometimes they don't
secrete anything, such as the lymph nodes. Either way, it's good to know what you are talking about, before
you say it.
As far as Billy Graham goes, he has had correspondence with my grandmother, because my grandmother
does not approve of my being in the Message. When I told her that Billy Graham had sat under Brother
Branham's ministry for a while, she wrote him. When he had replied back, he denied ever knowing Brother
Branham. As far as denying, I don't know, but he did lie to say that he never knew Brother Branham.

Shaun
Options Rate
From: 8320JOHN 3/31/2003 6:37 am

187.70 in reply to 187.68
I've studied and the more I studied, the more I see that WMB, tho a Christian man was a long ways from
being doctrinally infallible. He was an evangelist that intruded into the office of teaching for which he was not
equipped nor prepared. The message sect is the results.
1. Justification can be resinded said WMB...at least at one stage of his "progressive" career. Hardly the
comment of a "prophet."
2. Jews can be "given eternal life" even denying the Messiah.
3. Early on he spoke of the Third Person, later he changed his view, then he waffled here and there on the
issue. Indecisive.
etc, etc.
If one has staked his spiritual well being on the teachings of WMB as the All in All, so be it. But that's as far
as they will ever go...as far as they can go. WMB was still learning as he left town. He may have changed
more if he had of lived, even regarding a few of the doctrines the message holds dear but really cannot show
Scripture, but only a, "...Brother Branham said..." :)-
(Praying for your injury)

Options Rate

To: 8320JOHN (71 of 107)
187.71 in reply to 187.70
You know, I recently heard a minister preaching, he was talking about a certain man that was high up in the
Catholic church. I think that he was a cardinal that would travel with the pope, and all. He was one of two
men that had a key to a room under the Vatican. That room was a library. Contained in this library was a
glass table that had a glass lid, and it was sealed. Inside it was four books, and the four books were sealed.
One was a book on Martin Luther, the other on John Wesley, and the other two was The Seven Church Ages,
and The Revelation of the Seven Seals, and they had special seals. He said that these books seals said, "The
end time prophet to Laodecia." I don't recall exactly where he had read the rest of what was said, but he had
also said that he read, "We hate this man, he caused more damage to the Catholic church than all other
ministries to sweep around the world."
Fact, or fiction? You make your own decisions, fact is, that is what he said. If he is still alive, I don't know,
because the Catholic church has a history of killing men like that, that leave. By the way, he has left the
Catholic church, and came to the Message. He said that if the Catholic church was that against it, it had to be
truth.

Shaun
Thank you for the prayers.
Edited 3/31/2003 8:05:15 AM ET by _Acolyte_ (LILEAGLET)
Options Rate


To: 8320JOHN (72 of 107)
187.72 in reply to 187.70
By the way, when did you start studying the Message?

Shaun
Options Rate

187.73 in reply to 187.68
<<>>
Tell me a little bit about how you went about studying. What standard did you use, other than the message's
own interpretation of the Bible? This is an honest question.
Kris
Options Rate

187.74 in reply to 187.71
Where did you get that story, and how can you substantiate it? You are saying that a Cardinal in the Catholic
Church left it because he believed the message? I am not saying that it's not true, I would just like some
evidence.
Kris
Options Rate


187.75 in reply to 187.71
When I heard that story, about 10 years ago, it went like this:
A European message minister was in a crowd being addressed by a Vatican official. The official held up a
Spoken Word book before the crowd and said "this is our greatest enemy."
Options Rate

To: 8320JOHN (76 of 107)
187.76 in reply to 187.59
<<Sounds rather unlikely. Will you scan and post a letter from your grandmother to that effect? >>
""Unbelievers Anonymous"....hmmmm..I like the sound of it...You folks never give up wanting your so called
proof...but when it doesn't match what you want it to..you have to keep looking till you find what you want...
smile..
9:16
Options Rate

187.77 in reply to 187.73
I just used the Bible. I would read the Bible, and compare it to the Message. The revelation I got out of
reading matched right up with the Message. I don't trust anybody else's interpretation. I had discussions with
many other ministers from many different denominations, and other Christian religions, and I didn't see any
that came near what I had found in the Scriptures. I had silenced my uncle numerous times, who is a retired
Baptist missionary.
The way I study is by reading the Bible, and compare. I have found no contradictions. The difference is, I was
not raised up with any other religious background. I knew nothing of God, only what I would read in the
Bible. The settling factor on it all, though, was the fruit that the Message had born. When I say fruit, I am
talking about people that lived what they believed, not just claimed it. There was a manifestation of it.

Shaun

Options Rate

187.78 in reply to 187.74
He left the Catholic church because there was things he saw that he didn't agree with. It wasn't until after he
had left that he came in contact with a minister from Canada, ummm, Quebec I think it was. Anyways, it was
from that minister that I had heard the story. This ex-cardinal is now going around to many churches up in
Canada giving his testimony, as I had last heard. He has, however, accepted the Message.

Shaun
Options Rate

187.79 in reply to 187.75
I think that this is a different incident, and person.

Shaun
Options Rate

187.80 in reply to 187.79
Could be. Was it Bro. Ferguson who was telling this (he's the only one I know of in Quebec)? I wonder if he
has the story posted anywhere?
Options Rate


Subscribe
187.81 in reply to 187.80
I believe that his name was Brother Petit that told the story, I don't know who the pastor was, though.

Shaun
Options Rate

To: 8320JOHN (82 of 107)
187.82 in reply to 187.65
<<<<<BTW, Neanderthal Man is still very much a theory. Not only so, but the serpent is certainly not to be
equated with this theoretical character. >>>>>>>>
EXACTLY! In fact, I once did a study on some of these primitive findings, and most of them are bogus, in the
sense that someone built whole skulls from only a tiny fragment. In fact, even "Lucy" has since been
disproven to have been human, but no text book has changed it. The creationist scientists are doing much
research to separate the fact from the fiction.
Also, WMB describes the serpent as a beautiful creature - more good looking and enticing than Adam. No
scientist's depiction drawn from a fragment of bone ever looked good to me.
Sorry, but I do not buy that Eve would be attracted to an upright serpent, rather than a PERFECT MAN -
especially one that looked like the creatures on National Geographic.
Love,
Options Delete Rate


187.83 in reply to 187.69
Thank you for citing some sources. I was able to find some info through them that I did not come up in my
earlier research. During my search, I found the following statement:
The uterus is composed of three layers: (1) a mucus membrane, the endometrium (2) a muscle coat,
the myometrium, and (3) a serosa. The endometrium consists of a simple columnar epithelial lining,
from which numerous uterine glands extend.
http://lifesci.rutgers.edu/~babiarz/Frepro.htm
This is a part of the female reproduction system I was previously unaware of. I have also learned that one
form of uterine cancer is endometrial cancer. I have removed this issue from the list of discernment errors in
my opening post. Thanks for your input, Acolyte.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate

From: 8320JOHN 4/3/2003 3:47 pm

187.84 in reply to 187.71
Urban legend.
Message folks like to believe that book is that important, but the pope has far bigger fish to fry. When you
see it, or when you travel to Rome and have the cardinal open the chest for you and you see with with your
own eyes...get back to us. :)-
Options Rate
From: 8320JOHN 4/3/2003 3:58 pm

187.85 in reply to 187.72
>>By the way, when did you start studying the Message?<<
I first became aware of WMB in the 60's. I was involved in a study of healing evangelism, naturally the name
of WMB came to light.
WMB was a mid 20th century evangelist with a remarkable ability to discern, and that by an angel that stood
by his side he claimed. He had a method of detection, the swollen hand. He experienced visions, dreams,
predictions, discernments...all of which had a margin of error. He was not infallible. He did not experience
100% success in everything he said or did. He began to be a teacher/prophet after the demise of the revival
and experienced increasing rejection by the mainstream Pentecostal groups to which he was sent.
The turning point came after the revival subsided and all the evangelists were looking for new fields, ways to
stay alive and viable. Branham became a prophet to his following, asserting that he alone had the answer to
the seals, etc. But he either did not know or forgot that others before him taught the same thing. Thus, it was
not new revelation but existing teaching by such men as Larkin and Pink, both of which preceded him.
I do not see that WMB's doctrine is to be received as absolute. He contradicts the Apostle Paul and more
importantly the Lord.
Back to the Word...not back to the booklets.
Options Rate


To: 8320JOHN (86 of 107)
187.86 in reply to 187.84
As far as you are concerned, however, you are calling a man that stood behind the pulpit a liar. You should
watch what you say, my friend. As far as the cardinal goes, he is no longer associated with the catholic
church.

Shaun
Options Rate

To: 8320JOHN (87 of 107)
187.87 in reply to 187.85
If you say so, however, like I have said, you go on believing as you do, and I will go on as I do.

Shaun
Options Rate
From: 8320JOHN 4/3/2003 7:43 pm

187.88 in reply to 187.86
No, I am saying he did not see it, but got it second hand, When you see it...get back to us.
I knew a message preacher that told the same story but with a twist. In his version, the pope was blessings
the faithful out of the window of his residence at St. Peter's Square when he held up the church age book and
declared it the enemy of the RCC. Pure fantasy. Even if the pope was aware of the book or WMB, he would
never say such a thing owing to his stand on the ecumenical counsel. It's a hoax devised by a little group of
hopefuls that see that things did not turn out as planned, and now they have to fill the gap with stories of the
fantastic. They need to get back to the Word. Forget the campfire stories, the imaginations by a few fanatics
and major in Bible.
Options Rate

From: 8320JOHN 4/3/2003 7:45 pm

187.89 in reply to 187.87
That'll work.
Options Rate

To: 8320JOHN (90 of 107)
187.90 in reply to 187.88
The fact is, that as of last I heard, he was in Canada giving his testimony. ...shrug... That's all I know, that's
all I can say, though once again, your story is totally different.

Shaun
Options Rate
From: 8320JOHN 4/4/2003 6:12 am

187.91 in reply to 187.90
A "story" like this does undergo revision as it is told from person to person. Personally, I put ZERO confidence
in it. But I understand the message folks need to embrace such a fiction. The CA book is mild in its
condemnation of the RCC compared to some other works. The mainline Independent Fundamental Baptist
folks are even more vehement than WMB or the CA book in attacking RC.
I put it down to legend.
Options Rate


To: 8320JOHN (92 of 107)
187.92 in reply to 187.91
Well, as I said, you call the man that told it from behind the pulpit a liar.

Shaun
Options Rate
From: 8320JOHN 4/4/2003 8:04 am

187.93 in reply to 187.92
You're either hard headed or outright dull witted...!!
It is all second hand information. I don't doubt the man believes that, but I doubt the source...and I doubt
the pope cares one way or the other about the CA book. It's just not that inflammatory in the library of anti-
Catholic works. In fact, it's very mild compared to other works. Foxe's Book of the Martyrs is far more
accusatory than the CA book.
I know nothing of the man who spread the story nor do I care to search it out. If he believes it, and I am sure
he does, as did the man I heard the revised story from, so be it. I believe it to be an urban legend.
In fact, I doubt the pope has ever heard of WMB, and if he did he would not publically condemn him or the
book...and it certainly is not the greatest enemy of the RCC.
Options Rate


To: 8320JOHN (94 of 107)
187.94 in reply to 187.93
...chuckle... and you are thick-headed, possibly blind too, huh? You can't seem to read what I plainly say.
He is friends with the man. However, you believe as you wish. As I have told you, you have not heard that,
because that is a more recent event. Not something that happened years ago. Can you read well, John? Or
are you just overlooking what I say?

Shaun
Options Rate
From: 8320JOHN 4/4/2003 8:23 am

187.95 in reply to 187.94
Take a break.
Options Rate

To: 8320JOHN (96 of 107)
187.96 in reply to 187.93
Actually, I am surprised that the Pope didn't hold up a real Bible and say that that is the true enemy of the
Catholic Church. :)
Kris
Options Rate


187.97 in reply to 187.96
There you go, Kris, that's the truth!
Options Rate
From: 8320JOHN 4/4/2003 12:52 pm

187.98 in reply to 187.96
That I would believe. :)
Options Rate

To: 8320JOHN (99 of 107)
187.99 in reply to 187.93
I tend to doubt this, too, since the "message" group of believers is anything but large - and certainly not
large enough to be a significant threat to the Catholic Church. There were a lot of stories like this, told from
the pulpit in the message church I attended.
Love,
Options Delete Rate

From: nurse841 4/18/2003 4:02 pm

To: CajunBaby (Gsplgrl02) (100 of 107)
187.100 in reply to 187.55
Sister,
I agree 100% with you as you said we lived and breathed it(I did for 27 yrs.)
No matter how it is presented that's how they truley believe. I still know too many still in that I know
personally, that still believe that way.
Nurse
Options Rate
Keep Reading>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Navigate this discussion: 1-20 ...41-60 61-80 81-100 101-107
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Games


Subscribe
From: KENNAH (JohnK63) Jul-27 7:50 am
To: PaulSilas unread (101 of 107)
187.101 in reply to 187.1
In another thread, you made the following comment regarding what we have said at this one:
>>Obviously you don't know how the discernment worked.

In my eyes the fact that William Branhamw was able to correct himself ("I beg your pardon") is a much
greater evidence that the discerment was true (in the examples you picked) than it would be that it was
wrong.
In my eyes you have a lack of understanding how the discernment worked. That is why you see mistakes
where there are none.<<
What is there to know about how discernment works? In the Bible, prophets and apostles said only what
God told them to without ever having to correct themselves. The fact that WMB had to correct himself (not
once, but many times) should be a red flag of warning to anyone who is tempted to think he was hearing
from God in any sense that biblical prophets and apostles did when they practiced the so-called "gift
of discernment".
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate

From: heb138 Jul-29 11:04 pm

To: ALL (102 of 107)
187.102 in reply to 187.101
I glad that he was human and made mistakes.

I am also glad that he didnt tell falshoods as Abraham did.
I am also glad that he didnt have anybody Killed as David did in order to get a wife.
I am also glad that he lived a holy godly life.
If you were around during that time and you had a major illness...would you have gone to one of the
services?
The number of Healings...not by WMB...but by God using him...is well documented.
By the way...if people are following WMB..they missed the whole reason for the ministry.
If I were to go to any of your houses and look on your Computers in the History file...What would I find?
Internet Porn?
Worldly Trashy Movies in your collection perhaps?

Watching TV..which has nothing but lies and filth?
Do you still carry a Block Buster Movie Card?
This is why most people leave the Message of the Hour! They want to keep their Lustfull Worldly lifesyle.
Repent! and get Rapture Ready.
Thats what the Message of the Hour has done for me.
Options Rate
From: KENNAH (JohnK63) Jul-30 7:40 am

To: heb138 (103 of 107)
187.103 in reply to 187.102

>>The number of Healings...not by WMB...but by God using him...is well documented.<<
There are also many cases when he claimed that a person had been healed and they got worse and even died
in some instances (for example, see Controversial Prophecies - The Miracle of Donny Morton). I
believe God can and does heal people according to His sovereign will, but I don't think it is ever based on
their faith in Wm. Branham as a prophet as he frequently required of them. We don't see that everyone
who WMB pronounced as healed becoming completely restored as those in the Bible were by Jesus and the
apostles.
>>By the way...if people are following WMB..they missed the whole reason for the ministry.<<
In your opinion, what is the whole reason for his ministry?
>>If I were to go to any of your houses and look on your Computers in the History file...What would I find?
Internet Porn? Worldly Trashy Movies in your collection perhaps?
Watching TV..which has nothing but lies and filth?
Do you still carry a Block Buster Movie Card?<<
You could find a number of sects and cults which preach against all those things. Those who follow their lists
of do's and don'ts often look quite clean on the outside, but only God knows what's on the inside. As Jesus
said to the Pharisees, "You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside
are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean. In the same way, on the outside you appear to people
as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness" (Matthew 23:27-28).
The issue is not that one should clean up their lives according to the message of one who claimed to be a
prophet. The issue is that we repent of our sins, confess that Jesus Christ died and rose again, call on His
name and receive Him as our Savior in obedience to the Gospel of Christ. When we are born again, the Holy
Spirit takes up residence in us and continually sanctifies us from the inside out of our sinful desires. We are
never completely freed of our sinful ways while we live in our unredeemed bodies, but the Holy Spirit is the
one who sanctifies us and not our own efforts to live according to the artificial standards of
holiness prescribed by one who claims to be a prophet.
>>Repent! and get Rapture Ready. Thats what the Message of the Hour has done for me.<<
And what has the Gospel of Jesus Christ done for you, my friend?
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Edited 7/30/2004 8:44 am ET by KENNAH (JohnK63)
Options Rate
From: Jeena (jeena_el) Jul-30 10:29 am

To: heb138 (104 of 107)
187.104 in reply to 187.102
<<<This is why most people leave the Message of the Hour! They want to keep their Lustfull Worldly lifesyle.
>>>
This is simply NOT the TRUTH. This is a false accusation, and if you were being lead by the Holy Spirit, you
would not make such a false accusation.
Love,
Options Delete Rate

187.105 in reply to 187.104

Worldlyness has absolutely crept into the church and that includes some churches who claim to follow the
teachings of WMB. It is the Holy Spirit that is telling the People to get back in line.
The Internet Chat sites are destroying Marriages.

Internet Porn has crept in.
Trash movies and shows are being watched on TV.
People Piercing the body parts.
The list goes on.
By the way...none of the responses from Delphi has Flat out denied what I said....I appologize if it sounded
personal....I believe its a huge problem with the entire church world.
I can tell you that I dont have an issue with these things...but I am not perfect...
Those things are wrong and it doesnt matter what Church you belong to....they are still wrong!
Lord Bless,
BroMark
Options Rate

187.106 in reply to 187.104
Here is a quote.
"If we had more hell in the pulpit, we would have less hell in the pew."
Do you believe it?
I do. The Churchy People of these world need a cleansing and a good old fashioned alter call....with tears of
real repentence.
Lord Bless You Always,

BroMark
Options Rate


To: ALL (107 of 107)
187.107 in reply to 187.106
Since this is a discussion in a folder designated for Controversial Prophecies, I'd like to keep the discussion
on topic. Thank you.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate
Next Discussion>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Navigate this discussion: 1-20 ...61-80 81-100 101-107
Rate My Interest:

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - Source of Discernment:

Subscribe
Divine or Human? (14 views)
To: ALL (1 of 1)
1405.1
In another thread, NEWCLOTHES reveals an example of one of Wm. Branham's dubious claims of
discernment. He told that he once prayed for a young girl who was injured from a car accident so that she
could not speak or hear and was paralyzed on one side. The first time he tells of this incident, he says that
the girl was brought up to the platform by her mother and he simply prayed that the girl would get well (At
Kadesh-Barnea, May 27, 1956 [tape #56-0527]), which he said she did quite dramatically.
Nearly a month later, he described the same incident, saying that as the girl approached the platform,
a minister standing nearby by the name of Mr. Cash told him that the girl had been involved in an
auto accident which caused the injuries for which she wished to be prayed (The Law Having a Shadow,
June 21, 1956 [tape #56-0621]).
Finally, in a later sermon, Wm. Branham said that it was the Holy Spirit that revealed to him the nature of her
prayer need, not Mr. Cash (A Secondhanded Robe, December 6, 1956 [tape #56-1206]).
We don't know the actual details of what happened in regards to this young girl's healing because it wasn't
recorded on tape, but we do know that Wm. Branham clearly changed the story to make it sound as if he had
discerned her problem when earlier he said another minister actually told him what her problem was. How
many other times did Wm. Branham say he discerned something when his knowledge of events was really
obtained by purely natural means? Something to think about.
The following are the actual quotes which were referred to above:
Now, I... The... Last evening at Brother Junior Cash (I believe his name is), we were up there to
speak for him last evening and the Lord came down in a marvelous way.
And they brought a girl. The only thing that I see that could've been naturally, that you could have
seen with your eye, that was at the platform, was a colored girl from down in the lower part of
Indiana, below New Albany, or somewhere, had been in a accident and had severed the nerves in the
ear and the vocal, that she could not speak or hear. And a vein had been clamped off somewhere that
paralyzed her side. And the girl... Her mother, and her with the big braces trying to lead her up there,
just a young girl, lassie, and probably sixteen, something on that order.
And somehow or other, the Holy Spirit just seem to place Africa right in front of me. I looked at it.
And I have a vision wrote right here in the book, that the return to Africa will be far greater than the
first African meeting. And then, the people not knowing what was going on, that a vision taken place,
and I said, Heavenly Father..."
Not that we ask for miracles. The Bible said, "A weak and adulterous generation seeks after miracles."
And we don't seek after miracles, but God performs miracles. Right at the same time He said that, He
was performing miracles. But if we seek after them, have to have miracles, something to show of
some evidence that--that we're saved or something like that... I don't believe in evidences. I believe
the evidence that we're saved, we took God at His Word. That's the best thing I know, and then the
fruits follow.
Now, I asked Him if He would just grant it as a--as a sign that it was time to return back to Africa,
which our contacts are getting stronger all the time. And when we prayed for that girl, she could
speak and hear and move. It was just marvelous to see what our Lord could do. And so we're happy
tonight for that. And know that that lovely home, ever where it's at, is very happy tonight to see that
girl. How did it happen when the nerves were all cut off from it (See?), no way at all, nothing. It done
cut and clamped off, the nerve to the tongue or the--the vocal and to the hearing; which they're both
on the same nerve, but it was severed by the accident. But God in some way... How many was there,
heard the girl speak? Let's see in here. That's right. See? And she could speak and hear and talk. I'd
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Divine%20or%20Human1-20.html (1 of 3)4/1/2005 5:51:48 AM

talk like this... [Brother Branham speak softly--Ed.] I said, "Do you hear me?"
She said, "Yeah."
"Do you hear me?" Then I said, "Say, 'Mama.'"
She said, "Mama."
I said, "Say, 'Jesus.'"
She said, "Jesus," and go right ahead and talk.
A Kadesh-Barnea, May 27, 1956 (tape #56-0527)
And in going--seeing the time coming close when... I got a vision wrote in the back of my Bible we're
going to Africa. They brought this young Ethiopian girl. And as she was coming up, I noticed she was
swinging her leg. And she was kind of a--what we call kind of a slim, thin girl, about fifteen, real
skinny, well dressed little lady. But I noticed her working her mouth. It was up like that, and the tears
running down her cheeks. Well, I wondered what's the matter with that child. Well, when Mr. Cash
come to the platform, her mother was behind her; he said, "Brother Branham, the girl has a--a
severed nerve from an automobile accident, that bursted her something another, the nerve that--
from her hearing and speech. She'll never speak or hear again." And said, "It was a automobile
accident. It's," and said, "in doing so, it also done some other nerve that the doctor had to tie up
which makes her, with her leg like that; it's stiff in her side."
Well, I said, "That's sure too bad; poor kid. My heart goes out for her." And I said, "Bring her here
and let me pray for it."
So as she was coming I looked up over top of that girl's head; no visions had come; there was that
tall grass, little mounds of ant hills and things like typical of South Africa. The grass a waving, I could
hear wind blowing even. I knowed something had taken place. That left me; I didn't know what to
say. I stood there a few moments. I said, "Now, friends, I want to make this clear. I just saw come
before me a vision for Africa."
I said, "Perhaps maybe somebody's on their road here, or maybe He wants me to go over; it's time
for the vision to be fulfilled, which will be exceedingly greater than the other one was." And so then
as--I said, "Heavenly Father, we don't seek signs." How many knows what seeks after signs? "A weak
and adulternous generation." Is that right? We don't want to be classed like that.
But I said, "We're not, but yet You give signs. And I'm asking You to do it. I've prayed and wanted to
know what about going and so forth, when to go and so forth. But now, if this girl standing here and
that vision has broke, if You want me to be ready to prepare for Africa, will You give this little child,
poor little thing here, and a Christian... Although the doctor said the nerves was severed, it had to be
a work of creation, would You just give her back her perfect soundness? And that'll be a sign between
You and I, that I must make ready for Af ...[Message truncated]
View Full Message
Options Reply Rate
Next Discussion>>
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Divine%20or%20Human1-20.html (2 of 3)4/1/2005 5:51:48 AM

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - The Miracle of Donny

Subscribe
Morton (236 views)
To: ALL (1 of 67)
188.1
William Branham often told that he once prayed for a young boy by the name of Donny Morton who had a
terminal case of meningitis. He tells that the child was healed of the disease according to "thus saith the
Lord":
Here not long ago, you seen the article in the paper of that little Donny Morton being healed
out there in California. The "Reader's Digest" packed it, went in every language under
heaven, everywhere, about the miracle.
GOD.PERFECTING.HIS.CHURCH_ BINGHAMTON.NY SATURDAY_ 54-1204
And you seen it in Reader's Digest, not long ago, Donny Morton, The Miracle Of Donny
Morton. That little child right there in California, at the Assemblies of God, down there at that
school, Southwestern Bible School, that child was so twisted and afflicted till even John
Hopkins and Mayo Brothers said, 'There's not a earthly chance for him.' But the Lord...?...
THUS SAITH THE LORD. That was different.
HIS.UNFAILING.WORDS.OF.PROMISE_ PHOENIX.AZ V-15 N-3 MONDAY_ 64-0120
An article in the November 1952 issue of Readers Digest chronicled the story of Donny Morton and his
miracle. According to the article, Mr. Branham said to the child's parents, ". . . do not give up hope. With faith
in Gods power, and help from the medical world, your little son will live."
Donnys health began to improve dramatically, but within five months of this prediction, the boy died from a
combination of meningitis and pneumonia. The article describes the miracle somewhat differently than Mr.
Branham did:
The personal miracle Morton [Donnys father] sought - that his childs life be saved - was
denied. But out of his search for it came another miracle, because this Saskatchewan farmers
selfless and unquestioning pilgrimage across half a continent stirred the hearts of thousands.
I thought it was interesting to note that William Branham gives his erroneous testimony of the healing of
Donny Morton in at least 10 different sermons between 1953 and 1965. I decided to look at Owen
Jorgensen's biographical book, Supernatural: The Life of William Branham, to see how he treated Mr.
Branham's testimony of the miracle of Donny Morton. I was surprised to learn that he never mentioned the
incident of Donny Morton at all! Given the importance Mr. Branham placed on this "miracle," in a book as
comprehensive as Mr. Jorgensen's, I believe this omission is significant.
There are thousands of examples where God has miraculously healed people from incurable afflictions. Why
would a so-called prophet of the Lord see the need to testify of something that didn't happen, punctuating it
with "THUS SAITH THE LORD?"
John Kennah

Contact Me
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Donny%20Morton1-20.html (1 of 14)4/1/2005 5:54:15 AM

Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: watchman007 3/27/2002 1:06 pm

188.2 in reply to 188.1
I have knowed of many men that has been put under a oxygen tent, and given penicillin, and so forth by the
doctor, and completely healed with say, pneumonia. And the person left the hospital completely well with
pneumonia and a week later die with pneumonia. He just taken pneumonia again; that's all. But he was
healed.
And then when the late honorable brother, Jack Coe, had his trial, when a certain denominational church has
took sides with a infidel to fight against Brother Coe down in--in Florida at his trial. And then the judge,
willingly to show justice, and yet the church men (as the paper gave) had turned against Brother Coe and had
joined up with Joe Lewis, the free thinker, infidel, and calling themselves a notable church. But just because
they were so against Christ and against healing... But shows how it comes out all right.
The judge said, "Mr. Coe, do you still claim that this child was healed?"
He said, "I claim Christ healed the child."
And he said, "He took his braces off on one side of the platform in the presence of Mr. Coe, walked across the
platform and fell at his mother--crippled." And he said, "Could you show me any place... If there's any one
here can show me any place in the Bible that Christ ever did a trick like that, I'll be willing to forfeit the case."
And Reverend Gordon Lindsay (one of your Oregon boys here) raised up and said, "I can produce the case."
And Mr. Lindsay gave him the case. He said, "One night Jesus came walking on the water." And he said,
"Peter screamed from the boat, and the rest of them said, 'If Thou be the Christ--the Lord--bid me to come to
You on water.' And Peter stepped down out of the boat and started walking towards Jesus, normally, on the
water. But when he got scared, he sank."
That settled it; certainly. You can be healed one minute and sick the next. See? It depends on how long your
faith holds out. And faith is all what... Divine healing and salvation is nothing that we as individuals can do.
It's already a finished work, that Christ did at Calvary; it's our faith in that finished work.
QUEEN.OF.SHEBA_ KLAMATH.FALLS.OR SUNDAY_ 60-0710 http://www.branham.org/Message%20Infobase.
htm
Options Reply Rate


To: watchman007 (3 of 67)
188.3 in reply to 188.2
That may be, but Donny Moron was never healed from his meningitis. Mr. Branham implied that he
actually recovered.
Gordon Lindsay's example of Peter's faith has one flaw: it didn't speak to someone's healing. Jesus didn't
give Peter the gift of walking on water. He simply told Peter, "come." Peter did, but just like all of us at
times, he had a serious lapse of faith which caused him to sink. Healing is something different altogether.
There are no examples in the Bible where anyone ever lost their healing because of a lapse in faith. In fact,
Romans 11:29 says that God's gifts and his call are irrevocable. Gordon Lindsay's defense is nothing but a
sad excuse for Mr. Coe's deficient "prayer of faith." The argument that one's lack of faith will cause someone
to lose their healing, or cause someone to stay in a permanent state of infirmity, has proven to be a cruel
rebuke by many uncompassionate Christians towards those who are ill through no fault of their
own. Such retorts remind us of some of the less than exemplary characteristics of Job's accusers. What do
you suppose Mr. Lindsay would have said to Paul during his trial with the thorn in his flesh?
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.4 in reply to 188.3

The argument that one's lack of faith will cause someone to lose their healing:
MATTHEW 12:43
When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none.
Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth [it]
empty, swept, and garnished.
Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and
dwell there: and the last [state] of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked
generation.
or cause someone to stay in a permanent state of infirmity, has proven to be a cruel rebuke:
MARK 9:22
And ofttimes it hath cast him into the fire, and into the waters, to destroy him: but if thou canst do any thing,
have compassion on us, and help us.
Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things [are] possible to him that believeth.
Options Reply Rate

188.5 in reply to 188.4
I appreciate your reference to the Bible for your position. I would submit that these passages have to do with
demon possession, not physical healing. There is no scriptural precedence for one losing their healing for a
lack of faith or any other reason. However, if one is freed from a demonic spirit and does not turn to the Lord
after it is gone, there is nothing to prevent that demon from coming back and bringing more with it.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


188.6 in reply to 188.5
I think the term "losing healing" is loosely thrown around.

What I take it to mean, is that either the healing process is interupted [and/or worsens]; or the same
condition sets in again, simply because the same conditions are extent.
Options Reply Rate

188.7 in reply to 188.6
In any case, there is no scriptural support for it. As a matter of fact, I believe the Bible actually contradicts
such a belief in Romans 11:29, " . . . God's gifts and his call are irrevocable." One may become sick again
after being healed since our bodies are still subject to this world's diseases. But incidents such as Donny
Morton's situation are entirely foreign to the Bible.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


188.8 in reply to 188.7
It doesn't take much knowledge to know that healing (as opposed to miracles) can take time to be
implemented.
No one said he "lost his healing."
Rather that his condition improved (implying a partial completion of the healing process) followed by
whatever lack of faith etc. (remember that was the condition of the Thus Saith The Lord prophecy?) causing
the lads condition to go into recession.
In other words, the TB that remained, took back over once again and regained a hold.
Simple!
Options Reply Rate

188.9 in reply to 188.8
>>No one said he "lost his healing."<<
Maybe not, but Mr. Branham made the clear and obvious implication that Donny Morton was completely
healed according to "thus saith the Lord."
>>Rather that his condition improved (implying a partial completion of the healing process) followed by
the lads condition to go into recession.<<
Mr. Branham did not give the condition of unwavering faith for Donny's healing. His statement was, "With
faith in God's power, and help from the medical world . . . " The Morton's clearly had faith in God's power, or
else they wouldn't have contacted Mr. Branham in the first place. I don't know of a single example in the
Bible where anyone ever received partial healing, but before their healing was complete, suffered a complete
relapse. It just isn't God's way. It is obvious that William Branham misspoke when he made this prediction
to Donny's parents. It is equally obvious that Mr. Branham misled his followers by implying that Donny
Morton was healed according to "thus saith the Lord." Surely, these are not the characteristics of a true
prophet in the biblical sense.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Reply Rate

188.10 in reply to 188.9
My question would be, before death, was the child saved? If so, then he never did die, just went to sleep, and
therefore the boys life would be spared. He lived five months longer than he was supposed to, from what I
gathered. Fact is, he got better, and then passed on. Big deal, what's your point? God decided to take him
after he got better, thats what I see.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

188.11 in reply to 188.10
>>My question would be, before death, was the child saved? If so, then he never did die, just went to sleep,
and therefore the boys life would be spared.<>Fact is, he got better, and then passed on. Big deal, what's your point? God decided to take him after he
got better, thats what I see.<<
Donny Morton's health may have improved, but he never recovered from the disease as Wm. Branham led
everyone to believe. He died within five months of Mr. Branham's thus-saith-the-Lord prophecy.
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.12 in reply to 188.11
As I said, five months more is more than he had when Brother Branham went. Your argument is weak. An
example of someone losing healing is what happened with I think it was Jack Coe. He had prayed for a boy,
they took off the braces, and he walked across the stage, and the collapsed again. You know the story.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


188.13 in reply to 188.12
1. How could Donny Morton, who was never healed, lose his healing?
2. Where is it written in the Bible that someone, after being healed by the Lord, can loose
their healing?
3. Can you cite a biblical example of anyone who lost their healing after the Lord healed
them?
4. What does Romans 11:29 say to you?: "... for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable."
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.14 in reply to 188.12
>>An example of someone losing healing is what happened with I think it was Jack Coe. He had prayed for a
boy, they took off the braces, and he walked across the stage, and the collapsed again. You know the story.
<<
I don't see anything in that story that indicates the little boy was healed.
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.15 in reply to 188.13
...chuckle... Peter was told to come out on the water, and when he did, he walked a ways, and then he went
under when he got to looking around. I'm sure that has already been quoted to you. Did not Jesus tell him to
come out on the water to him? Did he sink? Or did he walk a ways, and then sink?
"What does Romans 11:29 say to you?: "... for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable.""
That's Amplified, right? (I have one of those.) KJV says this.. "For the gifts and calling of God are without
repentence." However, what are gifts? Read up on the Spiritual gifts. A gift isn't healing. You quoted that
verse out of context. I Corinthians 12 tells you of the spiritual gifts. Healing is a promise, not a gift. It says
that by His stripes, we are healed. That is nowhere near a gift.
As far as for his death, and that he was not healed, post your sources, I have searched for some time, and
have yet to find a thing with any evidence. I have seen the claim, no evidence.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


188.16 in reply to 188.14
Whatever. A boy that couldn't walk, walks, and then loses it, and you don't see where he was healed?

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

188.17 in reply to 188.15
>>Peter was told to come out on the water, and when he did, he walked a ways, and then he went under
when he got to looking around.<<
That is not an example of healing.
>>That's Amplified, right? (I have one of those.)<<
It's the NIV. I quoted the NIV because it is a modern translation. Mr. Branham had a propensity to badly
misinterpret the KJV because he didn't understand the vocabulary & rules of grammar of Middle
Age English (see, Scripture Misinterpretations; Romans 11:29).
>>A gift isn't healing. You quoted that verse out of context. <<
Oh? If you read the passage in context, I think its plain that you are the one who took it out of context by
saying it only refers to "spiritual gifts." The text doesn't say that. In context, its saying that God's gifts and
callings are irrevocable, period. How can you say that a person's healing is not a gift, especially in light of
Peter's statement, "Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name
of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk" (Acts 3:6)?
BTW, your quoting of Isaiah 53:5 was misapplied. This verse applies to spiritual healing, not physical (cf., I
Peter 2:24).
>>As far as for his death, and that he was not healed, post your sources, I have searched for some time, and
have yet to find a thing with any evidence. I have seen the claim, no evidence. <<

I cited my source in my opening post (post #1 of this thread).
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.18 in reply to 188.16
Who said he couldn't walk? I've seen plenty of examples where people who are confined to a wheelchair
have the ability to walk for a short way. I'm sure this is also the case for those in leg braces.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


188.19 in reply to 188.17
So says you.
29 - For God's gifts and His call are irrevocable. [He never withdraws them when once they are given, and He
does not change His mind about those to whom He gives His grace or to whom He sends His call.]
I don't cling to a modern translation, I have an NIV, I don't really use it, I have an Amplified, I trust it more
than an NIV, though I don't trust it over my KJV.
What is a gift? What is a promise?

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

188.20 in reply to 188.17
No, you have quotes, I want the sources. I want to read where it is written, not where you have posted it.

Shaun


Subscribe
Morton (236 views)
To: ALL (1 of 67)
188.1
William Branham often told that he once prayed for a young boy by the name of Donny Morton who had a
terminal case of meningitis. He tells that the child was healed of the disease according to "thus saith the
Lord":
Here not long ago, you seen the article in the paper of that little Donny Morton being healed
out there in California. The "Reader's Digest" packed it, went in every language under
heaven, everywhere, about the miracle.
GOD.PERFECTING.HIS.CHURCH_ BINGHAMTON.NY SATURDAY_ 54-1204
And you seen it in Reader's Digest, not long ago, Donny Morton, The Miracle Of Donny
Morton. That little child right there in California, at the Assemblies of God, down there at that
school, Southwestern Bible School, that child was so twisted and afflicted till even John
Hopkins and Mayo Brothers said, 'There's not a earthly chance for him.' But the Lord...?...
THUS SAITH THE LORD. That was different.
HIS.UNFAILING.WORDS.OF.PROMISE_ PHOENIX.AZ V-15 N-3 MONDAY_ 64-0120
An article in the November 1952 issue of Readers Digest chronicled the story of Donny Morton and his
miracle. According to the article, Mr. Branham said to the child's parents, ". . . do not give up hope. With faith
in Gods power, and help from the medical world, your little son will live."
Donnys health began to improve dramatically, but within five months of this prediction, the boy died from a
combination of meningitis and pneumonia. The article describes the miracle somewhat differently than Mr.
Branham did:
The personal miracle Morton [Donnys father] sought - that his childs life be saved - was
denied. But out of his search for it came another miracle, because this Saskatchewan farmers
selfless and unquestioning pilgrimage across half a continent stirred the hearts of thousands.
I thought it was interesting to note that William Branham gives his erroneous testimony of the healing of
Donny Morton in at least 10 different sermons between 1953 and 1965. I decided to look at Owen
Jorgensen's biographical book, Supernatural: The Life of William Branham, to see how he treated Mr.
Branham's testimony of the miracle of Donny Morton. I was surprised to learn that he never mentioned the
incident of Donny Morton at all! Given the importance Mr. Branham placed on this "miracle," in a book as
comprehensive as Mr. Jorgensen's, I believe this omission is significant.
There are thousands of examples where God has miraculously healed people from incurable afflictions. Why
would a so-called prophet of the Lord see the need to testify of something that didn't happen, punctuating it
with "THUS SAITH THE LORD?"
John Kennah

Contact Me

Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.2 in reply to 188.1
I have knowed of many men that has been put under a oxygen tent, and given penicillin, and so forth by the
doctor, and completely healed with say, pneumonia. And the person left the hospital completely well with
pneumonia and a week later die with pneumonia. He just taken pneumonia again; that's all. But he was
healed.
And then when the late honorable brother, Jack Coe, had his trial, when a certain denominational church has
took sides with a infidel to fight against Brother Coe down in--in Florida at his trial. And then the judge,
willingly to show justice, and yet the church men (as the paper gave) had turned against Brother Coe and had
joined up with Joe Lewis, the free thinker, infidel, and calling themselves a notable church. But just because
they were so against Christ and against healing... But shows how it comes out all right.
The judge said, "Mr. Coe, do you still claim that this child was healed?"
He said, "I claim Christ healed the child."
And he said, "He took his braces off on one side of the platform in the presence of Mr. Coe, walked across the
platform and fell at his mother--crippled." And he said, "Could you show me any place... If there's any one
here can show me any place in the Bible that Christ ever did a trick like that, I'll be willing to forfeit the case."
And Reverend Gordon Lindsay (one of your Oregon boys here) raised up and said, "I can produce the case."
And Mr. Lindsay gave him the case. He said, "One night Jesus came walking on the water." And he said,
"Peter screamed from the boat, and the rest of them said, 'If Thou be the Christ--the Lord--bid me to come to
You on water.' And Peter stepped down out of the boat and started walking towards Jesus, normally, on the
water. But when he got scared, he sank."
That settled it; certainly. You can be healed one minute and sick the next. See? It depends on how long your
faith holds out. And faith is all what... Divine healing and salvation is nothing that we as individuals can do.
It's already a finished work, that Christ did at Calvary; it's our faith in that finished work.
QUEEN.OF.SHEBA_ KLAMATH.FALLS.OR SUNDAY_ 60-0710 http://www.branham.org/Message%20Infobase.
htm
Options Reply Rate


To: watchman007 (3 of 67)
188.3 in reply to 188.2
That may be, but Donny Moron was never healed from his meningitis. Mr. Branham implied that he
actually recovered.
Gordon Lindsay's example of Peter's faith has one flaw: it didn't speak to someone's healing. Jesus didn't
give Peter the gift of walking on water. He simply told Peter, "come." Peter did, but just like all of us at
times, he had a serious lapse of faith which caused him to sink. Healing is something different altogether.
There are no examples in the Bible where anyone ever lost their healing because of a lapse in faith. In fact,
Romans 11:29 says that God's gifts and his call are irrevocable. Gordon Lindsay's defense is nothing but a
sad excuse for Mr. Coe's deficient "prayer of faith." The argument that one's lack of faith will cause someone
to lose their healing, or cause someone to stay in a permanent state of infirmity, has proven to be a cruel
rebuke by many uncompassionate Christians towards those who are ill through no fault of their
own. Such retorts remind us of some of the less than exemplary characteristics of Job's accusers. What do
you suppose Mr. Lindsay would have said to Paul during his trial with the thorn in his flesh?
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.4 in reply to 188.3

The argument that one's lack of faith will cause someone to lose their healing:
MATTHEW 12:43
When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none.
Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth [it]
empty, swept, and garnished.
Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and
dwell there: and the last [state] of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked
generation.
or cause someone to stay in a permanent state of infirmity, has proven to be a cruel rebuke:
MARK 9:22
And ofttimes it hath cast him into the fire, and into the waters, to destroy him: but if thou canst do any thing,
have compassion on us, and help us.
Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things [are] possible to him that believeth.
Options Reply Rate

188.5 in reply to 188.4
I appreciate your reference to the Bible for your position. I would submit that these passages have to do with
demon possession, not physical healing. There is no scriptural precedence for one losing their healing for a
lack of faith or any other reason. However, if one is freed from a demonic spirit and does not turn to the Lord
after it is gone, there is nothing to prevent that demon from coming back and bringing more with it.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


188.6 in reply to 188.5
I think the term "losing healing" is loosely thrown around.

What I take it to mean, is that either the healing process is interupted [and/or worsens]; or the same
condition sets in again, simply because the same conditions are extent.
Options Reply Rate

188.7 in reply to 188.6
In any case, there is no scriptural support for it. As a matter of fact, I believe the Bible actually contradicts
such a belief in Romans 11:29, " . . . God's gifts and his call are irrevocable." One may become sick again
after being healed since our bodies are still subject to this world's diseases. But incidents such as Donny
Morton's situation are entirely foreign to the Bible.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


188.8 in reply to 188.7
It doesn't take much knowledge to know that healing (as opposed to miracles) can take time to be
implemented.
No one said he "lost his healing."
Rather that his condition improved (implying a partial completion of the healing process) followed by
the lads condition to go into recession.
In other words, the TB that remained, took back over once again and regained a hold.
Simple!
Options Reply Rate

188.9 in reply to 188.8
>>No one said he "lost his healing."<<
Maybe not, but Mr. Branham made the clear and obvious implication that Donny Morton was completely
healed according to "thus saith the Lord."
>>Rather that his condition improved (implying a partial completion of the healing process) followed by
the lads condition to go into recession.<<
Mr. Branham did not give the condition of unwavering faith for Donny's healing. His statement was, "With
faith in God's power, and help from the medical world . . . " The Morton's clearly had faith in God's power, or
else they wouldn't have contacted Mr. Branham in the first place. I don't know of a single example in the
Bible where anyone ever received partial healing, but before their healing was complete, suffered a complete
relapse. It just isn't God's way. It is obvious that William Branham misspoke when he made this prediction
to Donny's parents. It is equally obvious that Mr. Branham misled his followers by implying that Donny
Morton was healed according to "thus saith the Lord." Surely, these are not the characteristics of a true
prophet in the biblical sense.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Reply Rate

188.10 in reply to 188.9
My question would be, before death, was the child saved? If so, then he never did die, just went to sleep, and
therefore the boys life would be spared. He lived five months longer than he was supposed to, from what I
gathered. Fact is, he got better, and then passed on. Big deal, what's your point? God decided to take him
after he got better, thats what I see.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

188.11 in reply to 188.10
>>My question would be, before death, was the child saved? If so, then he never did die, just went to sleep,
and therefore the boys life would be spared.<>Fact is, he got better, and then passed on. Big deal, what's your point? God decided to take him after he
got better, thats what I see.<<
Donny Morton's health may have improved, but he never recovered from the disease as Wm. Branham led
everyone to believe. He died within five months of Mr. Branham's thus-saith-the-Lord prophecy.
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.12 in reply to 188.11
As I said, five months more is more than he had when Brother Branham went. Your argument is weak. An
example of someone losing healing is what happened with I think it was Jack Coe. He had prayed for a boy,
they took off the braces, and he walked across the stage, and the collapsed again. You know the story.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


188.13 in reply to 188.12
1. How could Donny Morton, who was never healed, lose his healing?
2. Where is it written in the Bible that someone, after being healed by the Lord, can loose
their healing?
3. Can you cite a biblical example of anyone who lost their healing after the Lord healed
them?
4. What does Romans 11:29 say to you?: "... for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable."
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.14 in reply to 188.12
>>An example of someone losing healing is what happened with I think it was Jack Coe. He had prayed for a
boy, they took off the braces, and he walked across the stage, and the collapsed again. You know the story.
<<
I don't see anything in that story that indicates the little boy was healed.
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.15 in reply to 188.13
...chuckle... Peter was told to come out on the water, and when he did, he walked a ways, and then he went
under when he got to looking around. I'm sure that has already been quoted to you. Did not Jesus tell him to
come out on the water to him? Did he sink? Or did he walk a ways, and then sink?
"What does Romans 11:29 say to you?: "... for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable.""
That's Amplified, right? (I have one of those.) KJV says this.. "For the gifts and calling of God are without
repentence." However, what are gifts? Read up on the Spiritual gifts. A gift isn't healing. You quoted that
verse out of context. I Corinthians 12 tells you of the spiritual gifts. Healing is a promise, not a gift. It says
that by His stripes, we are healed. That is nowhere near a gift.
As far as for his death, and that he was not healed, post your sources, I have searched for some time, and
have yet to find a thing with any evidence. I have seen the claim, no evidence.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


188.16 in reply to 188.14
Whatever. A boy that couldn't walk, walks, and then loses it, and you don't see where he was healed?

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

188.17 in reply to 188.15
>>Peter was told to come out on the water, and when he did, he walked a ways, and then he went under
when he got to looking around.<<
That is not an example of healing.
>>That's Amplified, right? (I have one of those.)<<
It's the NIV. I quoted the NIV because it is a modern translation. Mr. Branham had a propensity to badly
misinterpret the KJV because he didn't understand the vocabulary & rules of grammar of Middle
Age English (see, Scripture Misinterpretations; Romans 11:29).
>>A gift isn't healing. You quoted that verse out of context. <<
Oh? If you read the passage in context, I think its plain that you are the one who took it out of context by
saying it only refers to "spiritual gifts." The text doesn't say that. In context, its saying that God's gifts and
callings are irrevocable, period. How can you say that a person's healing is not a gift, especially in light of
Peter's statement, "Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name
of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk" (Acts 3:6)?
BTW, your quoting of Isaiah 53:5 was misapplied. This verse applies to spiritual healing, not physical (cf., I
Peter 2:24).
>>As far as for his death, and that he was not healed, post your sources, I have searched for some time, and
have yet to find a thing with any evidence. I have seen the claim, no evidence. <<

I cited my source in my opening post (post #1 of this thread).
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.18 in reply to 188.16
Who said he couldn't walk? I've seen plenty of examples where people who are confined to a wheelchair
have the ability to walk for a short way. I'm sure this is also the case for those in leg braces.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


188.19 in reply to 188.17
So says you.
29 - For God's gifts and His call are irrevocable. [He never withdraws them when once they are given, and He
does not change His mind about those to whom He gives His grace or to whom He sends His call.]
I don't cling to a modern translation, I have an NIV, I don't really use it, I have an Amplified, I trust it more
than an NIV, though I don't trust it over my KJV.
What is a gift? What is a promise?

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

188.20 in reply to 188.17
No, you have quotes, I want the sources. I want to read where it is written, not where you have posted it.

Shaun


Subscribe
Morton (237 views)
188.21 in reply to 188.19
>>I don't cling to a modern translation, I have an NIV, I don't really use it, I have an Amplified, I trust it
more than an NIV, though I don't trust it over my KJV.
What is a gift? What is a promise? <<
Since you're unwilling or unable to discuss the Bible in modern English, what good would it do for me to
define a gift or promise to you? It seems your mind is made up in that you've chosen to rely on your poor
understanding of the King James English for biblical doctrine rather than to understand what the Bible really
says.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


188.22 in reply to 188.21
...laughing... You saying that I don't know how to read the Old English? Or maybe that I cannot understand
the Hebrew, and the Greek? I don't think I have any problems with any of them. For one, my wife speaks
some Hebrew, having been raised Jewish. However, you, on the other hand, can't take Scriptures at face
value.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

188.23 in reply to 188.22
It's obvious that you don't know enough Old English to properly understand many passages in the Bible.
Let me demonstrate. Without the use of any other resources, please explain to me in modern English what
the following passage from the KJV means:
A continual dropping in a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike.
Whosoever hideth her hideth the wind, and the ointment of his right hand, [which] bewrayeth [itself].
Proverbs 27:15-16
If you can't, I would suggest it's because the KJV is written in a very old language where the vocabulary and
rules of grammar are often quite different than modern English. That being the case, how do you determine
whether your understanding of any passage in the KJV is accurate?
My point is, Mr. Branham predicted that Donny Morton would survive his illness. He did not. Rather than
recognizing that Mr. Branham made a false prophecy, you justify his error by misinterpreting a passage in the
KJV that contradicts Mr. Branham's view that one can lose their healing (Romans 11:29) in order to give him
a pass.
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.24 in reply to 188.20
It's there, but I'll repeat it here. My source is the same one Wm. Branham used, the November 1952 issue of
Readers Digest. This issue is volume #61, and the story is condensed from "Chatelaine", by Alma Edwards
Smith. Reader's Digest will send you a copy of the article if you request one.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


188.25 in reply to 188.23
You miss my point, if he was saved, he DID survive..
Your verse is simple, it's talking about how rain and a contentious woman are alike, and trying to stop the
contentious woman is like trying to stop the rain, and that "ointment", or oil, will cause her to slip through his
fingers. Was that so hard?

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

188.26 in reply to 188.16
Shaun, I like you, but this feels like an alternate universe: Healing is a temporary condition that comes and
goes. If a vision or prophecy is not fulfilled it must just mean something else. It doesnt matter if the prophet
doesnt know what the meaning is, well know it when it happens if we are spiritual enough. Using that kind of
criteria, any prophecy ever made by anyone is the absolute truth.
The healings I have witnessed were permanent ones. I am sure that several occurred in WMBs meetings as
well. Why must we make excuses for failed healings? That is as bad as denying the real ones. Dont you
believe God is real and can really heal?
Options Reply Rate


188.27 in reply to 188.26
My friend,
I truly believe that He can heal. Though, I don't believe they it is always a permanent one. See, my
grandmother had cancer, and I don't know why I didn't think of this sooner, however, she was supposed to
die a few different times because of it. However, she would recover each time, until the last. I say she was
healed each time, even though it was only going into remission. Some just had died, but, a couple other
times it was just remission. Anyways, she died... did she lose the healing? Sort of, because she still did die
because of it. She would get better, and then back down again. Her health would drasticly improve, though it
would fall off at a certain point, and they would find more cancer.
I can get a cold, and get healed of it, and then come down with it again. Was the healing permanent?

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

188.28 in reply to 188.27
Well, I think the cold is a little different than the cancer. I can be healed of a cold, and a month later get the
flu or another cold. Separate illnesses.
I have known of several Christians who claimed healing from cancer only to die of it. Remissions are common
even among persons who do not believe in healing, and a positive attitude would certainly contribute to a
remission. .
One fine Christian family I know refused to believe that God would allow their mother to die of cancer (there
used to be a feeling among Pentecostals in general that cancer was a demon and God would not allow a real
Christian to die of it). So when she died, they said it was heart failure. Sure, her heart stopped and then she
died, but the cancer never left her. So I think that is a case of denial, as are most reports of temporary or lost
healings.
My Methodist grandmother was healed of a large tumor while praying alone in her room. It was very large,
visible as a lump on the outside even under clothing. It went down instantly, never returned, and she lived to
a ripe old age. That is what healing is.

Options Reply Rate

188.29 in reply to 188.28
God is good. My mother in law was predicted to die of cancer about 3 years ago. When originally diagnosed,
she had stage 4 cancer in her breasts that had spread to her bone marrow and about everywhere else. They
gave her 6 months to 1 year, if that. I love how they underestimate the power of God. Anyway, how this
relates to the healing issue...I think I agree with you. God could completely heal her of cancer, in which case
it would be completely and totally gone. He chose not to heal her, I believe, because she has been an
outstanding witness to others with cancer, having the opportunity to share her faith. I am sure there are
other reasons, too. The point is that God did not heal her of her cancer. If he had, she would not still have it.
He did help it to go into remission despite the dire predictions of the doctors. Is it healing? No. She still has
cancer. But it is through God's power that she continues to live.
If someone prayed for her and pronounced her healed, but she still had the cancer, even though she went
into remission, that person would be incorrect.
Kris
Options Reply Rate

188.30 in reply to 188.29
Exactly. And praise the Lord for your grandmother's witness. Sometimes God's answer is no, but a Christian
learns patience and faith through each trial.
I don't blame anyone for trying to keep faith, but I recently watched a loved one refuse medical care and die
out of a dogmatic (perhaps even arrogant?) "claiming" of healing. This person believed that they had met
God's conditions; lived the life, walked the walk; therefore, God was duty bound to answer their prayer or say
why not.
Options Reply Rate


188.31 in reply to 188.25
>>You miss my point, if he was saved, he DID survive.. <<
When speaking to Donny's father, Wm. Branham said, "With faith in Gods power, and help from the medical
world, your little son will live." Since when did "help from the medical world" become a requirement for
salvation?
>>Your verse is simple, it's talking about how rain and a contentious woman are alike, and trying to stop the
contentious woman is like trying to stop the rain, and that "ointment", or oil, will cause her to slip through his
fingers. Was that so hard?<<
Did you really come up with this without looking up any other sources? How did you get "oil" from
"ointment"? Anyway, you were close, but you missed part of the meaning. You got v. 15 alright, but it
sounds as if you derived the meaning of v. 16 not from the text of that verse itself, but from what you
deduced after reading v. 15.
Here is a modern, literal word-for-word translaton of this passage:
Drops that never cease on a rainy day, and a contentious woman are alike;
he who hides her hides the wind, and the ointment of his right hand cries out.
The KJV is based on a word-for-word translation of the original language into Old English. It attempts to
translate as many words as possible from the original language into Old English. A word-for-word translation,
as you can tell from even a modern version, does not always offer the clearest meaning of a passage.
The following is a translation from a good thought-for-thought translation, which tanslates the intended
thoughts or meaning of a passage rather than a literal word-for-word translation. It's from the New Living
Translation (NLT):
A nagging wife is as annoying as the constant dripping on a rainy day. Trying to stop her complaints
is like trying to stop the wind or hold something with greased hands.
For this passage, I prefer the NLT over my favorite translation, the NIV, which is kind of a mixture of the KJV
and the NLT.
Wm. Branham demonstrated an obvious problem inherent with the KJV in his interpretation of Romans 11:29,
which I have already referred to in this thread. Mr. Branham's teachings may not have been so far off
doctrinally if he had chosen to study more outside his self-imposed boundaries of the Old King James
Version of the Bible. His followers find themselves in a less severe, yet similar situation as the commoners
during Luther's day when nobody was allowed to read anything but the Latin Bible.
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.32 in reply to 188.31
Ointment, if you know what it is, it is easy to come up with oil. I checked, after I had posted, my Amplified, I
was correct. Anyways, like I said, it was simple. Besides, your body naturally produces oils, making hands
slippery. I took for granted that you would know what contentious was, and so I left the word, I didn't see no
reason to provide another.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


188.33 in reply to 188.26
You make a good point, NC. We may claim our healing, but it doesn't always mean we will be healed. We
may become healed, and ascribe the healing to the miraculous power of God when it may be due to God's
provided natural means and not necessarily by a miracle. There is no guarantee that we will always be free
from an ailment which is seemingly cured naturally.
A true miraculous healing in the Bible was always pronounced as such by Jesus and His disciples. There is no
evidence whatsoever that one who received their healing in that manner ever lost it for any reason. Under
Wm. Branham's ministry, many did lose their healing (if they even received it at all) after being pronounced
by Mr. Branham as being healed by the Lord.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.34 in reply to 188.31

"When speaking to Donny's father, Wm. Branham said, "With faith in Gods power, and help from the medical
world, your little son will live.""
"Give a cow enough rope, it will hang itself." You just did, my friend. Key statement in this, "With faith in
God's power...." Someone's faith wasn't right.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

188.35 in reply to 188.34
Wm. Branham said, "With faith in Gods power, and help from the medical world, your little son will
live." This obviously indicates that Mr. Branham was referring to Donny's physical healing, not salvation.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


188.36 in reply to 188.35
As I said, you hung yourself on that, his PHYSICAL healing. You say he wasn't, Brother Branham said that
with faith, the boy would recover. See, you missed that, I guess. Have fun trying to make something else out
of nothing.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

188.37 in reply to 188.36
<<<As I said, you hung yourself on that, his PHYSICAL healing. You say he wasn't, Brother Branham said
that with faith, the boy would recover. See, you missed that, I guess. Have fun trying to make something
else out of nothing.>>> I guess I missed something as well. You said in a previous post that Branham must
have been referring to salvation, or spiritual healing. Now you are waffling back to physical healing since John
proved the other route unworkable. Now you used the old "he was healed but his faith weakened" so he lost
his healing argument. Well, which is it? Was it physical or spiritual? Obviously it was physical. Now we get
back to John's original argument that nowhere in the Bible did a person lose their healing that Jesus or his
disciples had pronounced.
Healed is healed. There is no dependent or halfway healing.
Kris
Options Reply Rate


188.38 in reply to 188.31
<<<Mr. Branham's teachings may not have been so far off doctrinally if he had chosen to study more outside
his self-imposed boundaries of the Old King James Version of the Bible.>>>
And unfortunately, the study materials he did use were things like the Watchtower's Greek Diaglott,
which is chock full of greek errors. This is not surprising, since the translators of the New World
Translation, using their own Greek Diaglott, were not even bonafide Greek scholars.
I do have to say one thing to say in defense of the King James version of the Bible: I find
memorization of scripture MUCH easier with the King James version. There have been studies in
which have determined it is the literary prose of King James English which makes this a factor. Also,
most of the reliable exhaustive concordances and reliable Greek Lexicons are based on the King
James version, so it makes it much easier to find Greek word meanings and can contribute to ease of
serious study into the original manuscript word meanings. Since I took Greek in school, I still find it
easier to study the Bible with the King James version, even though I often compare the texts between
other versions. If someone does not know how to use an exhaustive concordance, or has not taken
Greek and cannot read a Greek manuscript or use a Greek Lexicon, the newer versions you refer to
are quite helpful. Most of the time, the newer versions have done this study for the person, and I find
little error in their translations.
The only concern I have about some of the newer translations, is that many of them were translated
from a different Greek manuscript. Some studies have suggested that the manuscript in which King
James scholars translated from, is actually the oldest, most reliable text. (The Masoretic text) Either
way, one can easily find the unadulterated plan of salvation in any of the mentioned translations, and
are reliable enough to guide the Christian into sound doctrine.
Love,


188.39 in reply to 188.37
See, you miss something. John made the statement the boy was never healed, and that Brother Branham
was wrong, however, Brother Branham had said that if the fait was right, then he would be healed.
The salvation part, that was just giving a bit more rope. Remember, I asked John for sources, and he couldn't
provide any, so I just went with what he had quoted. Frankly, he hasn't provided one scrap, other than, "Get
in touch with Reader's Digest." You miss the fact that John is making issues of things that are little
importance. If the faith had been right, he would have been healed.
"Now you used the old "he was healed but his faith weakened" so he lost his healing argument."
I never said that he lost it in that last post, I said if the faith was right, then he would have been healed.
However, it is possible for a person to get healing from cancer, and the cancer will die, however when
something is dead it swells. So, when they see the swelling, they will think that it was never healed, and so
the life that was in that cancer will enter back into it.
Anyways, I am no longer going to comment on these anymore, because John is not presenting the whole
case, which was just proven.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


188.40 in reply to 188.39
<<<Anyways, I am no longer going to comment on these anymore, because John is not presenting the whole
case, which was just proven. >>>
Fair enough. We just have different definitions of the word "proof," that's all. I think with your reasoning, you
can take anything Branham said that was incorrect, failed prophecies, and false doctrine, and make it work if
you try hard enough.
Let me ask you this: Let's say one of his prophecies were wrong, or something he said did not line up with
Scripture, do you think you would notice? Or do you think you would explain it away?
Kris
Options Reply Rate
Keep Reading>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Navigate this discussion: 1-20 21-40 41-60 61-67
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Games


Subscribe
Morton (238 views)
188.41 in reply to 188.40
Kris,
I really think that you are sincere, and I do like you. See, I have done gone through this Message back when
I first came in. I searched the Scriptures, because I was looking for the fault, however, it all lined up. I don't
claim to know all the Bible, however, I find the doctrines to be correct. I say this not because I am
brainwashed, I never really went to church when I was younger, my mom won't go near one, and my dad will
go to church occasionally, though never when I was growing up.
This Message came to me in December of 1998, and I wanted to be sure that this was the truth. I knew that
if I could find it wrong in the Bible, then it was all wrong. "A little leaven, leaveneth the whole." I don't take
something he said, and just run with it, I will weigh it with the Bible.
Honestly, if I ever found anything wrong, I would have walked away. However, I tried it, and the fruits that it
brings forth, are the ones spoke of in the Bible, the fruits of the Spirit. I mentioned this on another forum,
and got inspired.
See, I didn't swollow it hook line and sinker, as some do, and they are the ones that quickly will fall away.
You ever been fishing? I loved to fish growing up, and that is where I learned a lot of patience. I learned that
at the first nibble the fish hasn't take the bait, and sometimes not at the second, however, you can feel when
that fish takes the bait, and you give it a firm tug to set the hook. I first nibbled, and it was good, then I
nibbled again, and it was even better, then I took the bait, and am on my way to Glory. Jesus Christ is good.
But, you see, it wasn't the doctrines that sold me on it. I saw the fruit that it bore. I saw the Bible walking
around in front of me, veiled in human flesh. I inspected the fruit, and when I saw that it wasn't bruised, and
that it wasn't worm eaten, and had all kinds of spots all over, I traded my old fruit for This. It wasn't anything
to do with the good preaching, I had heard that for a long time. However, when I saw the Life of It, Jesus
Christ walking around again, then I said, "Ah ha!! There It is! I found It!!" So, I say, before you go and
purchase fruit, inspect it, see whether it is good, and ripe, and not rotten, and worm infested, and so on.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


188.42 in reply to 188.36
Making something out of nothing? I think you need to re-read my opening post on this subject. Wm.
Branham explicitly said Donny Morton was physically healed according to "thus saith the Lord." Here are a
few more quotes that make it clear that Wm. Branham claimed Donny Morton's physical healing. As I've
already pointed out, Donny Morton never totally recovered from his disease:
He said, "Lady, look, Mayo Brothers give it up and said it can't be done." Said, "A man up here was
praying for it, named Brother Branham." Said, "He's made a prayer for the baby [Donny Morton]." He
said, "Wait a minute. Black-headed, wearing a gray coat." And said, "That's her." Said, "Where is that
doctor?" And he told him. Took him up there and the doctor performed the operation; the baby got
well.
DEMONOLOGY.2.RELIGIOUS_ CONNERSVILLE.IN DE 41-78 TUESDAY_ 53-0609A
Notice, someone then, about a year later, you read the Reader's Digest, of my meeting in California,
down there at the campgrounds, when they brought that little Donny Morton. Many of you has read
it, no doubt. From Donny Morton, the miracle, when they brought him down out of Canada and give a
wonderful write up, how he come to the platform., little fellow, twisted all out of condition. And how,
said, the evangelist never asked one question but looked straight at the child, and told him where he
come from, how he'd been to Mayo Brother's, and turned down and everything. And just exactly how
the outcome of the child would be. And it was just exactly word by word.
GLORIFIED.JESUS_ PHOENIX.AZ FRIDAY_ 55-0225
You read the "Reader's Digest" about a year or something ago, in October a year ago or something
like that on the healing of little Donny Morton, that Mayo Brothers had give up. And they brought him
to the platform in California, and there the vision showed the little boy was healed (see?), and
they packed a big article of it, and I was at Mayo Brothers for an interview. All right.
ABRAHAM_ BROOKLYN.NY SATURDAY_ 56-1208
It wasn't two years ago, October's this year, the "Reader's Digest," when God made Mayo Clinic stand
still and hear the testimony of little Donny Morton on that incurable disease, when he was brought to
the platform and the Holy Spirit told him exactly what to do, and God healed the boy there.
The scientific world, John Hopkins and Mayo's, when I went there, there lay the "Reader's Digest" on
their platform, or on their table there, to be read. God made the medical world stand still and see
Donny Morton be healed by the power of God.
STAND.STILL.AND.SEE.THE.SALVATION_ CHICAGO.IL SATURDAY_ 57-0629
Tell me where there ever was one doctor that could heal a disease, or tell me where they got a
medicine that'll heal a disease. I was interviewed at Mayo's; you seen it in the "Reader's Digest," and
so forth, Donny Morton, was healed up here.
BALM.IN.GILEAD_ LONG.BEACH.CA SATURDAY_ 61-0218
And the Holy Spirit told him who he was, where he come from, and so forth--little drawed-over
father, holding his baby. And so... Then it told him exactly what would happen. The Lord healed the
child to the glory of God.
GREATER.THAN.SOLOMON.IS.HERE_ PORT.ALBERNI.BC WEDNESDAY_ 62-0725
There's no doctor that will tell you that he has the medicine that'll heal you. If he does, he misinforms
you.
Because Mayo Brothers, on a interview recently... When this little Donny Morton was healed in
Canada, that Mayo's had turned down, which happened on the west coast. You seen it in "Reader's
Digest."

SIRS.WE.WOULD.SEE.JESUS_ DALLAS.TX V-19 N-8 WEDNESDAY_ 64-0304
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.43 in reply to 188.38
Thanks for the reminder about some of Mr. Branham's other dubious study resources, Jeena.
Let me clarify what I mean about the KJV. I have no problem with using the KJV. I think many verses sound
more beautiful from that version than in other versions. It really is a good word-for-word English translation,
but as I said, the language is outdated. Most people who read it are not Old English experts. My problem is
with the notion that the KJV is the only trustworthy English translation of the Bible. Most cults that I'm aware
of base much of their erroneous doctrines on their misunderstanding of the KJV (have you ever heard of a
cult that based its teachings on the NIV?). If someone is determined that the KJV is the reliable version, I
believe it would be to their advantage to obtain a New King James Version, which is written in modern
English, rather than Old English.
There is an ongoing debate about which manuscripts are most reliable, but the differences do not effect the
presentation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Most Bibles I know of indicate in the footnotes where differences
in the various manuscripts lie. But overall, essential Christian doctrine remains clear regardless of which
manuscripts we use.
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.44 in reply to 188.39
>>Remember, I asked John for sources, and he couldn't provide any, so I just went with what he had quoted.
<<
What? I gave you my source in two different posts. Just because you don't believe my source (the same
source Wm. Branham referred to while claiming Donny Morton was healed, I might add) doesn't mean it
doesn't exist.
>>Frankly, he hasn't provided one scrap, other than, "Get in touch with Reader's Digest."<>If the faith had been right, he would have been healed. <<
If you haven't read it by now, I posted a series of quotes in which Mr. Branham said Donny Morton was
healed.
>>However, it is possible for a person to get healing from cancer, and the cancer will die, however when
something is dead it swells. So, when they see the swelling, they will think that it was never healed, and so
the life that was in that cancer will enter back into it.<<
With all due respect, that is a totally unbiblical and unsubstantiated theory invented by deliverance ministers
of weak faith to cover their tracks when things went wrong. This idea was nothing more than an argument
that Wm. Branham and others have used in an attempt to rationalize why some people whom they had
pronounced healed apparently "lost" their healing or even died of their diseases. As we've pointed out
before, there are no examples anywhere in the Bible where someone who was healed by Jesus or His
disciples lost their healing for any reason--ever!
>>Anyways, I am no longer going to comment on these anymore, because John is not presenting the whole
case, which was just proven.<<

If you don't believe I've presented the whole case, you are free to show what I left out yourself. Up to now,
all you've done is deny the evidence.
Shaun, I don't say these things just to win arguments. I say them to get people to think. What I say, I base
on the facts and the Bible. That is all I ask of followers of the Message to consider. It's not enough for one
to say that he/she believes Wm. Branham was a prophet, therefore all arguments against his teachings or
prophecies must be wrong. Every one of us needs to be able show through the Scriptures and/or verifiable
evidence why they believe what they believe. Faith based on feelings, emotions or subjective reasoning is
demonstrably misplaced in almost every case. Such faith may be verified by the Scriptures in some cases,
but that is rare. A Christian's faith is not blind faith. It's faith based on the evidence God Himself
has presented for us through His Word and through the natural laws of the world He created. We must
always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks for the reason of the hope that we have (I Peter
3:15). That's all I ask from Message believers who post in this forum.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


188.45 in reply to 188.44
RE <<With all due respect, that is a totally unbiblical and unsubstantiated theory invented by deliverance
ministers of weak faith which you seem to have swallowed hook, line and sinker. This idea was nothing more
than an argument that Wm. Branham and others have used in an attempt to rationalize why some people
whom they had pronounced healed apparently "lost" their healing or even died of their diseases. As we've
pointed out before, there are no examples anywhere in the Bible where someone who was healed by Jesus or
His disciples lost their healing for any reason--ever!>>
Then why did Jesus say "Go and sin no more lest a worse thing come upon you?...Or when a demon comes
out of a man if he doesn't keep it clean Seven times more come into him"....With all due respect...
In Christ,
Eaglerock22
9:16
Options Reply Rate

188.46 in reply to 188.44
John, as I said in a post earlier, I like you as a person.
Alright, you want an answer for my faith, and why I believe it, then here you go.
In December of 1998 I was going to high school, wrestling. I had the potential to be one of the best in my
region, even the state. I had numerous close matches with the top ranking wrestlers. However, I never had
one, because I didn't have the drive to just win, I just wanted to have fun, they wanted the win more than I
did. The one time I went out with a drive to win, I cracked two ribs on the guy I was pinning. I never went
out with that attitude again, either, I don't feel that that win was right.
Anyways, it was about a month prior to December, maybe even the beginning of December, I can't recall, but
I went out to eat with my dad, and a minister from the local "Message" church. (I honestly don't like labeling
the churches "Message", however it's easier to relate the story to you.) Anyways, after dinner, him and my
dad was talking, and I was listening, and I had a lot of questions on my heart. The minister suddenly turned
to me, and he started telling me about the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation. He finished, and reached over
and grabbed my shirt over my heart, and said, "You know that little tug you feel in here? That's God." How
could he know about the pull that I had felt since a little child?
I walked away having made up my mind to go to church, AFTER wrestling season was over. One night, there
was a special meeting, an open forum between the pastor of that church, and a baptist pastor, and the
discussion was the original sin. My dad said I should go, but I had practice that night, and if I missed that

practice, I would have missed the tournament that was coming up. I couldn't miss that, that was too
important to me. I went on to practice, and at 6:00 p.m., when the service started, I found myself sprawled
out on the mat with my knee nearly twisted out of joint, and my shoulder about snatched out of socket. I
remember looking at the clock, and thinking, "Oh Lord, that service just started. What am I doing here?" I
tore the cartilage in my knee then, and tore the rotator cuff in my shoulder, but the Lord healed that without
doctors.
Anyways, that night, I was sitting in the recliner, that was the only comfortable place I could find, at home
when something funny happened. The lights in the room had dimmed a little, but the other lights around me,
like a street light I could see, went dark. I thought that was weird, then my dad got home later, and told me
about what happened at the meeting. He hadn't noticed what happened to me, I just laid in the recliner.
He told me of how when that baptist pastor got up, and he started railing on Brother Branham, and against
the Message, the lights went out. Save for the lights that were right above the local "Message" believers.
(Once again, another title I do not like, but easier to relate to you.) Anyways, he went on to say about how
that those lights stayed on, and that the emergency lights had never kicked on, and the rest of the room was
black.
I then proceeded to tell him about my experience, and showed him my shoulder, which was dangling there,
all the muscles pulled, no use of the limb. My knee was swollen to an enormous size, and turning black and
blue. I went to church the following service, hardly able to walk, but those people were excited when they
saw me come.
God showed Himself to me that night, I had a personal experience with Him. I knew then that He was alive
and well, and watching over me. I know my place, He told me my place. Sure, I still searched my Bible, just
to be sure that the Message was true, and I found it to be true. Like I told Kris, it wasn't just the doctrines
that got me, it was the fruit that the Message bore, it was the fruits of the Spirit. Not the ones in Proverbs
which God hates, these are the fruits of the Holy Spirit.
There is your answer for the faith that lies within me. One of the many experiences I had with God. Honestly,
John, and you would probably challenge me over the validity, because I never told anyone, but I have seen
visions. The reason I say visions, is because I was not asleep when it happened, and they have ALL come to
pass just the way I saw them. You say the one of Marilyn Monroe was insignificant, then I have one for you.
(Keep in mind I am a land surveyor, and so I might use terms you are not familiar with, try and keep with me
though.) One day I had to go and work with one of the other crews, not the one that I usually worked with. A
survey crew is at least two men, though sometimes they are three. Anyways, there was three of us working,
while the other two men were working somewhere else.
That morning I saw something, and I couldn't explain it. I had seen this home, I didn't recognize it, and I
remember looking over, and talking to Tom. (One of the party chiefs.) I then picked up the theodalite, and
proceeded to walk to the back of this house to a control point. I remember looking down at the feet, and
thinking, "Those are not my shoes." Anyways, I put down the theodalite, I had looked around as if guaging
how long it would take to complete the job, paying close attention to a pool behind a fence. I then looked at
Tom again, asking the time, and he told the time. Then I said something back to him, and he said to load up
the equipment and that we were going back to the office.
Now, the crew I was working with had finished the jobs that we were assigned, and were in the office to see
about getting some more work. Well, Tom came in, and the other guy complained of being sick, so he went
home. Tom was irritated because he needed to get that job done, it was due. I was then told to go with Tom
to the job that they had been doing. When we got there, I looked at the house, and couldn't believe that
it was the same house. I asked Tom what had happened to Scott, the other man that went home.
He told me that they were set up in the front doing the job, and he was complaining of feeling ill. They had
just set a control point in the rear, and had left off on that. I asked him if they were set up on that point

before they had left. He said that Scott went back there, but had never set up, he complained about feeling
bad, and that there was too much involved in finishing, that he had to go. So they had left.
I first got out the equipment, and then I walked right to the first point that Scott had been set up on, and
looked, just the same as what I saw. I then walked straight the point in the back, and turned, and right
behind the house, the exact same pool, behind the exact same fence. The events Tom had told me, along
with what I was seeing, matched what I saw EXACTLY.
I have seen things such as that from a boy. I have also had NUMEROUS dreams that would be of future
events. The ones that would creep me out is the visions, because I would NOT be asleep, and see these
things. I had no explanation, so tried to just ignore them, but now I know what they are. If the vision of
Marilyn Monroe was insignificant, and you don't see why God would show him that, why would God show me
what I saw? What is the significance of that?
View Full Message
Options Reply Rate

188.47 in reply to 188.45
>>Then why did Jesus say "Go and sin no more lest a worse thing come upon you?...Or when a demon
comes out of a man if he doesn't keep it clean Seven times more come into him"...<<
Your first verse comes from John 5:14. If you notice, Jesus did not say, "Go and sin no more or the same
thing will come back upon you." He said a worse thing.
The second verse you alluded to comes from Matthew 12:43-45 and Luke 11:14-26. The subject of these
passages is demonic possession, not physical illnesses. In this example, Jesus makes the point that if one is
freed from a demonic entity but does nothing to "clean his house" (the implication being he did nothing to
change his spiritual condition in which the devil originally found him), he is subject to being taken over again
by the same evil spirit, in addition to many others besides.
It is relatively obvious that this does not have to do with the supernatural physical healing of Christians by
virtue of the fact that Jesus does not indicate what is necessary to avoid losing one's healing. Jesus is clearly
speaking to people who have not yet accepted salvation: "Even so shall it be also unto this wicked
generation" (Matthew 12:45). In other words, without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, unrepentant men
have no assurance that their bodies will not be re-inhabited by evil spirits. In light of the fact that there are
no passages of Scripture that illustrate that one can lose their supernatural healing, these passages are poor
examples on which to formulate such a doctrine.
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.48 in reply to 188.47
RE <<Your first verse comes from John 5:14. If you notice, Jesus did not say, "Go and sin no more or the
same thing will come back upon you." He said a worse thing.>>
And a worse thing could be more of the same but even worse...Or it could be something worse..depends on
your interpretation..Either way, I guess we would have to do a thorough exam of each individual case to help
you believe the relevance.
<<The second verse you alluded to comes from Matthew 12:43-45 and Luke 11:14-26. The subject of these
passages is demonic possession, not physical illnesses. In this example, Jesus makes the point that if one is
freed from a demonic entity but does nothing to "clean his house" (the implication being he did nothing to
change his spiritual condition in which the devil originally found him), he is subject to being taken over again
by the same evil spirit, in addition to many others besides.>>
Sin is unbelief...ALL sickness whether physical or spiritual are a result...
<<It is relatively obvious that this does not have to do with the supernatural physical healing of Christians by
virtue of the fact that Jesus does not indicate what is necessary to avoid losing one's healing. Jesus is clearly
speaking to people who have not yet accepted salvation: "Even so shall it be also unto this wicked
generation" (Matthew 12:45). In other words, without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, unrepentant men
have no assurance that their bodies will not be re-inhabited by evil spirits. In light of the fact that there are
no passages of Scripture that illustrate that one can lose their supernatural healing, these passages are poor
examples on which to formulate such a doctrine.>>
Jesus said many times "according to your faith be it unto you"...If our faith wavers just as when Peter was
walking on the water and began to sink, we can also lose our healing by unbelief...NO MAN can heal, only
God...And it is the faith of the individual...Just as salvation is based on FAITH of the individual...As Judas lost
his Faith, and was lost, as the Children of Israel in the Wilderness perished after being brought out of Egypt
because of their UNBELIEF...
In Christ,
Eaglerock22

9:16
Options Reply Rate

188.49 in reply to 188.46
Thanks for your illustrations. I'm not here to deny that those things happened to you, but they do not
indicate in any way that Wm. Branham's Message is the truth. The experiences you related are subjective;
that is, you accept them as vindication of the validity of the Message without any external verification. They
are not substantiated by any biblical facts, as far as I could see. I don't judge your heart or sincerity, but
these experiences do not substantiate the Message of William Branham.
The type of faith I'm talking about can be taken right to the Word of God. Many of Wm. Branham's teachings
cannot be supported by Scripture, but because you've had the experiences you've described, you're willing to
believe that his teachings are correct over the plain meaning of the Bible in many cases. I'm not here to say
that the supernatural doesn't happen. But supernatural occurrences do not vindicate that what one believes
is true. We must test what we believe, including our own experiences, with the Bible. It seems to me that
you have accepted the Message as legitimate because it fits your experience rather than the Bible.
It's not surprising that you've always felt in inward tug. Blaise Pascal said, "There is a god-shaped vacuum in
the heart of every man that cannot be filled by any created thing but only by the Creator made known
through Jesus Christ." Many people are aware of this vacuum and attempt to fill it according to the desires of
their flesh. Some people think that it takes something more and devote themselves to working for a
worthy cause. Many recognize the need as a spiritual one, but seek God in the wrong places, winding up in
non-Christian cults. Still others see the truth in the Bible, but mix the truth with errors taught by those
whom they see as more spiritual than themselves. Many of them never find the true path to Jesus
Christ. Finally, there are the few who are led to a saving knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and grow in
grace and truth according to sound biblical teaching.
I cannot judge your heart and say where you are in your relationship with Jesus Christ. But I can say that
Wm. Branham's Message is not in keeping with God's written revelation to us, the Bible. I have not found
where Mr. Branham's teachings are responsible for a more abundant life in Jesus Christ among his followers
than one can find in any other denomination or local Christian body. I haven't found a burden for the lost
according to the Great Commission among the followers of the Message that is present in other Christian
churches that do not embrace his teachings. I do not see any greater demonstration of the spiritual gifts
operating among Message believers than among Christians outside of the Message.
I have not found where any Message believer has been able to give an answer for the validity of the Message
without having to fall back on extra-biblical revelations, supernatural signs or simply maintaining a blind faith
in his teachings where they cannot be clearly found in the written Word. That is not the kind of faith the Bible
tells us to have when it says, "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (I Thessalonians 5:21). That is
the responsibility of all those who choose to become disciples of Jesus Christ!

John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.50 in reply to 188.48
>>And a worse thing could be more of the same but even worse...Or it could be something worse..depends
on your interpretation..<<
The plain meaning is, "a worse thing," not "the same thing, only worse." Your interpretation is based on the
unbibical premise that one can lose his healing after being supernaturally healed by God. Since the premise
is in error, it follows that so is your interpretation.
>>Sin is unbelief... <<
Sin is not unbelief. Otherwise, Satan would not have sinned (Cf. James 2:19). Sin is rebellion against God.
In any case, in Matthew 12 and Luke 11, Jesus is talking about unrepentant sinners, not Christians who still
sin.
>>ALL sickness whether physical or spiritual are a result... <<
All sickness, like the sinful nature, is due to the fallen condition of man. We will not be free from sickness
until our bodies are redeemed. Though we become new creatures in Christ when we are born again, we still
get sick and die. It doesn't mean that our bodies are being invaded by evil spirits, as illustrated in
Matthew 12 and Luke 11.
>>Jesus said many times "according to your faith be it unto you"...If our faith wavers just as when Peter was
walking on the water and began to sink, we can also lose our healing by unbelief...<<
Jesus said this only once in the Bible (see Matthew 9:29), and the context describes how one receives
healing according to one's faith, not the possibility that one could lose their healing because of unbelief.

There is no example in Scripture where anyone ever lost their supernatural healing due to a lack of faith.
Once they were healed, they were healed. To say that one could "lose their healing" would imply that a lack
of faith somehow re-created the illness that Jesus already destroyed. In a sense, that demonstrates a
creative power that's hard enough to produce by our most extreme faithful efforts, not alone by a lack
thereof!
Furthermore, one must conclude that in order to keep one's supernatural healing intact, one's faith must
never, ever, ever waver, or it would come back. In this sense, I don't think it would be humanly possible to
retain a supernatural healing. Again I would remind you, there is no example in the Bible where a person
healed by Jesus or His disciples ever lost their healing when their faith wavered.
The example of Peter walking on the water is an entirely different situation. Jesus simply told Peter to come
to Him. Peter began to walk on the water by faith, but he became doubtful when he realized what was going
on around him and he quickly lost his new found ability. His doubt did not require a supernatural restoration
of his inability to walk on water. It simply negated his ability to stay above the water.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.51 in reply to 188.50

May I simply ask how much experience have you personally had administering healing by faith as Bro.
Branham's ministry..You seem to consider yourself the expert here??
To be a critic takes no skill, to produce what Bro. Branhams ministry took God...
Bro. Branhams ministry speaks for itself...Yours is a matter of definitions and carnal reasoning...Any
vindicated proof as to your correct interpretation??
Your reasoning is endless...
In Christ,
Eaglerock22
9:16
Options Reply Rate

188.52 in reply to 188.51
My brother, they don't believe in vindication. They think their word vindicates it, or something like that. ...
chuckle... However, when asked to show the vindication, they just danced around the subject. Anyways, I
guess he wants us to take his word over the Bible, or over a ministry that God did vindicate.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


188.53 in reply to 188.49
<<It's not surprising that you've always felt in inward tug. Blaise Pascal said, "There is a god-shaped vacuum
in the heart of every man that cannot be filled by any created thing but only by the Creator made known
through Jesus Christ." >> What a beautiful thing!
It has been so painful to see people throughout my lifetime who were attracted to a sense of order and
fellowship in a message group initially; and later the pain of betrayal upon discovery that power corrupts the
best of leaders.
Human leadership cannot carry the burden of standing between God and the congregation and will always
fall, from your church pastor to WMB himself. That is why God sent us the personal indwelling of the Holy
Spirit. When that lines up with scripture, you can be sure it is a solid rock, instead of a slippery slope.
Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of
Israel, and with the house of Judah: 32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the
day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake,
although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: 33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with
the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in
their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.34 And they shall teach no more every man
his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least
of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their
sin no more.
Luke 16:16: The law and the prophets were until John; since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and
every man presseth into it.
Matt 11: 13: For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
Matt 22:37-40: Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul,
and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love
thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
John 1:17: For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
Hebrews 1:1: God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the
prophets, "2": Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things,
by whom also he made the worlds.
1 Peter 1:10: Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the
grace that should come unto you:
Options Reply Rate


188.54 in reply to 188.43
Exactly. I totally agree with you. I have no problem with using any translation which helps the person
understand the Bible and enjoy reading it on a daily basis. My husband loves the New King James version.
Since I still use my Greek New Testament, Lexicon and exhaustive concordance quite a bit, I just tend to use
the King James version so I can easily find things. You are correct, there will probably always be an ongoing
debate about which translation is most perfect. I think the Holy Spirit if fully capable of revealing saving
truth to any person who is drawn to the Word of God and salvation.
Have you ever read the footnote in many of the Bibles that says that Mark 16:16 & 18 wasn't even in the
Sinaitic manuscript? It is in the masoretic manuscript and the majority of the manuscripts which have been
found. In school, our professor taught us that King James used the Masoretic text because the manuscript
had been canonized by the Catholic church as being the most reliable text. He said that The Greek
Septuagent and Latin Vulgate, Rheims & Siniatic manuscripts were all considered unreliable texts. His reason
was that the scribes had certain rules when copying the text. For instance, they could not write more than
three words without looking at the original copy. If they made more than 3 mistakes in the entire copied
manuscript, they had to toss the manuscript in the trash. The reason King James used the Masoretic rather
than the Siniatic manuscript, was because the Siniatic manuscript was found in the trash can of an old
monastary. I have always wanted to research all of this and find out if this were all true, but haven't done
much more research on canonization. One of the things my professor said, (again, not sure this is true) was
that many of the new translations were taken from the Siniatic manuscript - an unreliable text.
The people in the church I was raised in, insist that they are to speak in King James English when praying.
Everything is "thee" and "thou". When they pray it is something like this "We thank thee oh Lord, for thou
has been so gracious. Thou hast shown us mercy and thou knowest what is best for thy children.....etc." If
any of the men pray out loud in church and don't pray in King James, they are sharply rebuked for being
"disrespectful" to the Lord and not showing reverence. I guess they don't realize that the King James version
of the Bible is someone's translation of one of many early Greek manuscripts, because they think that the
Lord speaks in King James English. I have also heard people "interpret tongues" in King James English. I
know I am off the subject, but how do these conceptions and traditions get started?
Having said all that, I just wonder why the message people are so sure that the King James version is the
best version - when the Masoretic text was the one that the Catholic church claimed was most reliable when
King James was having the Bible translated into English. You would think that they would take that as a
"sign" that King James is the one to stay away from! :)
Love,


188.55 in reply to 188.43
<<<Thanks for the reminder about some of Mr. Branham's other dubious study resources, Jeena.>>>
He also used the Douay Version of the Bible in his studies. While message people usually condemn study
using other translations and study materials, they ignore the fact that he did use a lot of extra materials. He
also had very close friends he hunted with who came out of Jehovah's Witness church.
ABRAHAM.AND.HIS.SEED_ BLOOMINGTON.IL SUNDAY_ 61-0416

E-54 Turn the next page in your Bible, 17th chapter. See if God keeps His Word.
Abraham's an old man. He's a hundred years old. He was lacking one year; he was ninety
and nine. And the Lord appeared to him in the Name of El-Shaddai, "the bosom."Excuse
me, young ladies, my sisters. "El," comes from the word "a strong One"; "Shad" means
"breast." "Shaddai" means "breasted." God, He said, "I am Almighty God."Now, if you got
a "Scofield Bible," or if you got a "Thompson Chain," or if you get the "Emphatic
Diaglott," or any commentary, you notice that that word broke down when he called Him
that, he called Him El, and He appeared to Him in the Name of El-Shaddai.
BE.NOT.AFRAID_ TULARE.CA FRIDAY_ 61-0224

E-37 Jesus could only do He said... And the Scriptures are infallible. He said, "I do nothing
within Myself until I see the Father doing it first." Now, He said He saw it: "See." "Verily,
verily I say unto you, the Son can do nothing in Himself, but what he sees the Father." Look
back to the "Emphatic Diaglott"; see if the word isn't right: "See" Look at it. Even to the
Douay version.
There is plenty of evidence that WMB used other versions of the Bible, including the Catholic and JW
materials. In one sermon, he even mentioned that the Holy Spirit told him to go get the Emphatic Diaglott
and read something.
BLASPHEMOUS.NAMES_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-21 SUNDAY_ 62-1104M

31-4 What a difference between "names of blasphemy" and "blasphemous names." Get it? I
caught that this morning when I was reading here the--coming down. Something just told
me, "Go into your room; pick up 'The Diaglott.'" No, It's just obedience, that's all. Walked
in, and I picked out Revelations 17. I thought, "Why do You want me to read this for?" And
I started reading. As soon as I struck it, "There it is." I got a pencil and wrote it down. I
said, "There it is."
Yet, if we mention that we refer to other study materials or versions of the Bible, message folks insinuate
that we are doing something wrong.
Also, wasn't the Watchtower's Emphatic Diaglott a translation of the LATIN New Testament? And not a

literal translation from a Greek manuscript? The Latin text would have been the text translated by the
Catholic church. If I am wrong, correct me.
Love,

188.56 in reply to 188.51
<<<May I simply ask how much experience have you personally had administering healing by faith as Bro.
Branham's ministry..You seem to consider yourself the expert here??
To be a critic takes no skill, to produce what Bro. Branhams ministry took God...
Bro. Branhams ministry speaks for itself...Yours is a matter of definitions and carnal reasoning...Any
vindicated proof as to your correct interpretation?? >>> I'm sorry, but I'm still waiting for any kind of proof
that he actually healed someone that "stayed healed." I think all I have seen here is refuted cases of healing,
or temporary healing.
Kris
Options Reply Rate


188.57 in reply to 188.56
Kris,
He didn't do the healing, Jesus Christ did. If you want, come to Beaufort SC, and I will introduce you to
someone who was healed under his ministry, and they stayed healed, and that goes for all that don't believe
that there was any.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

188.58 in reply to 188.54
I absolutely agree that people should use the translation that works for them (within reason, I am not a huge
Living Bible fan). I know I discussed this in another thread, but my only point was to people who believed
that the KJV was God's one and only divinely inspired Bible and the other ones were liberal paraphrases of
the KJV.
God Bless You!
Kris
Options Reply Rate


188.59 in reply to 188.1
Math 14: 28 And Peter answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water. 29
And he said, Come. And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus.
30 But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save
me.
Mark 8: 23 And he took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the town; and when he had spit on his
eyes, and put his hands upon him, he asked him if he saw ought. 24 And he looked up, and said, I see men
as trees, walking.
Options Reply Rate

188.60 in reply to 188.58
I'm not a fan of the Living Bible either. But then, the Living Bible is a paraphrase, not a translation. Huge
difference.
Kris, do you happen to know more about the Emphatic Diaglott? Wasn't it first translated from Greek
manuscript into Latin? And then into English? I am slipping in my memory. :) At any rate, I know that is is
Watchtower publication.
I think the main thing is that we are not limited to any one translation of the Bible. Comparing for serious
study is GREAT. And, incidently, I do know people who have found salvation reading even the Living Bible.
The Holy Spirit has the total ability to draw and convert a lost soul - thank the Lord!
:) God bless you, too, brother!
Love,


Subscribe
Morton (238 views)
188.61 in reply to 188.56
<<I'm sorry, but I'm still waiting for any kind of proof that he actually healed someone that "stayed healed."
I think all I have seen here is refuted cases of healing, or temporary healing. >>
That is because you are following an "unbelieving prophet" and using your carnal mind to understand spiritual
things...The so called refuted cases are from an unbeliever to the core...no surprise that you can't see
spiritual things...The carnal mind is enmity against God and is not subject to the law of God..
In Christ,
Eaglerock22
9:16
Options Reply Rate

188.62 in reply to 188.51
As I told you before, this forum is about the teachings of William Branham, not myself. It's irrelevant what
my background is except to say that I'm a born again, Spirit filled Christian who believes the Bible and loves
the Lord. The purpose of this forum is to openly discuss the issues surrounding Wm. Branham's prophecies
and teachings with an emphasis on how the Message does or does not conform to the Bible. If you have
anything to say that's pertinent to the discussion, you are welcome to join in. If all you have to offer are
criticisms of myself, then you're in the wrong place.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Reply Rate

188.63 in reply to 188.53
Well said!
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

188.64 in reply to 188.60
<<<Kris, do you happen to know more about the Emphatic Diaglott?>>>
To be honest, I never heard of it before I came here :)
Sorry.
Kris

Options Reply Rate

188.65 in reply to 188.61
<<<...no surprise that you can't see spiritual things...The carnal mind is enmity against God and is not
subject to the law of God..>>>
I believe that God gave us a brain so that we could use it. I don't think he ever really encouraged blind faith.
Isaiah 1:18 says, "Come now, let us reason together," says the LORD . "Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they shall be like wool."
Acts 17 "1When they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there
was a Jewish synagogue. 2As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he
reasoned with them from the Scriptures,"
More of Acts 17: "16While Paul was waiting for them in Athens, he was greatly distressed to see that the city
was full of idols. 17So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks, as well as in
the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there. "
Obviously, reasoning is a tool that God expects us to use.
1 Corinthians 13:11 I believe says it all: "When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I
reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me." See? He no longer reasoned like
a child.
Options Reply Rate


188.66 in reply to 188.65
EXCELLANT.
Love,
Next Discussion>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - FDR to Lead the World to

Subscribe
War (252 views)
To: ALL (1 of 43)
451.1
William Branham claimed to have had 7 major visions in 1932 or 1933 in which he saw several events that
would take place in the world between then and 1977. He said of one of his visions:
The president which now is, President Franklin D. Roosevelt... (Now remember, this is twenty-
eight years ago.) will cause the whole world to go to war...
Condemnation by Representation, Jeffersonville, IN, (tape #60-1113)
He also said:
We now have a president (Dwi... Mr. Roosevelt), and this Mr. Roosevelt will cause the world
to go into a world war through his--in his time of his administration, his--his--as president.
Conference, Shreveport, LA (tape #60-1125)
He also said:
Germany never picked on us; we picked on them, throwed the whole world into a war, to cause a
world war. [Germany actually declared war on the US first on December 11, 1941. Roosevelt
responded by requesting a declaration of war against Germany from Congress later that day, which
they did--JohnK]
Condemnation by Representation, Jeffersonville, IN, (tape #60-1113)
The earliest reference we have to this series of seven visions was in 1953. Mr. Branham apparently did not
study the history of World War II before telling his followers of this prophecy. Historians indicate that World
War II began in March 1939. There were as many as 23 countries that declared war before the United States
did at the end of 1941. Below is a list of countries and the dates they "voluntarily" entered or declared war
during WWII (the dates are written as yymmdd):
Australia 390303
Germany 390901
France 390903
Great Britain 390903
New Zealand 390903
S. Africa 390906
Canada 390910
USSR 390917
Italy 400610
Japan 400922
Bulgaria 410424
Romania 410622
Hungary 410627
India 411207
Panama 411207
Yugoslavia 411207
Costa Rica 411208
Dom Rep 411208
El Salvador 411208
Haiti 411208
Honduras 411208
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/FDR%20WW2-1-20.html (1 of 17)4/1/2005 6:05:59 AM

Nicaragua 411208
Manchukuo 411208
Netherlands 411208
United States 411208
China 411209
Cuba 411209
Guatemala 411209
Slovakia 411212
Croatia 411214
Czechoslovakiea 411216
Albania 411217
Belgium 411220
Thailand 420125
Mexico 420522
Brazil 420822
Ethiopia 421214
Iraq 430117
Burma 430801
Iran 430909
Columbia 431126
Bolivia 431204
Liberia 440127
San Marino 440921
Paraguay 450207
Peru 450212
Uruguay 450215
Venezuela 450215
Turkey 450223
Egypt 450224
Syria 450226
Lebanon 450227
Saudi Arabia 450301
Finland 450303
Argentina 450327
Chile 450411
Mon Peo Rep 450809
This vision is another example of Mr. Branham's many prophecies that history has not borne out to be true.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Edited 8/5/2004 8:34 am ET by KENNAH (JohnK63)
Options Reply Rate


451.2 in reply to 451.1
It is a curious fact of history that the only country that Hitler ever formally declared war on was America. In
other cases Hitler attacked first and let the other country declare war in response.
Options Reply Rate

451.3 in reply to 451.2
Hi Philip, good to hear from you!
That is very interesting. I didn't realize that, but you're right. The US also declared war on Germany the
same day (December 11, 1941).
Have you looked at the Website recently? A lot has changed in the last few months. Take a look at if when
you have time by clicking on the gray Webpage tag above. Delphi's Web server seems to be down again
this morning, but check back. Feel free to make comments or suggestions. Lord bless!
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


451.4 in reply to 451.1
Mr. Kennah,
as I said, you are pathologically looking for a fault in William Branham's sermons, and if you find none, you
make one up. Same with the Vision. This is a part of the Vision Br. Branham had in 1933.
"Benito Mussolini will invade Ethiopia and take it. The poorer country will fall at his steps. Italy will then try to
invade other countries but will fail, and Mussolini himself will come to a disgraceful end."
"From Germany, the young Austrian, Adolf Hitler, will draw the world into war. America too will go to war,
and in the process Franklin Roosevelt will be elected to a fourth term as President. Germany will fortify
herself behind an extensive wall of concrete, and America will pay a tremendous price in lives to break
through this wall. But Germany will be defeated and Hitler will come to a mysterious end."
.........................................
So now Mr. Kennah, show me the error in this Vision. This is the Vision as William Branham told it to his
congregation in 1933.
If he later refers back to it and is not precise in what he says, then that is not a fault. The Vision counts, not
the vague reference back to it. As you can see, the Vision itself has no mistakes. The references to the Vision
may be incomplete, but that doesn't make the Vision wrong.
CONCLUSION: William Branham Vision came to pass exactly the way it was said.
...........................................
> And in 1933 when the Lord, when we was having meetings over here where that Church of Christ is
standing now, the old Masonic home, the vision of the Lord came to me up here and predicted that, Germany
would rise up and have put that Maginot Line there. Many of you remember. And how they'd be all fortified in
there, and the Americans would take a great beating right there at that line. It also said what would take
place, and about Roosevelt and them things, how he would run and make that fourth term. Perfectly, just
exactly the way it come to pass. <
> A second world war. I said, "The President that now is )--that the President that we now have, which was
Franklin D. Roosevelt..." I said, "The President we have in now will run even in the fourth term (He's on his
first then.)--will run into the fourth term, and we will be taken to a second world war."
I said, "The dictator that's now arising in Italy (which is Mussolini), he will come into power, and he will go to
Ethiopia; and Ethiopia will fall at his steps." There's people setting here now that knows that there's a group
of people come and stood (when I was having my meeting in the Redman's Hall down there that night, when
I had to go down there to preach that, Redman's Hall)--was going to throw me out of the hall for saying such
a thing (Here... Yeah, Mrs. Wilson, I know you're... That's right.) when I said that. But did he do it? But I
said, "He'll come to a shameful end," and he did. <
> I saw a vision. I saw President Roosevelt was going to help lead the world to a world war, told it that
morning. They was going to lock me up for it. And I said, "They'll go to war with Germany." Eleven years
before the Maginot Line was built, I said, "There..." in that same vision I saw Germany fortified in concrete.
And America took a terrible beating there, and many of you boys know what happened, was there.
I said, "Mussolini is standing up as a dictator; he will make his first invasion to Ethiopia. But he will take
Ethiopia, but he will come to a disgraceful end, him and that woman both." <
.........................................

I don't know why you go and look for the complete Vision to see what he said in the first place, but that you
rather take parts of it and put them out of context. I suggest that you knew the whole Vision before you put
theses Quotes online. I don't know your exact motive, but whatever it might be, to me it is everything else
than pure!
PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate

451.5 in reply to 451.4
>>This is the Vision as William Branham told it to his congregation in 1933.<<
I've learned long ago that un-sourced information is usually not reliable. Can you verify that Mr. Branham
indeed presented that prophecy as you posted it? What is your source, since we have no recorded sermons
made earlier than 1947. I have asked the William Branham Evangelistic Association for the exact wording of
the original prophecy, and they could only refer me to Mr. Branham's taped sermons. As you know, Mr.
Branham's earliest known reference any of these visions was in 1953, twenty years after he supposedly saw
them and 8 years after Mussolini's death. It's apparent that your quotes were made long after the earliest
recorded versions of the so-called "7 visions of 1933."
BTW, one of your quotes by Mr. Branham identifies the Maginot Line as having been built by the Germans.
The Maginot Line was a wall of defense built by France, not Germany, in order to provide the French with a
barrier from the Germans. Construction of the Maginot Line started in 1929 and ended in 1940, so it was
already in the process of being built in 1933. Later in his ministry (1959), Mr. Branham re-identified the
barrier where he said the Americans would suffer a terrible beating as the Siegfried Line, which was a system
of pillboxes and strong points built by Germany along the German western frontier in the 1930s. The
Americans successfully breached the Siegfried Line during Germany's defeat.
The bottom line is that we have no way of knowing what the original 7 prophecies said, if indeed Mr. Branham
even had any such visions. Given his propensity for exaggerating and embellishing the details of his supposed
visions/prophecies with each retelling of them, we cannot be the least bit confident that his original
prophecies were any more accurate than those we read in the astrology page of the newspaper.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Reply Rate

451.6 in reply to 451.5
Mr. Kennah,
I don't know if you still live in Tucson, but I think I remember that you somewhere said you were attending
Tucson Tabernacle. If that is right, you can go and contact Br. Owen Jorgensen. To my opinion he has made
the most research on all happenings in William Branham's life. I quoted the Vision out of his book
"Supernatural - The Life of William Branham". I guess there is no doubt that at least some Brothers (including
William Branham) wrote that Vision down in 1933. So you can go and ask where he got the whole Vision
from. If your intends were pure, I think you would have done that already, since I am sure that you know
that book.
CONCLUSION: Every man, when he is not precise, leaves some details when he is telling an incident,
especially if that incident lays centuries behind. (Only perfect Mr. Kennah never did that)
Even Paul was not precise in what he told other about his conversion, leaving certain details.
ACTS 22:9
9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that
spake to me.
ACTS 9:7
7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
So what now? did they or didn't they hear the voice? I guess both. Some heard it and some not. So now go
ahead and accuse Paul of being unprecise in his reference back to the event.
Also, IF you decided to take the Quotes of William Branham about a ceratin subject, then take ALL of them,
so that you get the complete picture.
PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate


451.7 in reply to 451.5
> I've learned long ago that un-sourced information is usually not reliable. Can you verify that Mr. Branham
indeed presented that prophecy as you posted it? <
It is very clear that you DIDN'T learn it:

YOU cannot verify that William Branham presented the prophecy as YOU posted it. What you did is showing
that what he later said about the Vision is not complete in its fulness, but that doesn't touch the Vision at all.
The Vision was given in 1933. If you don't know what the Vision says, then how can you judge it?
> The bottom line is that we have no way of knowing what the original 7 prophecies said, if indeed Mr.
Branham even had any such visions. <
That William Branham HAD the Visions is secured through ear witnesses who heard him tell the Visions.
The bottom line is that you have a big complex concerning William Branham. Your motives are not pure,
because you are not even trying to be neutral in the way of taking all facts into your picture. It is obvious that
you are incompetently of judging anything William Branham said or did because of preconceived opinions.
PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate

451.8 in reply to 451.7
You stated:
"YOU cannot verify that William Branham presented the prophecy as YOU posted it. What you did is showing
that what he later said about the Vision is not complete in its fulness, but that doesn't touch the Vision at all.
The Vision was given in 1933. If you don't know what the Vision says, then how can you judge it?"
Branham frequently claimed 'thus saith the Lord' for the prophecies when he described them in his sermons,
so regardless of what he did or didn't say in 1933, he is still a false prophet based upon the failure of
prophecies as he subsequently described them.
Branham's comments regarding these prophecies should be taken heed of: "Write it down and find out, you
young people. See if it happens. If it isn't, I'm a false prophet" (16/7/60).
Options Reply Rate


451.9 in reply to 451.4
Ever noticed that while Branham claimed that the 1933 prophecies consisted of 7 visions, only 6 are common
to both early and late descriptions of them? In early versions the extra vision concerned Roosevelt while in
later versions this was replaced by a vision of moral decline amongst women (which he was claiming had
already happened even before he started claiming he had predicted it).
Also note that Hitler didn't get any mention in the recorded versions of the prophecy prior to 1964.
It is notable that of the things Branham claimed to propheseied, those that have happened all occurred prior
to the earliest available accounts of the prophecy and those that were unfulfilled when he described them in
his recorded sermons remained unfulfilled.
Options Reply Rate

451.10 in reply to 451.7
I have read Owen Jorgenson's version of the seven visions. He did not name the source for his account of the
visions. It is clear that his rendition of the 7 visions is a compilation of what he's read in Mr. Branham's
sermons and other books that are standard materials in many Message believers' libraries (as well as in
mine). In his "Sources and Bibliography," Mr. Jorgenson does not cite the original writing of the visions which
Mr. Branham supposedly read from in the sermon Condemnation by Representation (tape #60-1113), nor
does the wording of his account match it. Mr. Jorgenson does not cite any "ear witnesses" to the first time Mr.
Branham related the vision to his church. As I said, the William Branham Evangelistic Association does not
even have access the original wording of the visions. It is clear that Mr. Jorgenson's portrayal of the 7 visions
was done without the benefit of any original sources.
>>Even Paul was not precise in what he told other about his conversion, leaving certain details. ACTS 22:9...
<<
The difference between your example from Acts and Mr. Branham's visions is that when one looks at all the
accounts of Paul's conversion, they compliment one another and give us a clearer view of what really
happened. With Mr. Branham's varying accounts, the details seem to come out of nowhere, some of them
having changed as time went by. When one compiles the details into one account as we did with Paul's
conversion, we find that there are details that are not compatible with others. Mr. Branham appears very
much like a child who makes up parts of a story each time he tells it.
>>YOU cannot verify that William Branham presented the prophecy as YOU posted it.<<
That's the point. Mr. Branham told so many different versions of what he supposedly saw in his visions that it
is impossible to determine what he may have seen before it happened. It cannot be verified by our earliest
accounts of these visions (1953) that Mr. Branham saw the details he spoke about near the end of his life.
>>That William Branham HAD the Visions is secured through ear witnesses who heard him tell the Visions.<<

And who are these supposed "ear witnesses?" What are their testimonies about what Mr. Branham said he
saw?
The fact is, we have nothing to validate Mr. Branham's claim of having "7 major visions" outside of the
conflicting accounts he made in his recorded sermons. The earliest reference to the visions was in 1953. The
burden of proof is on Mr. Branham's followers to verify that Mr. Branham indeed had these 7 visions at all.
The fact that Mr. Branham gave conflicting accounts of what he apparently saw, along with the absence of
independent, corroborating testimonies of his original statements concerning the visions, indicates that they
were vague predictions at best, or totally fabricated at worst.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

451.11 in reply to 451.8
> Branham frequently claimed 'thus saith the Lord' for the prophecies when he described them in his
sermons, so regardless of what he did or didn't say in 1933, he is still a false prophet based upon the failure
of prophecies as he subsequently described them. <
How can anyone make a prophecy about yesterday? When William Branham claimed THUS SAITH THE LORD
for his prophecies, he indeed always meant the Vision/Prophecy itself, not the reference back to it. If you are
too short sighted to accept that, then I feel sorry for you.
> he is still a false prophet based upon the failure of prophecies as he subsequently described them. <
How can a failure in the description of a prophecy make a prophecy wrong??? If I misquote the Bible that
doesn't make the Bible wrong. But you seem too be too prejudiced to accept that.
PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate


451.12 in reply to 451.9
> Ever noticed that while Branham claimed that the 1933 prophecies consisted of 7 visions, only 6 are
common to both early and late descriptions of them?
It is notable that of the things Branham claimed to propheseied, those that have happened all occurred prior
to the earliest available accounts of the prophecy and those that were unfulfilled when he described them in
his recorded sermons remained unfulfilled. <
If you know the Message so well, you must have noticed that at several places he asked the audience if some
of them heard him giving the prophecies in 1933, and when he asked there were always some saying yes.(My
Grandmother was at a service in 1958 when he asked that and she said she saw some raising their hands).
So there is no doubt that he gave them prior to the events.
It seems that you don't know the whole context of the Vision, and that you therefore don't know what part of
the Vision is and what not etc. If you have the chance to get you a book of "Supernatural - The life of William
Branham" by Owen Jorgensen (book two contains the Vision) then you will know what the Vision said etc.
PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate

451.13 in reply to 451.10
As an addendum to my previous post, I would suggest that neither you nor any other Message believer has
any better idea of what Mr. Branham originally claimed to have seen in his vision than I do. We simply do not
have the original prophecies from which we can compare their supposed fulfillments.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


451.14 in reply to 451.11
You asked "How can anyone make a prophecy about yesterday?"

Prophecy in the Biblical sense does not need to be predictive, it is rather speaking (or acting in some cases e.
g. Ezekial) a divinely inspired message or in the case of false prophecy claiming to do so. To claim 'thus saith
the Lord' for a falsehood is false prophecy regardless of whether it concerns events past or future.
When Branham claims 'thus saith the Lord' for a (claimed) prophecy it is implausible for you to claim that it
only applied to a description of the prophecy he claimed he made some time in the past for which we have no
direct record of rather than what he had just described.
Options Reply Rate

451.15 in reply to 451.12
You make the assumption that if Branham hadn't made the prophecies he claimed in 1933 then his followers
would have corrected him. How realistic is it that one of the few followers still around from 1933 would have
publicly oppsed him on this if they didn't recall him making all the prophecies he claimed?
On other issues where he had made false claims his followers did not correct him.
Your comment on raising hands at his meeting reminded me of another incident witnessed by Alfred Pohl at
one of Branhams healing meating:
" I was standing right beside Branham, beside his left arm, and our moderator was standing on his right
hand. And we were helping him with these people coming by, praying with them and so on.
And in one case, Branham took the hand of a man, grabbed his hand and then lifted it up in the air and
showed the back of his hand toward the audience. And he said this, "The angel that gave me this gift,"he
talked quite a bit about that angel that gave him the gift"told me that in (a certain sicknessI forget which
it was) spots will appear on the back of my hand."
And as he held this man's hand out and showed the back of his hand toward the audience, he said, "Folks,
can you see the spots on my hand?"
Would you believe hands went up all over that auditorium and even in the back of the auditorium (people
were standing; the place was jammed). And in the balcony way back there you could hardly see his hand, let
alone see spots on his hand. It was way back there, and people had their hands up!
Back there in the gallery, and the balcony, and way at the back at the door. They could see spots! It was just
something else, and I said to myself, "How can these people see those spots?"
They could hardly see his hand, you know, it's too far away. But people were holding up their hands. It was
amazing. And I when I think back to this now, it seems to have been a form of mass hypnotism. People see
what they want to see; they wanted to see spots, because they believed in Branham, and there they were
and they could all see spots.
Excepting two of us. First of all, myself. I was standing right beside him. I was touching him, shoulder to
shoulder. And I looked, and for the life of me I couldn't see any spots. There were no spots.
And you know how I resolved that little problem? I said to myself, "Look, all these people can see spots. And
I can't. There's something wrong with me. They can't all be out of tune with God. I'm the one that's
backslidden." And I said to myself, "I'm going to talk to you later," and "there's something wrong with you."
Really, I was so sincere about this thing. I believed in Branham so much that I felt I was out of step with
God. And so I said, "Okay, I'm going to talk to myself later."
And then the healing went on, and the prayer line ended finally, and I led Branham into the dorm again, and

into the various rooms. When it was all over, I came back into church and here were quite a few people yet,
visiting, standing around. It was quite an exciting time. And lo and behold, the moderator, who stood on the
other side of Branham that night, said, "Brother Pohl, I want to ask you something."
"What is it?"
He said, "You were standing right beside Branham tonight when he held up this man's hand, and people could
see spots."
And then that thought came back to me, "Oh, yeah, that's right. I was the one that didn't see the spots."
So, I said, "Yes, I was right there. And you were on the other side on the right."
He said, "Tell me, did you see any spots on the back of his hand?" And I said, "No, I didn't see any spots." He
said, "I didn't either. I didn't either. And we were right there."
He said, "Tell me something. How is it that you and I who were standing right beside him couldn't see the
spots, and all those people back there, way back there, could see spots?"
Well, how do you answer that? He was our moderator. That made me feel so much better, because I found
out that he was backslidden too, and not me only, see what I mean! I had felt I had been backslidden
because I couldn't see those spots. But here's our moderator.
"We're in trouble; our moderator's backslidden, too, huh?"
That's how I reasoned. So I felt much better because I knew I wasn't the only one, that our brother
moderator couldn't see any spots either. And I thought, "Well, there's something wrong here, there's
something wrong with this whole procedure."
You recommend I read Owen Jorgensens book for a description of the prophecies. If it does not have some
previously unknown early copy of the prophecies, it will merely be adding a extra layer of embellishment to
accounts from Branham's sermons that already show signs of considerable embellishment.
Options Reply Rate

451.16 in reply to 451.15
> You recommend I read Owen Jorgensens book for a description of the prophecies. If it does not have some
previously unknown early copy of the prophecies, it will merely be adding a extra layer of embellishment to
accounts from Branham's sermons that already show signs of considerable embellishment. <
I read the books and the Visions were in there. You will have to talk to Br. Jorgensen if you want to know
where he got the Material froma nd how he was able to give the complete Visions. He spent so many years on
research about every little happening in William Branham's life, that he surely can answer you where he got
the information from. So please contact him if you have any doubt.
About your "dots story":

We had an experiment in physics: there was a transparent vessel with a green fluid in it on the teachers
desk. The teacher opened the lid
and said that if someone smells something, then he should raise his hand. After a short while someone in the
1st row raised his hands and slowly others followed. It didn't take 5 minutes untill every hand in the room
was up. But as you can guess, the fluid in the vessel was perfectly without smell. So this phenomena is not a
phenomena of mass-hypnosis at all.
I hope you don't doubt that Wiliiam Branham indeed had the gift in his left hand, where he could tell by the
pattern of spots on his hand what kind of disease a person had. You have to know that for almost 2 years in
his early ministry, he only had that gift operated, not the discernment. Many thousand people made
experiences with that gift and even neutral historians tell about that gift in their books. It is verified that he
indeed had that gift.

Why Mr. Pohl didn't see the spots I can't tell. I don't even know if his story is true. If the incident indeed was
like he said, then I could listen to it on the recorded tapes of William Branham. But I cannot find it anywhere.
So maybe it is not even true what Mr. Pohl says.
If you have any questions about the gift(s) William Branham had, I can again point you to Owen Jorgensens
books "Supernatural - The lif of William Branham". In there the gifts are described, and probably better than I
could do it. if you don't know where you can get these books I can tell you,
PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate

451.17 in reply to 451.15
I believe that the quotation you have posted from Alfred Pohl is one that I read a few years ago. If it is the
same one, then he goes on to say that he tried to find one example of healing in the follow up and couldn't
find one. Then he goes on to say that he doesn't even believe in the gifts of the Holy Spirit for today
anymore. So much for his spirituality.
Bro. Branham gave names and addreses of people who had been healed in diferent meeting all over the
States and over the world, and even said that they have given permission for their phone numbers to be
given out, and people can even reverse the charges if they want. I remember feeling pleasantly surprised
that, all these years later, I could read the addresses of the people, when they might be dead by now, or
moved, or the houses not even be there any more.What about the photos, Florence Nightinale, etc.
The name of the town and the date was given by Mr. Pohl, and it worried me for a while that no healings
could be found by someone who was aparently on WMB's side, until I got a sermon of Bro. Branham's dated a
little while after the meeting discussed, where he mentions specific healings and the letters of testimony and
thanks he had received from people healed in the meeting. Frankly I would have trouble believing anything
that Mr. Pohl said.
I don't believe everything that Bro. Branham taught was always correct, he was human and sometimes got
things wrong, but I don't believe that he lied about getting letters that he didn't get. Also, I do not know a lot
about the message as some people do, and I certainly don't know enough to be able to go to a specific
sermon to find a certain thing, and yet, when I was worried about this A. Pohl letter, and praying about it, I
come across Bro. Branham's mention of that exact meeting and even quotes testimonies of healings to put
my mind at rest.I don't believe that healings vindicate teachings, but I do believe that healings vindicate
healings.
Another point about the spots on the hand. Can anyone remember Bro. Branham asking the congregation if
they could see the light on occassions? Or is this a figment of MY imagination ? I have no doubt at all that HE
could see the spots and was merely asking if other people could. The fact that people got carried away and
gave false testimony is not a reflection on William Branham.
Katheryn Kuhlman (and , please let's not get off the point by talking about her :) I have my own views about
her ministry, women preachers, and visits to the pope and all :( ), used to ask a congregation, "If you can't
hear me at the back, please raise your hand." At which, some gullible people would raise their hands, and she
would say, with a cheeky smile, "Then how do you know what I said?" The congregation would then get her
little joke and laugh. People get carried away in religious meetings, what can I say? :)
The fact that this incident is ever mentioned at all, to me shows the 'clutching at straws' mentality that some
people enter into when trying to besmirch Bro. Branham. After all, what did he say?
Only, "Folks, can you see the spots on my hand?" Not exactly the most wicked thing I have ever read. :)
Don't we realize that a prophet (a "seer"), can SEE things which others cannot? I'm not the best versed
'messageite', in fact some people probably wouldn't think I'm in the message at all, but I'm sure I can

recollect other incidents where Bro. Branham asks for confirmation whether people can see what he can, or
whether he is in a vision at that time. When was the last time that you bit your finger so hard that it bled to
see if you were in a vision or not, and came to the conclusion that, "Visions don't bleed."
On the video, he asks, "Is this the patient?" Are we to read something dark and sinister into that, too?
Another point, You say, "...his folowers did not correct him." Well it seems that Mr. Pohl and the Moderator
were followers to some extent, and they sure corrected him. Or at least found the 'courage' to write against
him years later. Wouldn't someone from 1933 have found similar courage, if not publicly to his face, then
certainly by now after reflection on it.
I hope you don't mind me putting my two cents worth in.
Shalom.
Options Reply Rate

451.18 in reply to 451.16
I take it from your post that you are unaware of the source of Jorgensen's version of the '1933' prophecies
and are only assume that it isn't just based on Branham's somewhat contradictory later descriptions in his
sermons.
To draw a proper comparison with the claims of seeing spots on Branham's hand it using your 'physics' (sic)
experiment analogy would be like having the teacher asking students to put their hands up if they smelled
something and having people at the back put up their hand right away yet those at the front by the vessel
containing the fluid not smelling anything.
'Having the faith to be healed' was a major feature of Branham's preaching at healing meetings and he made
it clear on a number of occasions that he meant faith in his ministry in particular, not only in God:
"He told me if I get the people to believe me. That seems strange for me to have to say you believe in me.
Said, "Aren't you supposed believe God?" You must believe that. You believe God, believe Christ, and believe
the Holy Ghost. Then after believing all of them, God wants you to believe me. But then there's something for
you to do. Now, you can believe a man and still the gift won't work for you. Reason today people believe in
God. It's still Jesus. Isn't that right? He said, "As you believe in God, believe also in Me." Did He say it?
"As you have belief in God, you believe in Me. That's only way He could help them," 'cause they believe. Now,
I want you to believe me as one of them. But I want you to believe the day is coming and will to you... And
I'll do all I can to help you.
Now, of course, a word for my people. Please, no matter what sin you done, it'll be knowed here at the
platform. The first gift... That's the first manifestation of the gift, it made... Many people know that for about
two or three years; it's worked right along. Just that I could detect diseases...?... as a doctor, whatever it is
to you, it'd be the same thing. But that don't heal you. That'll encourage your faith to know that there's a
supernatural Being is standing here.
Then after about three years, in Canada about five months ago the other gift came down and was
manifested. Now, I tell the secrets of the hearts, the things that you do, the things that you've--unconfessed
sin, and so forth. See, it's perfect, because it's of God.
Now, that doesn't heal you. But what it does, is let you know that the Jesus that we've all talked about, and
your pastor has preached about, is only in this as something more to make you believe in Him, and have faith
in Him...?... How could we discern...?... down and die for you." ('Gifts Calling Without Repentance', ?/3/50)
Those wanting to be healed would have clearly wanted to see the spots for fear on being considered as
having insufficient faith to be healed. No doubt you would have heard the fable of the 'Emperor's new
clothes'. Unfortunately this is a common effect in Christian circles when the claim is implied that 'if you don't
see/hear/feel this you must be unspiritual' is made.

Options Reply Rate

451.19 in reply to 451.17
If you dismiss Pohl's testimony based upon your disagreement with his views on the gifts on the Holy Spirit
(though in the same interview he did state " Well, I believe God heals. I still have a personal belief that God
heals because I have seen healings-not a large amount, but I have seen some genuine healings. But I don't
claim to have the gift of healing. I just pray for people according to James 5. I believe that's the order for the
church today."). I would be even more justified in dismissing the testimony of Branham and his followers
based on their theological views.
I presume the incident told by Alfred Pohl you referred to in your posting is as follows:
"When the campaign was in progress in Winnipeg, the newspaper (one of the large city newspapers) was
giving considerable coverage to the meetings, and they indicated that there were a lot of people healed. They
were favorable to this church, and advertised it and gave news reports that quite a few people were healed.
But later on that same editor sent out some reporters to check on some of these people that they had written
up in the paper weeks before. [The reporters were] to check up and see whether these people who were
supposedly healed at that time, were still healed, were still alive, or whatever.
And when these reporters went back, they discovered that these people had died, or were in the same state
or in a worse state than they were before. So, the editor then put it in the paper that these cases had turned
out to be phonies, and that these people weren't healed after all. And there was something wrong with these
so-called miracles and healings.
But when the pastor of the church saw these reports in the paper, he went to the editor rather disturbed and
not very happy about the situation, and he confronted the editor: "Why do you do this to our church? You're
hurting the reputation of our church, and you shouldn't do that to us."
And the editor said words something to this effect, "Well, pastor, if the healings are genuine, you don't have
to worry, do you?"
And I thought to myself later on when I heard this, well, that editor certainly had a lot of common sense,
because if they're genuine, why worry? If they're not, well then they should be exposed-which is what the
paper did.
And the editor said, "Pastor, we gave you good coverage when Mr. Branham was here." The pastor had to
admit they did. "Now," he said, "we owe it to our people to give them the rest of the story." And he said,
"That's what we found." He said to the pastor, "I'll tell you what I'll do, if you can bring me one genuine case
of a genuine healing, I'll give you the front page."
And I was told right in that pastor's home that they couldn't find one." (1990 interview with David Cloud for O
Timothy Magazine)
Pohl was not the only one involved with Branham's ministry to note that Branham's claims did not match
actual healings.
. An associate of Branham's who acted as his interpreter during a healing campaign in Switzerland, Walter
Hollenweger later wrote regarding him (in his book 'The Pentecostals'):
"However generously he is judged, it must be admitted that his sermons were not merely simple, but often
nave as well, and that by contrast to what he claimed, only a small percentage of those who sought healing
were in fact healed."
While this does not dismiss all evidence of healings associated with Branham's ministry, it should be
remembered when exaggerated claims of the efficacy of Branham's ministry.
You make the assumption that all (or most) of the reports of healings made at Branham's meetings equate to

Healings verifiably occuring. Branham would also openly ask people to testify that they had been healed once
he had prayed for them, whether or not they had any tangible evidence of it, the idea being that the
proclamations of faith would result in their subsequent healing:
[Blank spot on tape]...?... of Divine healing over the coals not long ago. And he said, "I believe Brother
Branham called it out on the platform that had a cancer, that he'd be well." Said, "He had the man to go
ahead and testify, and tell the people to testify of their healing before they were healed. Those out in the
audience as long as they go ahead and testify, to believe God and testify..." Said, "Then he goes around and
says those people were healed."
I said, "The only thing I could do, take...?... His Word and what God said."
He said, "That's the reason Divine healings isn't... There's no Divine healing."
Friends, that person just did not understand. There's no other way in the world to be healed, only through
Divine healing [Blank spot on tape]... faith.
Look, Abraham believed God, and he testified concerning the things that was not, for he had God's Word.
That was enough for Abraham. Twenty-five years later, the promise came to--come to pass.
And today we believe God, express His Word, say that it's done before it is done; because faith is the
substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things you can't see, taste, feel, smell, or hear. See what I
mean? All right. That's it. You expect it. And when you believe it in your heart, you say so.
Do not look to symptoms. If you look to symptoms, you're sure to be lost. Any man any time who looked to
the natural things, always lost their victory. ('Expectations', 10/8/50)
For a number of these cases of claimed healings the evidence of them did not follow, with the symptoms
returning after the excitement died down. Several specific cases were reported from Alfred Pohl's experience
in Saskatoon:
Oh, yes. Yes. The first one I would relate to is a man from a little place near Regina, Saskatchewan. He and
his wife were staunch Christians in our denomination. Very fine family. They had four children, and they were
all attending our Bible school at that time, in which I was on staff. We knew these children very well-such
very fine children, and young people, and a very fine family.
One day during the healing campaign, the phone rang in our dorm and I answered it in our office there, and
here was this man phoning from the airport. He'd flown his wife in from near Regina, and he said, "We're
here. We want Branham to pray for my wife. She's dying of cancer. What shall we do?"
Well, I said, "Bring her down to the Bible school dorm." And he knew very well where that was. I said, "I'll
meet you at the south door, and we'll put her in a room, and I'll see that Branham prays for her."
Which he did, and after the meeting that night we proceeded to take Branham from room to room, and of
course we had her in mind very much. And we brought him into her room, and the husband was there, too.
Branham prayed for her and pronounced her healed.
Well, there was great rejoicing on the part of all of us. We really were rejoicing that the Lord had healed this
woman. [We were rejoicing] for the sake of the whole family. He had given them this story, of course, that
"she's still going to be sick, though she's healed; she's going to feel pretty bad." So, they flew back as soon
as they could. They wouldn't stay around. We didn't have the facilities to take care of sick people ...[Message
truncated]
View Full Message
Options Reply Rate
Keep Reading>>


Subscribe
War (254 views)
To: kw500r (21 of 43)
451.21 in reply to 451.20
William Branham said specifically that Roosevelt would CAUSE the whole
world to go to war:
CONDEMNATION.BY.REPRESENTATION_ JEFF.IN V-2 N-13 SUNDAY_ 60-1113

5-1 But last week, the reason I was expressing the way I did, there was more than politics included. I'd
like to read you a prophecy that was given. I got on... And many... By the way, Mr. Mercier and many of
them are going to take some of these old prophecies, and dig them out, and revise them a little, or bring
them up to date, and put them in papers. I'd like to read some things that I'd like for you to--to... This one
first. I'd like to read something to you.
1932: (Listen to this.) As I was on my way... Or as I was getting ready to go on my way to church this
morning, it came to pass that I fell into a vision. Our services is being held on Meigs Avenue at the old
orphans' home, where Charlie Kern lives in part of the building." (He lives just across the street now, you
know.)
And it came to pass that while I was in this vision I seen some dreadful things take place. I speak this in the
Name of the Lord.
The president which now is, President Franklin D. Roosevelt... (Now remember, this is twenty-eight years
ago.) will cause the whole world to go to war;
Love,


To: kw500r (22 of 43)
451.22 in reply to 451.20
He also claimed this:
CONDEMNATION.BY.REPRESENTATION_ JEFF.IN V-2 N-13 SUNDAY_ 60-1113

6-1 Now, look what happened now. In... President Franklin D. Roosevelt took America to England's tea
party. That's right. Germany never picked on us; we picked on them, throwed the whole world into a
war, to cause a world war. The Germans built the Maginot Line, which there--any veteran here knows
what she took there at the Maginot Line.
Women, given the right to vote, elected President-elect Kennedy--by the woman's vote, the wrong man,
which will finally be to full control of the Catholic church
Love,

To: kw500r (23 of 43)
451.23 in reply to 451.20


E-5 I was on my way to Sunday school, and when I was getting my Bible, a vision came before me; and I
was stopped in the floor. And here was what it said. It's on yellow paper. Will be printed in the "Herald of
Faith" right away, because most all of it is fulfilled. 1933--think of this now. Many, many years ago, about
twenty-eight years ago it--it taken place. Watch how accurate His Word is.
Said, "We now have a president (Dwi... Mr. Roosevelt), and this Mr. Roosevelt will cause the world to go
into a world war through his--in his time of his administration, his--his--as president," and then said, "And
during this time they have permitted women to vote, which will be a curse to the nation. They'll elect the
wrong man sometime." And they did the other day. Now, think of that. Said, "We will go to war with
Germany, and Germany will be fortified behind concrete. And we will take an awful beating at this place," the
Maginot Line eleven years before it was built. See? Exactly.

E-6 Said, "This new dictator, Mussolini, will take his first step toward Ethiopia, and Ethiopia will fall at his
feet." It did. It said, "That'll be his last. He will end in disgrace." And I said, "It will come to pass before the
end time comes that there will be a great woman stand up in the United States, because the United States is
marked woman. Her number is thirteen, and she'll rise up, either be president, or (I put it in parentheses)
perhaps the woman being beautiful and attractive will be the Catholic church but cruel at heart, and
she'll lead the nation to pollution. And then it will come to pass that they'll have an automobile perfected into
a place, that I seen a family driving in an automobile that was glass topped and didn't have any steering
wheel in it."
It was... And I seen the other day that it in the "Popular Mechanics" that the machine is already invented.
They can take it anywhere you want to by some sort of a--this radar control. Just set your post to it and it
goes right on. You don't even need it, and it's glass topped.

E-7 Then I turned to look and I seen the United States was a smoldering something had burned it up.
And down beneath there I said, not in the trance, but, "I predict..." (remember this, I guess this is taped
too), "I predict that these things will take place between now, 1933 and 1977."
Which will give us sixteen more years if my prediction strikes right.
Now, there was seven things spoke of that would happen. Five of them has already happened. There's two
left to take place. It'll be that way. That's in the Name of the Lord it shall be that way.
Love,


To: kw500r (24 of 43)
451.24 in reply to 451.20
REVELATION.CHAPTER.ONE_ JEFF.IN ROJC 9-67 SUNDAY_ 60-1204M

405 Look at the prophecy the Lord give me in '33, how it would happen, "They'd permit women to vote;
in voting they'd elect the wrong person." Seven things was given; five of them's already happened. The next
thing was a great woman, a church, or power or something, to take over in this United States and rule. Then
I seen it just like ashes laying, where it come to the end. It was the end time.
It said, "They'd have a machine that could drive, that didn't have to have no driver in it." They just perfected
it. It said, eleven years... The Holy Spirit said to me... There it is on paper; you can't--it can't be denied.
There it is on paper as the Holy Spirit said. Eleven years before the Maginot Line was built, I said the
Germans... America with this President Roosevelt will be the rascal of all of them." And that's right;
he was; not hurting you Democrats' feelings.
Love,

To: kw500r (25 of 43)
451.25 in reply to 451.20

EPHESIAN.CHURCH.AGE_ JEFF.IN ROJC 131-183 MONDAY_ 60-1205

47 How many remembers that vision here in the church? Sure. Said that how that even Kennedy would
be elected in this last election. How that women would be permitted to vote. How that Roosevelt would
take the world to war. How that Mussolini would go towards Ethiopia, his first invasion, and would take it;
that'd be the end; he'd die off after that. How these great isms would rise up and all fall back into
Communism; Hitlerism, and Mussolini, and Nazism, and so forth, would all fall back into Communism. And
eleven years beforehand, it said that we'd go to war with Germany, and Germany would be fortified behind
concrete, the Maginot Line. It happened just that way. Said then, after that, would come to a place that--
come to pass that science would increase so greatly until they would invent a car, the cars would become
more like "egg" all the time. And that vision was told right here where the Church of Christ stands now, at the
old orphans home. Charlie Kurn, perhaps in the building tonight, was living at the place at the time.
One Sunday morning about seven o'clock it happened. And It said, "Then there would come to pass that
they'd invent a car that they didn't need a steering wheel in it; it'd be controlled by some kind of a power."
They got it now. They got it now, a magnetic power, radar control. They don't even... Just set your radar to
where you're going, it takes you yourself; you don't have to steer it.
48 Now, and it said in there, "At that time, there'd be a great woman stand up in the United States." And
she was dressed and beautiful, but she was cruel in heart. And I got a parenthesis on the vision, even yellow
paper, said, "perhaps the Catholic church." And the women being permitted to vote would help elect the
wrong person for this nation. And that's what they done. Exactly. Now, said, "That would be the beginning."
Now, another thing it said, that... Then immediately after that, I saw this nation become as a smolter,
just blowed to bits. Now, if them things has happened, so will this other.
Love,


To: kw500r (26 of 43)
451.26 in reply to 451.20
THYATIREAN.CHURCH.AGE_ JEFF.IN ROJC 287-327 THURSDAY_ 60-1208

222 And now, and as I started to Sunday school I fell into a trance. We was having it over here at the old
Masonic home, Charlie Kurn's place, little group of us. And I seen this President Roosevelt leading the
world to a world war: predicted. I said, "And there's three isms: the Nazi, and the Fascism, and
Communism." I said... (How many in here remembers?) I said, "Keep your eyes on Communism; it'll all head
up in there." I said, "Ethiopia, Mussolini will go to Ethiopia, but he'll fail." And I said, "We'll finally go to war
with Germany," but I said, "Germany will be fortified in, in a great big bunch of concrete," eleven years
before the Maginot Line was built, eleven years.
223 I said, "Then after the war... We'll finally win it. And after the war is over, it'll come to pass that
science will be inventing great things." And I said, "When they do, they'll make an automobile, and
automobiles will continually shape down (You know what they looked like in '33, now they...)," said, "they'll
become like eggs, look like an egg. *For I seen on a highway, a great master highway, a car going
down the road that didn't have any steering wheel in it. It was controlled by a power." They got it right
now...?...
I said, "During that time... Now, they're permitting women to vote; and women, in voting, will finally..." I
said, "This nation is a woman's nation; it's marked by a woman. It's a woman right down through prophecy,
everywhere; and number thirteen everywhere in prophecy." And I said, "It's a woman's country; she has her
liberties here. And she'll ruin it; she's the ruination of the world."
225 (And, Roy, I got your letters on that, that great woman that... "Every criminal case... We've X-rayed it
down now to: every criminal case was ever done in this United States, a woman was behind it." That's exactly
right. That's immoral women. You see?... and things.)
Now, so then I said, "There will be in that time, during that time the woman will be permitted to vote, and
they'll elect the wrong person (They did it on this last election. That's right.) which will start the stronghold.
During that time it'll come to pass that--that there'll be a great woman rise up in the United States; she'll be
beautifully dressed (And I got in parenthesis, perhaps the Catholic church. See?), that'll take rulership over
the power, overpower the others in the United States. She'll be beautiful to look at, but she'll be cruel-
hearted as she can be."
227 I said, "Then I looked again, and I saw the United States just blowed to pieces. There wasn't nothing
left on it."
And I predicted then. "Now, this, that was THUS SAITH THE LORD."
And think. Of five of those seven predictions has already happened.
The church to take ahold, the Catholic church. And the coming of the end time...
And I said, "I seen, looked like just stumps a-burning, rocks blowed out, and the whole United States just
looked bare, laying like that, as far as I could see where I was standing."
And I said, "I predict, according to the way time is moving; it'll be sometime between this year '33
and '77." And it'll have to squeeze awful hard to get through there.
And we're setting on a powder keg, friend. Everything's ready.
* Although it is true that cars have gotten more egg-shaped, there is no master highway, cars are still being
powered the same way, they still have steering wheels.
Also, I never saw the Catholics "in power" in my lifetime. Even when Kennedy was president, I didn't know
one person who had voted for him where I lived. People were grief stricken when he was assassinated, they
did not hate him. However, conservatives never were swung over to his religion.
Love,


To: kw500r (27 of 43)
451.27 in reply to 451.20
TURNING.NORTHWARD_ PHOENIX.AZ SUNDAY_ 61-0129

E-48 Over the nation it looked just like where rocks was blowed out and stumps was smoldering, and--
and so forth. And immediately after that, Mr. Roosevelt--truly in the time of his administration
here--the world went to war.
Love,

From: 8320JOHN 12/28/2002 11:31 am

451.28 in reply to 451.21
>>and revise them a little, or bring them up to date, and put them in papers. <<
:)-
Options Reply Rate
From: 8320JOHN 12/28/2002 11:33 am

451.29 in reply to 451.22
>>we picked on them, throwed the whole world into a war, to cause a world war.<<
If I am not mistaken, it was Germany that declared war on the USA after the Pearl Harbour incident. Mabey
we need to "revise" this one as well. :)-
Options Reply Rate
From: 8320JOHN 12/28/2002 11:37 am

451.30 in reply to 451.23
>>"I predict that these things will take place between now, 1933 and 1977." Which will give us sixteen more
years if my prediction strikes right.<<
Which as we have experienced...it has'nt. Billy Branham was an evangelist in the healing evangelism revival,
that was his ministry. After that, it is all "by guess and by golly." Speculation and failed predictions.
Back to the Word.
Options Reply Rate

From: 8320JOHN 12/28/2002 11:41 am

451.31 in reply to 451.26
>227 I said, "Then I looked again, and I saw the United States just blowed to pieces. There wasn't nothing
left on it."
And I predicted then. "Now, this, that was "THUS SAITH THE LORD."
And think. Of five of those seven predictions has already happened.
The church to take ahold, the Catholic church. And the coming of the end time...And I said, "I seen, looked
like just stumps a-burning, rocks blowed out, and the whole United States just looked bare, laying like that,
as far as I could see where I was standing."
And I said, "I predict, according to the way time is moving; it'll be sometime between this year '33 and '77."
And it'll have to squeeze awful hard to get through there. And we're setting on a powder keg, friend.
Everything's ready.<
So it was in fact, "...thus saith the Lord...??" Which was it? A prediction or in fact a prophecy? Will the real
WMB please stand up.
Options Reply Rate
From: 8320JOHN 12/28/2002 1:30 pm

To: kw500r (34 of 43)
451.34 in reply to 451.32
"...thus saith the Lord..." What??
1977?
America destroyed?
Prophecy?
Prediction?
What?
All nations will eventually be destroyed. And that is, "...thus SAID the Lord..." So how does this gives us any
information that we did not already have? It does'nt...we knew that going in.
You know, it really is'nt worth haggling over in my view. I see no reason to accept the sayings of WMB above
that which can be proven by consistent Scriptural evidence. Many have forecast the future, even those far
from being Christians. It does not prove their doctrine, and that is really my only objection to the mess-age
claims.
Enjoy the journey.

Options Reply Rate

To: kw500r (35 of 43)
451.35 in reply to 451.20
>>Hmm, let me think... was there a country that was not affected by the war? Nope. So was the whole world
at War? Why was it called WORLD WAR 2?<<
It was called World War II because the war was global in nature as opposed to regional, not because every
country in the world fought in or was affected by it. In WWI, only 32 nations were involved. WWII expanded
to include nearly all nations of the world, but there were still some which did not participate (e.g., Portugal,
Spain and Switzerland). WWII was already a global war before the US entered in 1941.
>>You said Bro Branham said Roosevelt would lead the world to war. Bro Branham never said this. That is
putting words in his mouth.<<
And now, and as I started to Sunday school I fell into a trance. We was having it over here at the old
Masonic home, Charlie Kurn's place, little group of us. And I seen this President Roosevelt leading
the world to a world war: predicted.--William Branham
THYATIREAN.CHURCH.AGE_ JEFF.IN ROJC 287-327 THURSDAY_ 60-1208
I would like to recommend that you develop a more clear way of indicating the difference between times
when you're quoting someone and when you're doing the speaking yourself. Your previous post made it look
like you were me and I was you until your last paragraph.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


To: kw500r (36 of 43)
451.36 in reply to 451.33
>>The way John has presented his first statement implies that Bro Branham said FDR whould start WW2,
which he never said or implied and if you read it that way then you are misinterpreting what he said just like
you do with certain scriptures and other quotes by him.<<
I presented Mr. Branham's quotes verbatim and commented on them (see http://forums.delphiforums.com/
kennah/messages?msg=451.1). There is no way his statements accurately reflect the United
State's participation in WWII. In order to do so, one must practically rewrite Mr. Branham's prophecy
and redefine the term World War as you have demonstrated in some of your previous posts. As I said earlier,
the US did not "cause the whole world to go to war" (Wm. Branham's words), but led the allies to win the
war. There is a profound difference.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

451.37 in reply to 451.27
Excellent series of quotes. It's hard to miss Wm. Branham's intended meaning after reading all these
examples. Thanks!
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


To: 8320JOHN (38 of 43)
451.38 in reply to 451.29
In response to Wm. Branham's statement, "Germany never picked on us; we picked on them, throwed the
whole world into a war, to cause a world war," you responded,
>>If I am not mistaken, it was Germany that declared war on the USA after the Pearl Harbour incident.<<
You are correct. Here are the opening statements of President Roosevelt's Declaration of War on Germany:
To the Congress of the United States:
On the morning of Dec. 11 the Government of Germany, pursuing its course of world conquest,
declared war against the United States.
The long-known and the long-expected has thus taken place. The forces endeavoring to enslave the
entire world now are moving toward this hemisphere.
Never before has there been a greater challenge to life, liberty and civilization.
Delay invites great danger. Rapid and united effort by all of the peoples of the world who are
determined to remain free will insure a world victory of the forces of justice and of righteousness over
the forces of savagery and of barbarism.
Italy also has declared war against the United States.
I therefore request the Congress to recognize a state of war between the United States and Germany,
and between the United States and Italy.
Franklin D. Roosevelt
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

From: 8320JOHN 12/31/2002 7:46 am

451.39 in reply to 451.38
Germany did officially declare war on the United States, a very foolish move by Hitler, of whom it was said by
the General Staff,
that 'he was one of our best agents,' he made so many disastrous mistakes in the military realm.
The USA was conducting convoy duty across the Alantic prior to the declaration of war, but as yet did not
actually come into direct conflict with the German Army, Air Force, etc. We did in fact carry out several depth
charge attacks on underwater forces. None were successful as I recall, that is, as far as is known. The Ruben
James, a destroyer was sunk by U-Boats prior to the declaration of war.
Options Reply Rate

451.40 in reply to 451.37
You are welcome. I couldn't help but notice some of the things he predicted around those quotes, such as
some of the details of the prophecies concerning the car. I started another string, pointing out that this
prophecy has not yet been fulfilled AS HE DESCRIBED IT. I had not really noticed the details before. One
would be hardpressed to see a story in Popular Mechanics, that the car was prototyped - as the fulfilment of
this prophecy.
This string is about FDR, which is why I put those comments on another string. Since we are discussing
whether or not his prophecies are perfectly fulfilled or not, I thought I would point out that the egg-shaped
car prophecies are not fulfilled - at least not yet.
Love,


Subscribe
War (255 views)
451.41 in reply to 451.37
Also, John, he makes many comments about women voting the wrong man into office (Kennedy). What
about his opponent? Was not Nixon later nearly impeached? Was WMB saying that Nixon was the more
honorable presidential candidate? Just wondering if anyone has ever thought about these statements. Was
Nixon any more righteous than Kennedy?
Also, he was always alluding to the fact that former presidents were such Godly, honorable men - as though
the government were ever "pure". He made many comments about men such as Lincoln - who indeed did
some good things in freeing the slaves, etc. - but actually had seances in the White House! In fact, Lincoln
was somewhat of a "seer" himself. He had a very compelling vision about the USA and destruction himself.
Although President Clinton's antics were highly publicized, it is a fact that former presidents participated in
similar things. Sexual indiscretions were not new to later "beatnik" presidents at all. I don't believe in
discussing those things which are done "in darkness", but one only has to do some research to find out that
what I am saying is true.
Love,


451.42 in reply to 451.37
Also, from my studies, it seems that WMB definitely had something against FDR. He blamed him
for the "daylight savings time" and called it "democratic time":
WE.WOULD.SEE.JESUS_ SASKATOON.SK THURSDAY_ 57-0516

E-3 We call it at home, Democrat time, because Mr. Roosevelt was the one who did this thing. And our
country set it up so they could get a... oh, "I will play golf a little longer, or something another." I don't know
what they're... I don't see why they just leave it the way God made it. Don't you think that'd be better? God
made the sun to go over, so just... They just settled on something about it anyhow.
He also referred to FDR's 4 terms as a preliminary dictatorship:
[INVASION.OF.THE.USA_ JEFF.IN V-26 N-1 SUNDAY_ 54-0509 203 But let me tell you,
when Mr. Roosevelt (The man's dead. Let him rest; I trust he is.) come in, and run in three or four terms,
and taken over, just a preliminary dictatorshipI can prove to you, that in the Scripture, where That said it'd
take place. That's right. We haven't got no more constitution. She's broke to pieces. ]
He made mention that Roosevelt changed Thanksgiving:
DIVINE.HEALING_ JEFF.IN V-26 N-9 SUNDAY_ 54-1219M

9 We only have one Protestant holiday in America, and Mr. Roosevelt changed that for us. Uh-huh. That's
Thanksgiving. The rest of them are all Catholic days, every one of them. See? Mr. Roosevelt changed that for
us. So we just have it on every Thursday, or some week, or something like that. It isn't on a regular set day
anymore.
He even insinutated that it was during his term that caused women to eventually vote the wrong
man into the presidency:

E-5 Said, "We now have a president (Dwi... Mr. Roosevelt), and this Mr. Roosevelt will cause the world to
go into a world war through his--in his time of his administration, his--his--as president," and then said, "And
during this time they have permitted women to vote, which will be a curse to the nation. They'll elect
the wrong man sometime."
Although, he did say that now both Republicans and Democrats are corrupt, he seemed to clearly be a
Republican and did not think much of FDR, at least that was my impression. Note that he never referred to
him as "President" Roosevelt, but "Mr." Roosevelt and he was still in term. It is considered proper respect to
refer to a President or FORMER President with the title "President" and back in those days, it was rare NOT to
do this.
Love,

Edited 12/31/2002 12:54:53 PM ET by Jeena (JEENA_EL)
Edited 12/31/2002 12:56:17 PM ET by Jeena (JEENA_EL)

451.43 in reply to 451.42
Those are some interesting points to ponder, Jeena.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
Next Discussion>>

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - WB to Fred Barker: "It'll all

Subscribe
be over." (189 views)
To: ALL (1 of 64)
1395.1
In March 1965, a friend of Wm. Branham's by the name of Fred Barker had a serious stroke and lay in an
Upland, California hospital close to death. While on a campaign in LA, Wm. Branham visited his friend in the
hospital. During an interview for Only Believe magazine (December 1998) Fred Barker gives this account of
his visit from Wm. Branham:
He sat down beside my bed, and we started talking about the birds that were on the windowsill, but after a few minutes, he began
to tell me about the 5 instances of the Spoken Word. I had never heard anything like that before, and at that time I had no idea of
what he was talking about. Scripturally, we really didnt know the significance of Brother Branhams ministry, and we just
looked at him then as a healing evangelist.
Brother Branham prayed for me. Then, as he started for the door, he stopped and turned towards me and placed his hat, which
was in his hand, over his chest. Freddie, he said to me, its important what you say to the Lord. Some day, like the
Syrophenician woman and Sister Hattie Wright, youll say the right thing and itll all be over [emphasis added].
After 39 days in the hospital, Brother Fred was released from the hospital, partially paralyzed and nearly unable to speak. Near the end of
the interview, he was asked, "How do you feel today about what Brother Branham told you so many years ago in that Upland hospital
room?" Bro. Fred answered,
The Lord has richly blessed us in so many ways, but physically I am still confined to a wheelchair. I have never completely
regained my health. I realize now that Brother Branham must have seen a vision as he was leaving my room, in order to have
said to me what he did. I am standing on that, and am believing that in Gods time, and by inspiration, that I will say the right
thing, and what was spoken on that day will be fulfilled.
During my tenure at Tucson Tabernacle, Fred Barker was a regular attendee as well. Bro. Barker was always optimistic and a hard worker
on a project to create a concordance of Wm. Branham's sermons. He was an inspiration to us all. But his condition continued to worsen
during my time at the Tabernacle. We all believed with Bro. Barker that he would one day say the right thing and become completely
healed. Pearry Green would often remind us of that promise.
A few years ago, Brother Fred passed away having never received the healing Wm. Branham promised would one day come.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Fred%20Barker1-20.html (1 of 19)4/1/2005 6:12:52 AM

(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: atHisfeet 1/26/2004 10:29 am

1395.2 in reply to 1395.1
Some day, like the Syrophenician woman and Sister Hattie Wright, youll say the right thing and
itll all be over [emphasis added].
It'll all be over... What will all be over? His life? His suffering with the physical condition he was
in? He would receive healing?
- God Bless -
atHisfeet
Options Reply Rate
From: quailfeather 1/26/2004 5:30 pm

1395.3 in reply to 1395.1
i dont see where brother branham said thus says the lord or that he had a vision
brothre fred assumed he had one..
and what if the "right thing" was "lord take me home?"
fred's story is really a rebule to me as i am disabled myself and i find it hard to be positive as he was.
and it will all be over...praise god that it is for fred!
i dont see any condemnation of the prophet here as you might
tell me did the tuscon tabernacle "pray you out from under the blood?"
how did they deal with you?

Options Reply Rate

To: atHisfeet (4 of 64)
1395.4 in reply to 1395.2
Since Fred Barker had no desire to die from his illness but to be healed, I would say that in the context of the
examples Wm. Branham preceeded his statement with (where the Syrophenician said the right thing and she
received her desire, and Hattie Wright said the right thing and got what she desired), I think it's obvious he
meant that Bro. Barker would one day say the right thing and receive his healing. I would have a hard time
believing he meant Bro. Barker would one day say the right thing and die. If that's what he meant, that
would sure be different than anything Jesus or His disciples ever said in response to people's request for
healing, wouldn't it!
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


To: quailfeather unread (5 of 64)
1395.5 in reply to 1395.3
>>i dont see where brother branham said thus says the lord or that he had a vision
brothre fred assumed he had one.. <<
Where does the Bible say that a prophet has to say "thus saith the Lord", or see a vision before he
prophesies? The New Testament is filled with prophesies, yet I don't believe the phrase "thus saith the Lord"
was ever used by the NT prophets, apostles or other writers of the NT. Whether or not Bro. Barker was
correct in his assumption that Wm. Branham had a vision, I don't think he was incorrect in his interpretation
of what Wm. Branham was suggesting.
>>and what if the "right thing" was "lord take me home?" <<
As I mentioned to aHf, this would not have been consistent with his examples of the "spoken word". As far
as I know, Bro. Barker continued to accept by faith that he would be physically healed until he died. After all,
he believed it was a promise given to him by a prophet of God, who often said to those he prayed for,
"believe and don't doubt!"
>>fred's story is really a rebule to me as i am disabled myself and i find it hard to be positive as he was.
and it will all be over...praise god that it is for fred! <<
I'm sorry for the suffering you are having to go through. We don't have to look at people like Bro. Fred as a
rebuke, though. I know he had his ups and downs. So did the apostle Paul. But we can take encouragement
from their examples. I'm sure my problems don't compare to the cross you find yourself having to bear, but
I think it's important to try to do as Paul said during times of trial, and that is to be content in whatever
situation we are in. The source of such joy and contentment isn't in our circumstances, but in our
relationship with the Lord. It is the Lord who gives us strength to overcome the downside of our negative
circumstances to such an extent that we can even use our pain for God's glory and His Kingdom, like Joni
Erickson Tada. Of course, to be with the Lord is the ultimate, but since we're not there yet, there is
no greater sense of fulfillment than to know we are in God's will even through all our trials and infirmities.
We don't have to feel rebuked by those who are content in the Lord through extreme adversities. We can
aspire to be like them by God's grace.
>>tell me did the tuscon tabernacle "pray you out from under the blood?"
how did they deal with you? <<
I have no idea what they may have done as a congregation after I left. However, nobody from the
Tabernacle ever reached out and tried to win me back. I wrote a letter explaining why I didn't believe the
Message anymore and mailed it to everyone on the Tucson Tabernacle directory shortly after I left. I got a
few responses, but no one made a serious attempt to encourage me to come back.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles


Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

1395.6 in reply to 1395.4
<< I would have a hard time believing he meant Bro. Barker would one day say the right thing and die. If
that's what he meant, that would sure be different than anything Jesus or His disciples ever said in response
to people's request for healing, wouldn't it! >>
True. I was only saying that he didn't tell Fred Barker that he would be healed. Hattie Wright wanted the
salvation of her sons... not anything "physically" for herself.
I was only stating that it is possible that Fred Barker did receive whatever was his desire, and that desire may
not have been for his healing.
Not trying to be argumentative, only trying to look at this from another angle.
- God Bless -
atHisfeet
Psalm 25:5 Lead me in thy truth, and teach me:

for thou art the God of my salvation;
on thee do I wait all the day.

Options Reply Rate

1395.7 in reply to 1395.6
>>I was only stating that it is possible that Fred Barker did receive whatever was his desire, and that desire
may not have been for his healing.<<
I understand what you're saying. However, although I never discussed his desire to be healed with him, I
knew Fred Barker. All of us at the Tabernacle knew it was his desire to be healed. As late as his 1998
interview with Only Believe, he expected that he would one day say the right thing and be completely,
physically healed. In his closing statement of the interview he said,
The Lord has richly blessed us in so many ways, but physically I am still confined to a wheelchair. I
have never completely regained my health. I realize now that Brother Branham must have seen a
vision as he was leaving my room, in order to have said to me what he did. I am standing on that,
and am believing that in Gods time, and by inspiration, that I will say the right thing, and what was
spoken on that day will be fulfilled.
Bro. Barker continued to believe for his healing because he knew what Wm. Branham taught about
the "spoken word" (the ability to speak one's desire and have it come to pass, whether it be for healing,
restoring lost limbs or creating something out of nothing). If Wm. Branham's promise wasn't a false
prophecy, we would have to believe that a man known for his gifts of healing and prophecy had just predicted
that Bro. Barker would one day become so discouraged by decades of suffering that his desire would be to
seek relief in death and that he would say the right thing and make it happen. I don't think that fits the
context of Wm. Branham's visit with Bro. Barker back in 1965.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Reply Rate

1395.8 in reply to 1395.7
When I said: "It is possible that Fred Barker did receive whatever was his desire, and that desire may not
have been for his healing."
I was not insinuating that he wished to die, but rather the desire that he had that Bro. Branham was referring
to could have been any number of things... Maybe his desire was for the salvation of loved ones, or maybe it
was to mend a broken relationship... and perhaps he did at some time "say the right thing", even though he
himself didn't realize it.
From the interview excerpt that you posted, it does indeed sound like he attributed the statement of Bro.
Branham to his physical healing, and as such, Fred may have missed what Bro. Branham was actually
referring to.
If indeed Bro. Branham was referring to Fred's physical healing, then, I believe that it would have been a
failed vision.
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate


1395.9 in reply to 1395.8
>>I was not insinuating that he wished to die, but rather the desire that he had that Bro. Branham was
referring to could have been any number of things... Maybe his desire was for the salvation of loved ones, or
maybe it was to mend a broken relationship...<<
Thanks for the clarification.
>>... and perhaps he did at some time "say the right thing", even though he himself didn't realize it... From
the interview excerpt that you posted, it does indeed sound like he attributed the statement of Bro. Branham
to his physical healing, and as such, Fred may have missed what Bro. Branham was actually referring to.<<
The next thing to consider would be why God would have led Wm. Branham to make such a statement that
neither Bro. Barker, his wife, nor any of the rest of us would have recognized as having come to pass.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


1395.10 in reply to 1395.9
<< The next thing to consider would be why God would have led Wm. Branham to make such a statement
that neither Bro. Barker, his wife, nor any of the rest of us would have recognized as having come to pass.
>>
Right. Many people would say that the reason things like this happened is to "seperate the wheat from the
chaff"...
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate

1395.11 in reply to 1395.10
>>Many people would say that the reason things like this happened is to "seperate the wheat from the
chaff"...<<
Believe me, I hear you there. What do you think?
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: atHisfeet 1/29/2004 1:20 pm

1395.12 in reply to 1395.11
<< Believe me, I hear you there. What do you think? >>
Well now, that is the question...
Am I wheat? Or am I chaff? Does believing the message make you wheat?
For 20 years, believing the message and the messenger to be true, it is hard to objectively look at anything
without being "swayed" by the teachings of the message... in oher words, to reject the messenger, you
reject the message, and to reject the message is to reject Christ. And who wants to reject Christ?? Not me.
So, now the decision has to be made on my part.
Is Bro. Branham "The Messenger/Prophet" to this "last church age", or not? If he is, then I need to embrace
ALL he said, even if it contradicts itself, and the bible. If he is not, then the choice is easy.
My intellect/mind/thoughts can see the discrepancies within the message. There isn't anyone that can tell me
that there are no discrepancies. I can also see discrepancies between the message and the bible.
I have been praying so much for God to show me the truth. Message or not. I am open to His leading. I
keep asking for God to "give me an answer" as to what the truth is, and "Is the message true" etc. The only
answer I feel impressed upon my heart is:
"I have already given you My answer with My Word".
Something that I have been thinking about lately... if the message and the bible are the same (as is
preached), and if you are able to "judge the message" by the bible, then shouldn't you say that you can
"judge the bible by the message"?? When I think of it that way, it doesn't make me very comfortable.........
So, I pray now that God will reveal the truth (with regards to the message) to me by His word, and that I am
not too stupid to see it.

(Sorry to ramble on and on.... and veer so far from your question)
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate

1395.13 in reply to 1395.12
then shouldn't you say that you can "judge the bible by the message"?? When I think of it that way, it
doesn't make me very comfortable.........
Unfortunately, that's the only way to make the message "line up", which is to conform the Bible to it, rather
than vice versa.
So, I pray now that God will reveal the truth (with regards to the message) to me by His word, and that I am
not too stupid to see it.
I think God is doing a fine job with you already, and you are definitely smart enough to see it (not that it
really takes intelligence, but I know what you mean). You are showing a remarkable understanding of God's
Word for being in the Message. (that's a compliment) :-)
Kris


Options Reply Rate

1395.14 in reply to 1395.13
<< You are showing a remarkable understanding of God's Word for being in the Message. >>
It sure would be easier if God would just send an angel and tell me.... <sigh>
Then again, I would have the whole burden of proving that the angel was from God, and not satan disguised
as an angel of light....
There is NO easy way.
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate


1395.15 in reply to 1395.12
I think you have been answering your own questions for quite some time now, or rather, the Lord has been
showing them to you. You seem to know what' right, but the implications of making a final decision may be
so painful that I sense you are hesitating. I know what you're going through, having been in a similar place
myself. But there comes a time when we must shun the fear of men and circumstances and trust in the Word
of the Lord.
Please don't take this wrong, but I feel I should ask you a few questions. Have you repented of your sins?
Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God? Do you believe that He died for you sins? Have you
confessed that God raised Him from the dead? Do you have a desire to obey His Word?
If you have answered yes to all the above and still seem to be having a hard time making a decision, then I
would ask where your trust lies. Are you trusting in yourself to make the right decision, or are you trusting in
the Lord? Trusting in yourself will create doubts about whether you can make the right decision. But trusting
in God allows the Holy Spirit to be your counselor and guide. There's truth to the saying, "Let go and let
God."
So are you wheat or chaff? I truly believe you are wheat because you seem to love God and His Word. The
fact that your decision weighs so heavily on you in spite of the treatment you have already received by others
for even considering that you've been wrong says a lot.
"I have already given you My answer with My Word".
That is almost exactly what the Lord told me in my time of decision. When I made up my mind to submit
to Him and His Word, the burden that was lifted from me was incredible. I experienced a
newfound confidence in Him that I never felt in all my years in the Message.
When we go to a cold lake or swimming pool, that first jump is often the hardest. We know we'll miss the fun
if we don't jump in, but we hesitate. We get so close, then we run back. It only takes one little step
to become completely immersed in the water, but then the fun begins.
Jesus Christ is moving in your life, aHf. I think you know that. You just need to take that first small step into
His loving hands and trust that He'll do the rest.
May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope
by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Romans 15:13
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

1395.16 in reply to 1395.15
<< Have you repented of your sins? Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God? Do you
believe that He died for you sins? Have you confessed that God raised Him from the dead? Do you have a
desire to obey His Word?
If you have answered yes to all the above and still seem to be having a hard time making a decision, then I
would ask where your trust lies. Are you trusting in yourself to make the right decision, or are you trusting in
the Lord? Trusting in yourself will create doubts about whether you can make the right decision. But trusting
in God allows the Holy Spirit to be your counselor and guide. There's truth to the saying, "Let go and let
God.">>
As to your questions... Yes. I believe that my trust does lie in the Lord, but how can I be SURE that the
leading that I "feel" is from the Lord, and not satan trying to "lure me away" from the message? With all
due respect, how can I KNOW that the counsel that I am getting on this forum isn't just satan's efforts to get
me to leave the message? (I know that sounds awful)
Psalm 64:1 Hear my voice, O God, in my prayer: preserve my life from fear of the enemy.
Psalm 64:2 Hide me from the secret counsel of the wicked; from the insurrection of the workers of iniquity:
Psalm 64:3 Who whet their tongue like a sword, and bend their bows to shoot their arrows, even bitter words:
Psalm 64:4 That they may shoot in secret at the perfect: suddenly do they shoot at him, and fear not.
Psalm 64:5 They encourage themselves in an evil matter: they commune of laying snares privily; they say,
Who shall see them?
Psalm 64:6 They search out iniquities; they accomplish a diligent search: both the inward thought of every
one of them, and the heart, is deep.
Psalm 64:7 But God shall shoot at them with an arrow; suddenly shall they be wounded.
Psalm 64:8 So they shall make their own tongue to fall upon themselves: all that see them shall flee away.
Psalm 64:9 And all men shall fear, and shall declare the work of God; for they shall wisely consider of his
doing.
Psalm 64:10 The righteous shall be glad in the LORD, and shall trust in him; and all the upright in heart shall
glory.
Even satan himself used scripture to try to "tempt" the Lord.... I am sorry brother. I am just so confused
right now. How can I know beyond a shadow of doubt??
- God Bless -

atHisfeet

Edited 1/29/2004 4:19:03 PM ET by atHisfeet
Options Reply Rate

1395.17 in reply to 1395.15
When we go to a cold lake or swimming pool, that first jump is often the hardest. We know we'll miss the fun
if we don't jump in, but we hesitate. We get so close, then we run back. It only takes one little step
to become completely immersed in the water, but then the fun begins.
What an awesome analogy!
Kris

Options Reply Rate


1395.18 in reply to 1395.16
With all due respect, how can I KNOW that the counsel that I am getting on this forum isn't just satan's
efforts to get me to leave the message? (I know that sounds awful)
Don't worry about how it sounds. It makes sense. You don't want to be burned twice. I think John had it
right when he said to just trust in God. Not put your doubts on the shelf. There has to be some point short
of God becoming flesh and conking you on the head where you can make a decision based on what he has
given you and trust Him to lead you the right way. Hmm.. let me put it a different way...
Many people believe they are led by the Holy Spirit, and yet are in a lie. I know, that is your fear, that Satan
may be enticing you with "fine sounding arguments". We can only be sure when we take the position that we
really don't care about ramifications or what it means, we just want the truth. Those in the message or in
other groups that are in that much error are not unbiased judgers of the truth. Granted, none of us are
completely unbiased. But we need to get to the point where we are naked before God and put all of our
beliefs in front of Him and ask Him to show you the truth. If we truly don't care about what it means, and we
hunger for that Pure Truth revealed by His Holy Spirit, He will not, by any means, steer us wrong.
We are deceived by asking God to show us the truth, but not really meaning it. We are deceived when we
say we only want the truth, but only if it conforms to our preconceptions or will make our lives more
comfortable.
If you are seeking God with a humble and open heart, he will not under any circumstances, steer you wrong.
I think the bottom line is the original question I asked. What more does He need to show you short of
"conking" you on the head?
Let me put it yet another way. Would you agree that you have given God every possible opportunity to show
you the truth in the Message? It seems that you have. And how has He answered you? The pastor railing
against you on Sundays. Ever increasing doubts. Refusal to answer your honest questions. It's not like you
are rejecting Christ or His Word. You are simply asking how what people believe really conforms to the Word,
as the Word commands.
This is far different from putting your doubts on the shelf, but at some point, a step of faith has to be
involved. At some point, you have to trust that God has not given you a stone when you have asked for
bread, or a snake when you have asked for a fish. (Matthew 7:7-10).
You remain in my prayers. As an aside, does pretty much everyone in your church know about the doubts
that you are experiencing?
In Christ Jesus,
Kris


Options Reply Rate

1395.19 in reply to 1395.18
<< As an aside, does pretty much everyone in your church know about the doubts that you are
experiencing? >>
Not one person knows... not my kids or anyone. Only my wife, and the pastor (and perhaps his wife, if he
told her...)
No one has any clue what my wife and I are going through right now. I don't want to cause anyone else to
stumble...
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate


1395.20 in reply to 1395.16
>>I believe that my trust does lie in the Lord, but how can I be SURE that the leading that I "feel" is from the
Lord, and not satan trying to "lure me away" from the message?<<
Because we are not to go by what we feel. As it's been said, feelings are notoriously deceptive. Satan loves
to influence us by appealing to what we "feel" instead of by what we read in the Bible. That's why we must
trust the Word as our absolute, and the Holy Spirit as our teacher. You don't have to learn to trust your
feelings. On the contrary, what you need to do is learn to trust what God has revealed in the Bible. There
comes a time when we ignore our "feelings" and step out and faithfully accept what God has said in His
Word. Our feelings are constantly changing, but His Word is ever True!
I mentioned this way back when we first started discussing your dilemma. Do you remember when I told you
that you don't have to "leave the Message," as it were? That's still true. I'm not suggesting you forsake all
of Wm. Branham's teachings. But if you're willing, let's take this step: Start reading nothing but your Bible
for 1 year. Don't listen to any Message tapes or read the books. Just spend your time in prayer and the
Bible. One of those "read your Bible in a year" schedules might help because they mix the OT with the NT on
a daily basis. Now, as you spend your time reading God's Word, you probably will read passages that
contradict what you've been taught in the Message. Don't struggle with, "but Bro. Branham said so-and-so."
Just listen to the Holy Spirit and trust in His Word. You might even ask one of us at the forum about
something you've read. Like I said, don't approach it like you're going to forsake the Message. Just take one
step at a time, and if you read something in the Bible that doesn't fit with the Message, just say, "I'm going
to set this Message teaching aside and trust in Your Word, Lord." Then continue immersing yourself in
God's written revelation to us, the Bible. Would you be willing to try that? Trust in the Lord and not in those
whose words contradict what He has taught us in His Word.
"Every word of God is flawless;

he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.
Do not add to his words,
or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.
"Two things I ask of you, O LORD ;

do not refuse me before I die:
Keep falsehood and lies far from me;
give me neither poverty nor riches,
but give me only my daily bread.
Proverbs 30:5-8
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me

Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
Keep Reading>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Games


Subscribe
1395.21 in reply to 1395.12
<and if you are able to "judge the message" by the bible, then shouldn't you say that you can "judge the
bible by the message"?? >
Would that be like the progressive revelation idea? That the Bible was part of the learning process and the
Holy Spirit corrected it through WMB?
<When I think of it that way, it doesn't make me very comfortable.........> Makes me ache all over:)
Options Reply Rate

1395.22 in reply to 1395.20
Honestly John, I have already stopped listening to tapes, and "reading" the message. I have done some
recent "study" of the message with regards to things I have been seeing on this and other "pro-message"
forums. I have been studying the Bible, and my wife and I are "re-starting" our nightly Bible-study that we
used to do at our home with our two teenagers.
The problem with "only reading the Bible and not listening to the message" is that we are still going to a
message church. My kids will hear one thing at home with our study, and then possibly hear something
different at church. If my kids were just toddlers, I wouldn't worry, but as teens, I am concerned that if they
see that the message is wrong, and it is the only "version of God" that they know they might become
discouraged, and turn away from God.
I don't honestly know how to explain things to them if we decide to leave the message....
- God Bless -
atHisfeet


Options Reply Rate

1395.23 in reply to 1395.22
Maybe if you are constantly hammering (that may be too strong) home the fact that the Bible is the absolute,
and anything that doesn't agree with that isn't worth believing, and keep coming back to how reliable the
Bible is, and they even take part in your Bible studies, when they start to see differences, they will side with
you. I understand how hard it may be for them because of the message may be all they know.
Is your wife accepting the idea that it is at least possible that you are right?
Kris

Options Reply Rate

1395.24 in reply to 1395.23
<< Is your wife accepting the idea that it is at least possible that you are right? >>
She is still quite bewildered by the whole idea that we have been told all along that there are NO
discrepancies in the message, only to find out that the pastor has seen many of the same discrepancies as I
have found...
She is so afraid of leaving the message and being "lost" because of it....
- God Bless -

atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate

1395.25 in reply to 1395.22
>>Honestly John, I have already stopped listening to tapes, and "reading" the message. I have done some
recent "study" of the message with regards to things I have been seeing on this and other "pro-message"
forums. I have been studying the Bible, and my wife and I are "re-starting" our nightly Bible-study that we
used to do at our home with our two teenagers.<<
It sounds like you're on the right track. You don't have to answer this online, but do you pray out
loud together with your wife? If not, this is something I would recommend as a daily practice.
>>The problem with "only reading the Bible and not listening to the message" is that we are still going to a
message church. My kids will hear one thing at home with our study, and then possibly hear something
different at church.<<
Perhaps you could prepare them for something like that. As the spiritual leader of your family, do you
encourage your kids to ask questions? I make a point to bring up the fact with my kids that they will have
questions, and that there will be others who try to influence them that the Bible cannot be trusted. I tell
them that the Bible can be trusted and if they have questions about what they've heard, whether from
atheists or those involved in aberrant sects, or even from church, to come to me so I can give them the
proper perspective from the Bible.
>>I don't honestly know how to explain things to them if we decide to leave the message.... <<
I know that's a real concern. And I know if or when it comes to that, it won't be easy. But remember this:
the Truth is better than fiction. Just pray to the Lord for the Wisdom to say the right thing. Pray with your
kids before you begin to correct the errors you've been taught all those years. Make sure you have good
biblical references at hand. I think it's better that they learn the Truth under your guidance than to continue
on in error, or worse, discover for themselves when they're on their own that the Message is not the truth
and go off into the world like so many have done.
>>She is so afraid of leaving the message and being "lost" because of it.... <<

God has kept His Word for 2,000 years. Why should we believe that it has been hidden all these years and
that it took one small man who clearly taught doctrinal errors and prophesied inaccurately to reveal God's
ultimate truth?
You might consider reasons why you and your wife don't have a similar fear that you will be lost for not
following the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Mormons or even Roman Catholicism. God doesn't ask us to follow
the teachings of modern day prophets. He has always told us to trust His sole repository for redemptive
revelation--the Bible. The last human voices of Divine authority to the Church were the apostles and others
who wrote the Bible. Since that time, God hasn't used individual men to convey teachings of a true
revelatory nature. All those "prophets" throughout history who have tried are now judged by history to have
been heretics. Their teachings continually evolve in order to answer the discrepancies that are pointed out to
them by those of us who believe the Bible (progressive revelation?). But where the big cults such as the JW's
and the Mormons have stayed relatively unified in their errors (even though there are smaller factions within
these movements), the Message has splintered into so many factions it's hard to identify them all or even
identify which one is the most prominent.
We don't have to fear that we are rejecting God when we choose not to ascribe to the teachings of any
one individual (see Paul's admonition in 1 Corinthians 1:10-24). Once we've been born again,
our responsibility is to love God, pray to and worship Him in Spirit and in Truth, and grow in the
knowledge of what He has already revealed in His Word so we can be effective witnesses of His plan of
Salvation to a lost world. Not to mention that the more we know what is written, the easier it is to recognize
false teachings when they inevitably come our way. God has given us every evidence to believe His Word
is Divine rather than human in origin. By His Word, He has given us the means to see that the evidences of
the inconsistencies in doctrine and prophecy indicate that the Message is human rather than Divine in origin.
You and your family are daily in my most fervent prayers.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

From: atHisfeet Feb-2 11:40 am

1395.26 in reply to 1395.25
<< You don't have to answer this online, but do you pray out loud together with your wife? >>
Not as often as I should.... But trying to get better with this. I have been quite faithful with my "personal"
prayer time, but not very good with this part of my prayer life.
Let me ask you this:
If Brother Branham was wrong on many things, does that mean he was wrong on all things? At our recent
"testimony service", there were some of the newer "members" of the church that said that they were not
drawn to our church, or didn't continue coming to our church because of the teachings of Brother Branham,
but they were attracted by the "life" that they saw in the people there. What is that "life" that they are
seeing?
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate

From: CajunBaby (Gsplgrl02) Feb-2 7:12 pm

1395.27 in reply to 1395.26
>>If Brother Branham was wrong on many things, does that mean he was wrong on all things? At our recent
"testimony service", there were some of the newer "members" of the church that said that they were not
drawn to our church, or didn't continue coming to our church because of the teachings of Brother Branham,
but they were attracted by the "life" that they saw in the people there. What is that "life" that they are
seeing?<< Hi , I know this was addressed to John but hopefully you won't mind me butting in- I too,
was attracted by that "life"; it all looks so good from the outside; the holiness dressing, the seemingly
orderliness of the family, etc. But as I was around longer I begin to notice things that one can't help notice
in a close group after awhile. In the message one learns to put on a good face no matter what troubles are
really going on in the family. WB taught it to be that way; confess what you want to happen, and so forth. I
remember anytime I had a problem and I would try talking to other message believers about it, including the
pastor, I was encouraged to love my husband no matter what horrible things were going on, keep up
appearances in church in order to be a "testimony" to others, especially newcomers, keep believing
everything the "prophet" said, no matter what.
After I was there even longer, sisters in the church began letting things slip out sometimes...they was so
much private turmoil in their lives it had to come out somewhat in their frustation. Physical and spiritual
abuse was rampant in many of these families and it was sanctioned by the ministry in alot of ways because
instead of helping these families with sound biblical counseling they made the victims of these abuses even
more of a victim. The woman was to "keep in her place" no matter what. I was a personal victim of this
abuse myself when initially everything looked so good from the outside. Have you ever seen the movie "The
Stepford Wives"? When I first left the message I saw that movie and I cried because it reminded me so much
of my "life" in the message.
The problem is not that WB was wrong on some things or not; the problem is that he taught two different
ways on nearly everything and it only brought contradictions and confusions for me. Now that my husband
has left the message of WB he strives to be like Christ and to love me as Christ loved the church. He is no
longer pressured by the teachings of WB to be the "ruler" over his household. He rules with love and wisdom
and we gladly and lovingly follow Him as he follows Christ. Looks on the outside of the "life" can be
deceiving. Anyone can put on a good face. Some people in the message may truly have a good 'life', but
even mormons and amish and even atheists can live a good "life". Confucious is a teacher on morals and
even though the morals may be good does it bring the salvation and truth that can only be found in Christ?
Just a thought...
GSPLGRL
Options Reply Rate

From: Batholomew Feb-3 4:26 am

1395.28 in reply to 1395.6
>>Not trying to be argumentative, only trying to look at this from another angle.<<
Who knows what William meant? Apparently a lot of people were expecting a physical healing. Apparently
Fred didn't know what was going to happening or was happening.
Options Reply Rate

1395.29 in reply to 1395.26
>>If Brother Branham was wrong on many things, does that mean he was wrong on all things?<<
No, which is why I believe so many Christians who really should know better have been led astray by his
Message.
>>What is that "life" that they are seeing?<<
Not knowing anyone from your congregation, nor the people who made these comments, I really couldn't
say. We all have our subjective opinions, I suppose. I'm sure you've heard of people who have
joined churches, sects or cults because of the love and acceptance they received from the people in those
groups, or perhaps because they were attracted to their lifestyles. I don't think that the "life" that one sees
in those of a particular group is necessarily a reliable indication that the belief structure of that group is
biblically sound.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Reply Rate

1395.30 in reply to 1395.27
Sorry to hear of the hardships you had while in the message. I know that I see some relationships between
husband and wife that are much different than my own. I think, "I could never treat my wife that way"....
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate

1395.31 in reply to 1395.26

Just another take on the "life" thing.
Our worship leader when I was in the Message seemed so on fire and full of the Holy Spirit when he led
worship. It was awesome. I loved the worship of our church. It was so vibrant, and you could plainly see
how the Spirit of God was working in our midst. Our worship leader lived with my younger (middle) brother
for a short time, and while my youngest brother was visiting them, and other older teens (16-19) from the
church, he couldn't believe the way they talked. They were swearing, and seemed just like anyone else from
the world. And my youngest brother was not saved yet! What kind of witness was that?
Hmmm.. so I guess what I am saying, and also based on the point John made about people seeing the "life"
in many religions and cults, including Scientology and Buddhism, that this "feeling" or "life" is a mostly
subjective thing.
I was thinking about what John had said before about not trusting our feelings, as they can be deceptive.
And I thought of Star Wars where Obi Wan Kenobi told Luke Skywalker to "trust his feelings". It's amazing
how subtle little things like that work their way into our subconscious. I completely agree that feelings are
good, but unreliable indicators of truth. And getting that "warm and fuzzy" or "goose-pimply" feeling is a
completely emotional reaction and is in no way an absolute or trustworthy indicator of truth.
I don't know if this helps at all. Another idea I just had is that a lot of those who go to message churches
that are from other "denominations" are used to seeing the human side of the people in their church, as well
as the struggles they face. As Gospelgirl said, the (most) people in the message hide their struggles well. So
newcomers might be tempted to think that the "health and wealth" gospel is alive and well, and these people
must be doing something right to have nothing to complain about.
Sorry for the length.
God Bless You!
Kris

Options Reply Rate

From: atHisfeet Feb-3 12:41 pm

1395.32 in reply to 1395.31
<< Our worship leader when I was in the Message seemed so on fire and full of the Holy Spirit when he led
worship. It was awesome. I loved the worship of our church. It was so vibrant, and you could plainly see
how the Spirit of God was working in our midst. Our worship leader lived with my younger (middle) brother
for a short time, and while my youngest brother was visiting them, and other older teens (16-19) from the
church, he couldn't believe the way they talked. They were swearing, and seemed just like anyone else from
the world. And my youngest brother was not saved yet! What kind of witness was that? >>
Yes, I have seen similar things to this... :-(
My wife has been asking me of late: "Why is it that we, who are trying to live right and please the Lord by
doing "all the things that we are told to do in the message" (no t.v., no christmas trees, long hair etc...) are
eternally separated from God for asking some questions about the message (doubting Bro. Branham's
words), when others that "look the part" of a message believer, at church, but don't live the life very well
away from the church are ok?
We have been told "well, you don't know what is in their hearts".... but I thought that:
Luke 6:45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil
man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart
his mouth speaketh.
Matt 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate

From: cmadwolf Feb-3 3:25 pm

1395.33 in reply to 1395.32
I think, at least in my dad's case, that the outward appearance is part of the draw the message held for him.
He is very old fashoned "holiness" in his beliefs. I do believe if there was a church around that still held the
same beliefs, it would be an easier transition to leave the message. But since the message is the only church
that I know in this area where the women dress in dresses only, long hair, no makeup, etc, it will be difficult
for him to leave. That said, I have seen a lot of women that wear dresses to their ankles, and have never cut
their hair, but their tongues are longer than their sleeves, and sharper than knives.
Options Reply Rate

To: cmadwolf (34 of 64)
1395.34 in reply to 1395.33
<< That said, I have seen a lot of women that wear dresses to their ankles, and have never cut their hair,
but their tongues are longer than their sleeves, and sharper than knives. >>
That is true. The long hair, dresses, no makeup is only on the outside of course... True modesty has to be
on the inside. :-)
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate

From: Jeena (jeena_el) Feb-3 5:29 pm

1395.35 in reply to 1395.27
<<<Have you ever seen the movie "The Stepford Wives"? When I first left the message I saw that movie
and I cried because it reminded me so much of my "life" in the message. >>>
YES!!! AND I CRIED, TOO!!
<<< even mormons and amish and even atheists can live a good "life". even mormons and amish and even
atheists can live a good "life".>>>
SO TRUE! In fact, when I was first witnessed to by a very faithful Mormon, whom I respected ( a teacher, in
fact) I was very impressed by "the life" they lead, and how Mormons fellowshipped with one another and
loved their families. I also was so impressed with the "Mormon Tabernacle Choir", and I even toured their
Temple square in Salt Lake City. (Don't say I never researched each and EVERY thing I was witnessed to
about! :) ---) Bottom line, I felt the religious "feelings". I "felt" the pull...I was impressed by the many
miracles cited in the museum and testimonials...but bottom line ---
ONLY THE WORD COUNTS.
Love,

From: CajunBaby (Gsplgrl02) Feb-4 2:51 am

1395.36 in reply to 1395.30
>>Sorry to hear of the hardships you had while in the message. I know that I see some relationships
between husband and wife that are much different than my own. I think, "I could never treat my wife that
way".... <<
Bless your Heart! I can tell by your posts that you have a gentle spirit...not every brother I met in the
message treated their families bad, but far too many did for my comfort. I am glad and not surprised that
you are not of that sort. I feel I must defend my husband somewhat... Before the message we were like
best friends, you never saw a better person or husband. Because I had grown up in the message I sort of
confided in my husband that I was worried he would become like so many of the husbands in the message...
you know, a dictatorial ruler with an iron fist. He assured me he would never be like that and I know he
intended to never become like that. However, our church was very close knit and the husbands and pastor
would get together regularly to go on campouts and whatnot with just the men only. My husband became
what he never thought he would... I think the pressure was just too great. The men were told that they were
responsible before God for their families which i found out later was simply not true. We will all have to face
God individually, says the Bible. My husband tried to fight the pressure but it was too great...we were in a
very controlling church that made it their business to be involved with the members. This was accomplished
through many campouts, picnics, get togethers, etc. The church would rent out gymnasiums regularly, at
least once a month, or get together at another members home. Now that we are out of the message I have
my husband back...we are best friends again, thank the Lord! But it took time to undo the false teachings
about marriage and other things and we still have to remind ourselves to check everything with the Word.
Time heals all wounds. God Bless you Brother, and keep loving your family through it all...you will come out
just fine!
GSPLGRL
Options Reply Rate
From: CajunBaby (Gsplgrl02) Feb-4 3:03 am

1395.37 in reply to 1395.35

>>YES!!! AND I CRIED, TOO!!<< It's something isn't it? When you see something happen to someone else,
whether it's through a movie or someone in real life, that's happened to you, it's like you finally see and
realize what happened to you...like a lightning bolt hitting you. Our church preahed against television and I
agree that there's alot of bad on there, but there are good things too. I can't count the times I've been
helped by a television program in my own life, and that movie was one of those times!
>>SO TRUE! In fact, when I was first witnessed to by a very faithful Mormon, whom I respected ( a teacher,
in fact) I was very impressed by "the life" they lead, and how Mormons fellowshipped with one another and
loved their families. I also was so impressed with the "Mormon Tabernacle Choir", and I even toured their
Temple square in Salt Lake City. (Don't say I never researched each and EVERY thing I was witnessed to
about! :) ---) Bottom line, I felt the religious "feelings". I "felt" the pull...I was impressed by the many
miracles cited in the museum and testimonials...but bottom line ---<< You are certainly more diligent than
me! It is something how we can be so deceived by our feelings. You are right...ONLY THE WORD COUNTS!!!
GSPLGRL
Options Reply Rate

1395.38 in reply to 1395.32
Your posts, insights, and steadfast search for the truth are an encouragement to me.
I don't know if I mentioned this in talking about our former worship leader, but I don't want to imply that
people in the church can be perfect or that we don't sin. But we should be honest that we are human and
sometimes stumble and it is only through the grace of God Almighty that we are washed clean by the blood of
Jesus.
My wife has been asking me of late: "Why is it that we, who are trying to live right and please the Lord by
away from the church are ok?
Is she starting to sense the truth? I don't know how you or her feel about the word "cult" (you probably hate
it as much as I did), but have you tried showing her that list I printed from Christiananswers.net on "how do
you know if you are under mind control" or something to that effect?
http://forums.prospero.com/kennah/messages?msg=1366.1
That may shed some light on the "tactics" used by those in your church or in the message who say to doubt it
or ask questions is to risk damnation.
Anyway, it seems as if your wife may be beginning to see what you see. Am I right?
Kris


Options Reply Rate

1395.39 in reply to 1395.38
<< ...have you tried showing her that list I printed from Christiananswers.net on "how do you know if you
are under mind control" or something to that effect? >>
Yes, I did. And she said to me "well, the same thing can be said for the Bible". I know that there was
someone (Quailfeather?) that showed how most of the questions on that test would have been answered by
the apostle Paul... So, I don't know if that test is a very good "indicator" of anything. Though I appreciate
what you were trying to show by mentioning the test.
<< Anyway, it seems as if your wife may be beginning to see what you see. Am I right? >>
Well, actually, she is still quite confused by the whole thing. She feels very deceived at this point. That we
were told that there were no discrepancies in "the message", and now the pastor told me that he has seen
many of the same discrepancies that I have seen...
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate

From: cmadwolf Feb-4 9:40 am

1395.40 in reply to 1395.36
My dad has really been hammering into me that he is still the head of the family---even though I am grown
and married with a family of my own!! It makes me wonder if he has mentioned something questionable at
his church and they have driven into him that he is accountable!! He says in one breath "I am still the head of
the family" then in the other "you'll be held accountable for what you believe, and if you reject the message
you'll have to answer to God". My reply is "And you'll be held accountable, too, Daddy, if you're teaching
incorrect doctrine".
Options Reply Rate
Keep Reading>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Games


Subscribe
1395.41 in reply to 1395.40
<< My reply is "And you'll be held accountable, too, Daddy, if you're teaching incorrect doctrine". >>
OUCH! That is probably one of a Dad's biggest fears. That he would lead his family in the wrong direction.
If my daughter said this to me, it would probably be like a knife into my heart. (I don't say this to make you
feel bad, but just telling how I would have taken a statement like that). I know you are trying to help your
dad to see what you see, and even though he said to you "you will be held accountable", that response to
him was probably one of the more hurtful things you could have said.
Just my two cents worth.... (and I am still praying for you and your dad! )
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate


1395.42 in reply to 1395.41
I didn't say it in a smart manner, I was actually very quiet and soft spoken when I said it. He says very
hurtful things to us such as "you'll have to give your life in the tribulation!!" and "The token will be removed
from your life when I'm gone" "If you make it the only reason will be because I am God's seed and you're my
child". I don't intend to hurt him, but sometimes the truth DOES hurt. I am not willing to let him go on
believing something that is errant and not truth. I know you are still wavering on your decision, but I have no
doubt in my mind that this is WRONG. Every time I compare the books of WMB with the word, I find more
and more that convinces me it is completely wrong. It is the same situation as if your son or daughter
converted to Mormonism, Jehovah's witness or Buddism. Wouldn't you do EVERYTHING within your power to
help them? Wouldn't it kill you to see them in something that you knew was wrong? Wouldn't you try to
convince them every time you talked? That's the way I feel. To see my father, who pastored churches for
years, who used to be a minister of God turn his back completely on everything he believed for 20 years, that
is hard to deal with. I will not give up on this. I am praying constantly, and I will take back what was stolen
from me.
Options Reply Rate

1395.43 in reply to 1395.42
<< I didn't say it in a smart manner, I was actually very quiet and soft spoken when I said it. He says very
hurtful things to us such as "you'll have to give your life in the tribulation!!" and "The token will be removed
from your life when I'm gone" "If you make it the only reason will be because I am God's seed and you're my
child". >>
I understand. Again, I didn't say what I said to hurt you... I have no reason to do that. Only knowing from a
dad's perspective, that is how I would have felt. I am not defending your dad, and his statements to you....
Since I don't see things the same way as your dad with regards to the statements he is making.
<>
I know that also. You would not love him in the right way, if you allowed him to continue believeing in
something that is not true.
<< I know you are still wavering on your decision, but I have no doubt in my mind that this is WRONG.
Every time I compare the books of WMB with the word, I find more and more that convinces me it is
completely wrong. >>
Actually, were I am right now, is trying to figure out what is right. I know that SOME of the teachings of Bro.
Branham are correct, and do line up with the Bible. I can't say that it is completely wrong. I am trying to
figure out if I leave the message because of the things I question, am I "throwing out the baby with the
bathwater"?
<< It is the same situation as if your son or daughter converted to Mormonism, Jehovah's witness or
Buddism. Wouldn't you do EVERYTHING within your power to help them? Wouldn't it kill you to see them in

something that you knew was wrong? Wouldn't you try to convince them every time you talked? That's the
way I feel. >>
I know what you mean.
<< To see my father, who pastored churches for years, who used to be a minister of God turn his back
completely on everything he believed for 20 years, that is hard to deal with. I will not give up on this. I am
praying constantly, and I will take back what was stolen from me. >>
Wow. I didn't realize that your dad was a pastor... This will be even harder for him to admit that he has
been deceived....
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate
From: Jeena (jeena_el) Feb-4 11:16 am

1395.44 in reply to 1395.37

<<<Our church preahed against television and I agree that there's alot of bad on there, but there are good
things too. I can't count the times I've been helped by a television program in my own life, and that movie
was one of those times!>>>
I know we have discussed TV on here in the past, but I have to interject this: One has to decide which is
best for their own personal walk with the Lord. There is an "on and off" dial and a station changer on a TV.
If a person does not have enough strength to discern which is best for them, spiritually, or what edifies and
strengthens and what tears down and weakens, then they probably shouldn't have a TV. In my case, I could
take or leave it. I have no problem turning the dial on a TV, or leaving it off. I do understand that some
people DO. I would never encourage someone who has decided it is spiritually better to have a home without
the influence of TV, to run and get a TV. However, for me, it is debatable who has the greater faith - a
person who has balanced control over his home, family and TV, and has one for the GOOD reasons - or a
person who admittedly states they cannot control its usage - for whatever reason.
Personally, I think the person with the greater faith and leadership, is the one who HAS one and discerns and
exercises proper control over it. If that can't be done - better to ax the thing.
Love,
From: cmadwolf Feb-4 12:39 pm

1395.45 in reply to 1395.43
Yes, he pastored for about 20 years. He went to the message right before I was a teenager. He had just come
out of a hurtful situation with a church he pastored. The message people called him every day until he came
to their church (Can you say proselytize?) That has created some problems for me. He basically had nothing
to do with me during those years, and it causes a lot of pain and problems for a young girl. You didn't hurt
my feelings, :), I was just defending my point, grin. My dad says he believes the message because it
"dovetails" with the word. I disagree, I think it's more like pounding square pegs into round holes to make
them fit. On the way back from lunch today I thought "Why would the Word, which is perfect, need any
enhancement?" and that's what I see the message books as, that message believers need it to enhance the
Word. Is the Holy Spirit not enough to give the Lord's people the revelations they need from the Bible? Why
would God need another man besides the Spirit to point those things out? I know some people will probably
argue "but that's what pastors do, isn't it?" Pastors USE the Word, they don't add to or feel the need to
enhance with new revelation, or in my experience they don't.
Options Reply Rate


1395.46 in reply to 1395.40
>>My dad has really been hammering into me that he is still the head of the family---even though I am
grown and married with a family of my own!! It makes me wonder if he has mentioned something
questionable at his church and they have driven into him that he is accountable!! He says in one breath "I am
still the head of the family" then in the other "you'll be held accountable for what you believe, and if you
reject the message you'll have to answer to God". My reply is "And you'll be held accountable, too, Daddy, if
you're teaching incorrect doctrine".<< Well, if your dad is in a M church that is anything like the one I was
in he probably hears the "accountability" tactic regularly. This is one of the many ways they use fear. In our
church this was used in almost every service. I found out later in a book about cults that this is one of the
ways that cults control their members. They use repetition, repeating fear tactics over and over again to
break down resistance of members, discourage independent thinking of their members, and basically keep
control. It is a very effective method. If a member begins to think on their own or suspect that a church
teaching is wrong it is usually quickly squelched when they go to their next "control session" at their church.
With myself, the Lord had to actually make it physically impossible for me to go to my M church to deal with
me. Once I was away from the control tactics and influence of the church I could start seeing the truth
without the fear tactic having as much success in my mind. In my opinion and personal experience it is
imperative for a person in any cult to physically get away from the cult to aid in their seeing the truth. I'd
highly recommend an extended peaceful family vacation where the believer could have much quiet time with
the Lord and their Bible and their family away from the influence and control of the church. I went to Destin
Florida with my family when I was still in the M church and just that one peaceful week was enough time
away from the M influence was enough for the Lord to start dealing with me...of course after we returned
from vacation is when i got physically ill and the Lord really continued to deal with me. But everyone is
different. My heart aches with you...our parents sound quite similar. I'm praying with you, please pray with
me also for my mom.
GSPLGRL
Options Reply Rate

1395.47 in reply to 1395.44
Agreed.
GSPLGRL
Options Reply Rate


1395.48 in reply to 1395.32
I always noticed that the young men who were acting up (drinking, swearing, whatever) were kind of looked
at as "boys will be boys" - but a girl who did none of the above and was seen in a pair of jeans or cut her hair
was without the camp.
Did you ever ask a child in the message what are the worst sins? Chances are they will say "women wearing
pants" or "women who cut their hair."
Options Reply Rate

1395.49 in reply to 1395.40
We used to hear a "lamb for the house" doctrine, something like a message believer could apply the token to
their household; a lot of people looked at it like they could be the sacrifice for their loved ones who were not
message believers.
I realize now how totally un-Christian that was.
Options Reply Rate

1395.50 in reply to 1395.44
Exactly. I have family members who did not convert to the message, and remained strong Christians. They
kept the TV, watched news and family shows, and never had any problem with it. A lot of the ones who got
rid of the TV (like us) later wound up getting TVs and exercising little if any control.
Options Reply Rate


1395.51 in reply to 1395.45

PERFECT! There are alot of people whose sincerity I suspect who may have adopted the message to get a
club to use on their families; the Bible just wasn't heavy enough.
Options Reply Rate

1395.52 in reply to 1395.48
<< I always noticed that the young men who were acting up (drinking, swearing, whatever) were kind of
looked at as "boys will be boys" - but a girl who did none of the above and was seen in a pair of jeans or cut
her hair was without the camp. >>
Yes, I have noticed a certain amount of this... My son (when he has gone to "camp meetings " for youth, has
questioned me as to why his "peers" will behave all holy and spiritual in service, and then 30 minutes later in
their dorms, are cracking off color jokes, and talking about gross subjects.
The first year my son and I went deer hunting with "the guys", was a real eye-opening experience also. My
son and I were told that "what happens in deer camp, stays in deer camp". Needless to say, my son and I
did not want to go hunting with "the guys" again! We did however go up again after a few years, with a
mostly different group of guys, and it was a lot better, but still not what I would call an "edifying experience".
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate


1395.53 in reply to 1395.48
It's that way with my dad too. Somehow it always gets back to how women are bad and they are held
accountable for sins that men aren't. For instance, my dad says that a woman who divorces and remarries
again will lose her soul (I thought blasphemy was the only unforgivable sin) but the man who divorces is free
to marry again. Yesterday we were talking about how other countries are much harder on criminals than the
US, and he said "when the Indians caught a woman in adultery they would cut her nose off" I asked, what did
they do to the man and he said "nothing". That whole air of superiority makes me angry and makes me
wonder why the men feel they have to have that? I have seen it very rampant in the message.
Options Reply Rate

1395.54 in reply to 1395.53
For instance, my dad says that a woman who divorces and remarries again will lose her soul (I thought
blasphemy was the only unforgivable sin)
I am sure a message believer could find a way to work around it. It's just like they defend how WMB said a
man could divorce his wife if she cut her hair, and it's in the Bible. And they say that she is commiting
adultery (I think they spiritualize it) by cutting their hair by disowning the leadership of the husband...or
some such foolishness.
Kris

Options Reply Rate


1395.55 in reply to 1395.54
Before when my dad would talk about the message I would have an open mind, there was always a little fear
"What if he's right and I'm wrong", but now I don't have that fear anymore! I have started to notice more and
more that everything that comes out of his mouth is not even his own mind or thinking, it is all WMB words.
It's almost like he is brainwashed.
Options Reply Rate

1395.56 in reply to 1395.55
Its wierd how you can't see that until you get your own head clear.
Options Reply Rate
From: SavedKris Feb-6 1:27 pm

1395.57 in reply to 1395.55
It's almost like he is brainwashed.
Unfortunately, I don't believe there is an "almost" involved. It is all part of the cult mentality and the way
people within it are controlled. It is so...pervasive yet subconscious. But brainwashed is unfortunately an
appropriate word. Many in the message have lost their ability to critically think on their own.
Kris

Options Reply Rate


1395.58 in reply to 1395.53
<< It's that way with my dad too. Somehow it always gets back to how women are bad and they are held
accountable for sins that men aren't. >>
That is because Eve sinned and brought death upon mankind... (message teaching)
Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed
upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Romans 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after
the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
Romans 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead,
much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto
many.
Romans 5:16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to
condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
Romans 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of
grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Romans 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by
the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall
many be made righteous.
Hmmm..... If we go back to Genesis we see:
Genesis 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest
freely eat:
Genesis 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that
thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Genesis 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help
meet for him.
So, the instruction NOT to eat of the tree was given to ADAM before Eve was even formed.... Hmmmm.....
<< For instance, my dad says that a woman who divorces and remarries again will lose her soul (I thought
blasphemy was the only unforgivable sin) but the man who divorces is free to marry again. >>
Matt 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication,
causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Matt 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry
another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
Mark 10:11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth
adultery against her.
1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived:
neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
1 Corinthians 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the
kingdom of God.

Looks like both will be guilty of adultery if they divorce (except for FORNICATION, not cutting of hair....)
- God Bless -
atHisfeet

Options Reply Rate

1395.59 in reply to 1395.22
>>My kids will hear one thing at home with our study, and then possibly hear something different at church.
<< ?
>>I don't honestly know how to explain things to them if we decide to leave the message.... << Perhaps you
won't have to. Maybe your children will notice something is wrong, and understand.
I believe Psalm 70 is a psalm for you and the Lord in your church.
Options Reply Rate


1395.60 in reply to 1395.26
>>What is that "life" that they are seeing?<< The proof of a fruit is in the eating.
Options Reply Rate
Keep Reading>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Games


Subscribe
1395.61 in reply to 1395.32
>>My wife has been asking me of late: "Why is it that we, who are trying to live right and please the Lord by
away from the church are ok?<<
The scriptire teaches that there is nothing hidden that will not be uncovered. This is only hiding before men -
and the fear of men. Jesus spoke to the pharisees about this all the time.
>>What's in the camp stays in the camp<< same thing here.
In my small sunday message fellowship, when I used to go, a guy called J said "I don't understand - I can
listen to a tape one moment, and then go and then go and watch tv the next moment" - or maybe something
worse. By watching tv, understand not what you believe about tv, but what he is supposed to believe about
tv. By his statement, I think he was watching something he would not want to be seen watching.
I am glad he made this statement, because it shows he fealt safe in our midst on Sundays. I have always
fealt this guy is in a bad place, but it was really hard for me to make contact with him (I tried discretely).
Options Reply Rate

1395.62 in reply to 1395.42
>>truth DOES hurt<< That's right.
Options Reply Rate


1395.63 in reply to 1395.43
>>Actually, were I am right now, is trying to figure out what is right. I know that SOME of the teachings of
Bro. Branham are correct, and do line up with the Bible. I can't say that it is completely wrong. I am trying to
figure out if I leave the message because of the things I question, am I "throwing out the baby with the
bathwater"?<<
This is something that I have been afraid of as well, but
Gal 1:
14And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly
zealous for the traditions of my fathers.
15But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb and called me through His grace,
16to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, ..
Options Reply Rate
From: Jeena (jeena_el) Feb-7 10:19 pm

1395.64 in reply to 1395.58
As always, a spectacular post!
Love,
Next Discussion>>

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - India Prophecy (43 views) Subscribe

To: ALL (1 of 6)
446.1
William Branham prophesied of a great campaign he was to hold in India, saying:
Mark my word; write it in the pages of your Bible, for it's THUS SAITH THE LORD,
"Remember, when we land in India, you're going to hear of tens of thousands times
thousands being saved." The Holy Spirit has said it; I've wrote it here in my Bible; it's wrote
in tens of thousands of Bibles right here, like the resurrection of the little boy. By a vision that
He said, "There's three hundred thousand of them in there." And you see if that isn't right.
There's how the Gospel's going to be preached just overnight. She'll just sweep like that from
place to place.
Questions and Answers, May 15, 1954 (tape #54-0515)
As many of his other prophecies, this one did not come to pass quite as he predicted. Mr. Branham did go to
India in September 1954, but the results fell far short of fulfilling this prophecy. Mr. Branham had to leave
India after having been rescued by the militia from an angry mob. He tells of this:
When I held my hand there, and when the prayer, of course wasn't interpreted, when I
dropped my hands, the man looked. He let out a scream. He grabbed me around the waist.
He grabbed the mayor of the city and begin hugging him and kissing him. He was just--could
see as good as any man setting in here. I'm telling you: a frantic, a scream went from those
people, and the whole thing went into a turmoil. Two or three hours later, they got me
through the crowd with a army there trying to push them back. I had no pockets in my coats.
My shoes was gone. They'd pulled every clothes off of me, nearly stripping me, screaming
and crying. And the next day with sorrow. I had to leave India with a promise that I'd be back
again.
India Trip Report, January 26, 1957 (tape #57-0126B)
Mr. Branham placed the blame for his lack of success in India on himself :
And when... I had been very much constrained to go to--to India. And yet, as many of you
might know, the Indian trip wasn't the success that it should've been, because I failed to
follow the leading of the Holy Spirit, and never recognized it after He give me a vision to go to
Africa first and then to India.
India Trip Report
When speaking of how many were actually saved in his India campaign, he said:
And yet, in the midst of five hundred thousand people that I was speaking to at Bombay, the
Lord Jesus Christ and Christianity triumphed over everyone of them and put every witch
doctor and holy man and everything else to shame. And there's no way of telling how many
came to the Lord Jesus. We had no cooperation amongst the churches and just dropped in for
three days, and there was no way of telling how many was saved.
Be not Afraid, It is I, July 20, 1960 (tape #60-0720)
Mr. Branham never achieved the results in India that were prophesied when he said, "THUS SAITH THE
LORD, 'Remember, when we land in India, you're going to hear of tens of thousands times thousands being
saved.' The Holy Spirit has said it . . . "
For a detailed account of Mr. Branhams India trip and its unintended consequences, see an excellent article
file:///Users/dianebrossette/Desktop/JK%20FORUM/India%20Prophecy1.html (1 of 6)4/1/2005 6:27:27 AM

by Phil Rickerby at http://forums.delphiforums.com/kennah/messages?msg=702.1.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

446.2 in reply to 446.1
Doesn't sound like he missed it. He should have done as the Spirit led him, and then there would be success.
Just as today, the Spirit leads a minister to go somewhere, and he is told there will be great success, it's
always hinging on whether or not he is yielded to the Holy Spirit. Honestly, weak point.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


446.3 in reply to 446.1
I couldn't get to that post with the link; it switched me to a login page for click2asia. But I see you have the
article posted in this same folder, Controversial Prophecies, as a Korealink post #1402.
Options Reply Rate

446.4 in reply to 446.3
Thanks! Korealink changed their format and I forgot to delete the link from my post. I'll get right to it!
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


446.5 in reply to 446.2
I think you need to see what WMB said HIMSELF - about what HE believed THUS SAITH THE
LORD really MEANT. He clearly believed that if he had the vision, and he SPOKE those
words, it was GOD Speaking and nothing - absolutely NOTHING could change that FACT:
JESUS.ON.THE.AUTHORITY.OF.THE.WORD_ WOOD.RIVER.IL WEDNESDAY_ 54-0217

E-26
Now, that's the Word of the Lord made manifest. See? Now, no matter what would take place, all the forces of
hell could move against that. The woman don't even have to have faith. She don't have to have anything,
'cause God has said so. That's God's Word materialized. Then I had THUS SAITH THE LORD.
GOD'S.PROVIDED.WAY.OF.HEALING_ CHICAGO.IL MONDAY_ 54-0719A

E-57 Sometimes a vision will break forth; I'll see her years later. I'll say, "THUS SAITH THE LORD."
Brother, watch that then. It's already happened. "THUS SAITH THE LORD, you are healed in the
Name of the Lord Jesus Christ. You're going to be well." There ain't enough devils out of hell can break
it then. That's right.
HOW.THE.ANGEL.CAME.TO.ME_ CHICAGO.IL FOOTPRINT.BOOK MONDAY_ 55-0117

55-1 And the brethren will probably... I see several tape recorders down here, and they'll pick this up,
of course. Anytime you want to know just what the Holy Spirit said to you, see the brethren here that's
got these tape recorders, and they can run that right back through; you can get your case exactly.
Watch and see if it don't happen just exactly the way It said. See? When you hear it breathe out,
"THUS SAITH THE LORD, 'A certain thing, or this is this way,'" or just check it over and see if that's
right or not. See? It's always that way.
JESUS.CHRIST.THE.SAME_ MACON.GA FRIDAY_ 55-0603

E-44 Now, the Lord bless you, and keep your seats. Be reverent; don't move around, and the boys will
dismiss the meeting just as soon as they feel. 'Course I... After He gets started, I--I don't have... They tell
it to me; I pick it up on tape recording. I know what He said. And mark it down, that every thing that
He says is absolutely the truth, and it'll be just exactly the way He said it. But remember now, whether
it's me, you'll hear it, it's THUS SAITH THE LORD. When you here that, then it's Him speaking.
JESUS.CHRIST.THE.SAME_ SAN.FERNANDO.CA SUNDAY_ 55-1113

E-74 In telling the person different things, that has nothing to do with their healing, that's rising their...
But when you here it say THUS SAITH THE LORD, watch that and mark that down. That's what He's
already done.
ANGEL.AND.HIS.COMMISSION_ PHOENIX.AZ SUNDAY_ 47-1102

E-29 If that man is in the building this af... If that man comes in this prayer line this afternoon, and I
get to touch him under this anointing that I have now, the man's ears will be perfectly opened. THUS
SAITH THE LORD. If that isn't right, then call me a false prophet.
TESTIMONY.OF.JESUS.CHRIST_ CHICAGO.IL SATURDAY_ 53-0829

E-24 And I run into... I said... they said, "Howdy do, Brother Branham."
And I said, "Sister Hall? All of you gather, everyone in the room. I have THUS SAITH THE LORD."
Mmm. Nothing's going to stop that. No matter what it is. All the devils that Satan could send out of hell,
that has nothing to do with it, not a thing.
When you hear that spoke in this building here, over something, just watch what takes place. Or
anybody here that's ever heard it anywhere, through the entire lifetime of His unworthy servant, if
you've ever heard that come forth, watch what follows it. It's always perfect.
JESUS.ON.THE.AUTHORITY.OF.THE.WORD_ WOOD.RIVER.IL WEDNESDAY_ 54-0217

E-26 Now, that's the Word of the Lord made manifest. See? Now, no matter what would take place, all
the forces of hell could move against that. ...[Message truncated]
View Full Message

446.6 in reply to 446.5
There's a lot I could say, however, I don't feel the need to. Honestly, Sister, just leave it at that. I have my
reasons, just trust that God doesn't want me to go any further with many in here on certain subjects. I don't
feel the leading to do so. Sorry.
Just please accept that I cannot proceed any further with certain things, God doesn't want me to.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - Korealink Post #1402 (102

Subscribe
views) (Closed for Posting)
To: ALL (1 of 3)
702.1
India False Prophecy

Philip Rickerby
In responding to your comments on Branham's India visit I have extracted my notes on the topic below. If
you are in contact with Billy Paul Branham, then I suggest you get him to clarify what actually happened on
the India trip.
Philip Rickerby
A Prophecy by Branham that is seldom mentioned was that his visit to India would spark a massive revival.
This prophecy was stated in the context of attempting to answer a question on how can the return of Jesus be
imminent if two thirds of the people in the world have not heard the Gospel:
"If two thirds of the people of the world heard... not heard the Gospel yet, the Word of the Gospel, how much
does the... (Beg your pardon. It's wrote with ink, and I've been perspiring here, and it's run into it. Let's see.)
If two thirds of the people of the world has not yet heard the Gospel, how can our Lord come now, since they
hadn't heard the Gospel, two thirds of them?
The Gospel cannot... Jesus cannot come until the...
Listen. We pass tracts all around over the world. You can't go on any little corner less there's been tracts
passed, somebody coming through there with theology. You go overseas today and call yourself a missionary,
and watch them laugh at you. Walk into India and say, "I'm a missionary."
"Well, what are you going to teach us?" They know more about the Bible... Some of their kids over there
know more about it than some of the teachers here in America knows about it. After all, it's an eastern Book.
And remember, they had the Gospel hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years 'fore America ever come
into existence. Saint Thomas, the great church that he preached in, is still standing today in India. They don't
need any of your teaching; they know all about it. They said, "What are you going to teach us?"
"Well, we're American Missionaries."
"What are you going to teach us, how to drink whiskey? That's what you all do over there in your churches:
smoke cigarettes? Going to teach us how to divorce our wives and so forth?" Said, "If you're going to do that,
we don't want it." And said, "You're coming over here with some new theology or something another; you're
going to try to teach us some of the Word; we know more about it than you do." And that's right. He said,
"But if you're coming to demonstrate what the Word says, we'll receive it." Amen. There you are. That's the
thing they're hungering for.
Mark my word; write it in the pages of your Bible, for it's THUS SAITH THE LORD, "Remember, when we land
in India, you're going to hear of tens of thousands times thousands being saved." The Holy Spirit has said it;
I've wrote it here in my Bible; it's wrote in tens of thousands of Bibles right here, like the resurrection of the
little boy. By a vision that He said, "There's three hundred thousand of them in there." And you see if that
isn't right. There's how the Gospel's going to be preached just overnight. She'll just sweep like that from
place to place.
In Africa, when those thirty thousand in one altar call received God, I said, "Raise your hands and receive the
Holy Ghost." I said, "Don't wait for some American missionary to come over and teach you to learn languages
in the churches." And mothers washing over boards to send a missionary over there, and ride around in a
nice big car, living on the fat of the land; sure, pass out a few tracts and come back. They don't want that;
proved it.
I said right here at the Jewish Hospital there, a few nights ago in a meeting with the ministers and doctors on
the subject of Divine healing; I said, "You called me a holy-roller, and you said I'd had a nightmare when I
told you of the Angel of the Lord." And I said, "And our own church has sent thousands and spent millions of
dollars of sending missionaries to Africa; and when I got there, they was packing little mud idols, trying to get
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Korealink%20Post.html (1 of 4)4/1/2005 6:30:35 AM

help from the mud idol, and call themselves Christians." And I said, "And what you called fanaticism won
more souls to Christ in five minutes' time than our millions of dollars and thousands of missionaries has done
in the last hundred and fifty years." They shut up; that was it. There it laid. I said, "Do you..." To them men,
I said, "Don't--don't you try to get educated; just take this Gospel and go on out yonder in the--in the native
land where a white man can't even go from the diseases."
And I've got records, right out of the Durban paper; it said, "Even if one old man couldn't even know which
was right and left hand, received the baptism of the Holy Ghost, and was baptizing on the average of a
thousand a week." That's how the Gospel's going just in a little bit; it only needs about six months to cover
the world. All right." ('Questions and Answers Image of the Beast', 15/5/54)
Branham did visit India in September 1954 however things did not go according plan and he only spent three
days in Bombay before having to leave following a riot situation at a meeting at which he needed to be
rescued by the militia:
"When I held my hand there, and when the prayer, of course wasn't interpreted, when I dropped my hands,
the man looked. He let out a scream. He grabbed me around the waist. He grabbed the mayor of the city and
begin hugging him and kissing him. He was just--could see as good as any man setting in here. I'm telling
you: a frantic, a scream went from those people, and the whole thing went into a turmoil. Two or three hours
later, they got me through the crowd with a army there trying to push them back. I had no pockets in my
coats. My shoes was gone. They'd pulled every clothes off of me, nearly stripping me, screaming and crying.
And the next day with sorrow. I had to leave India with a promise that I'd be back again. But, brother, the
commandments of Jesus Christ is just as true today, and just as vital. He's just as much resurrected today as
He ever was. And He is the same Lord Jesus, and He's with us today. Don't be afraid; trust the Lord.
Amen." ('India Trip Report', 26/1/57)
The reaction of the crowd may have had more to do with his comments about other religions in India rather
than the claimed healing, as his subsequent comments indicate that he was confusing major aspects of the
beliefs of Islam, Hinduism and other religions. In the volatile religious situation existing in India it would have
been easy to make a statement that would be found offensive to a mob.
Upon his return to America he described himself as being near to a nervous breakdown, though he attributed
this to seeing the poverty and degradation in India:
"And I tell you, brother, I--I couldn't stand it. I almost had a nervous breakdown. And I've been home now all
these days, since last Sunday. And I couldn't get out of the room. My wife there knows the truth, for about
five days. It liked to killed me. Even when our doctor taken my blood pressure, he said, "Man, you better get
some rest." Said, "Your nerves are so low till your blood pressure has went way down, and won't even put,
pick ...[Message truncated]

View Full Message
Options Rate


702.2 in reply to 702.1
Thanks for posting this! The link was wrong on the webpage, and I am glad you still had this.
Love,
Options Delete Rate

702.3 in reply to 702.2
No prob! Thanks for informing about the bad link!
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Rate
Next Discussion>>

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - The Lord Speaks Through

Subscribe
WMB's Lips (39 views)
To: ALL (1 of 21)
489.1
Near the end of a prayer service, the Lord Himself apparently begins to speak directly to the congregation
through William Branhams lips:
I'm the Lord that raised up Christ from the grave.

I'm the One that sent the Holy Ghost.
I'm the One that give the promise.
Brother Branham has nothing to do in this.
I have--He's surrendered his life to Me.
I'm using his Spirit;
I'm talking through his lips.
That's Me; I'm the Lord.
Looking At the Unseen, April 10, 1959 (tape #59-0410).
There are several reasons to doubt that this was really the Lord speaking through Mr. Branhams lips.
Although this statement is apparently made by the Lord in the first person, it contains many violations of the
rules of English grammar. For example:
I'm the Lord that . . . , Im the One that . . . The grammatically preferred way to say
this would be, Im the Lord who . . .
I'm the Lord that raised up Christ from the grave. The word up is unnecessary and
informal; in formal, correct English, "up" should be omitted.
I'm the One that give the promise. The word give is in the wrong tense. It should
be, I'm the One who gave the promise.
Brother Branham has nothing to do in this. This should be worded, Brother Branham
has nothing to do with this.
"I have--He's surrendered his life to Me." Are we to believe that the Lord actually
stumbled over His words here? The incomplete sentence, "I have..." suggests a lack of
forethought on the part of the one speaking.
That's Me; I'm the Lord, should be, It is I; Im the Lord.
God knows the rules of English grammar better than the most learned scholar. Therefore, it is my contention
that it was not the Lord who was speaking through William Branham's lips.
There are a couple of further observations that I believe are worth mentioning. At the point of the paragraph
where Mr. Branham says, I have. . . He has surrendered... it appears that he was about to say, "I have
surrendered myself to the Lord," but caught himself mid-sentence, changing it to, "He's surrendered himself
to Me."
Also, at one point the Lord supposedly says, I'm using his Spirit . . . If it was true that Brother Branham
has nothing to do in this, then the Lord could not have been using Mr. Branhams spirit, only his physical
body as a vessel to work through.
The bottom line is that there is nothing in this quote to support the assertion that the Lord was actually
speaking through William Branham. On the contrary, the fact that the Lord appears to be speaking in the first
person while using Mr. Branham's poor grammatical skills indicates that Mr. Branham made this statement on
his own initiative.
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Lord%20thru%20WMB%20lips1-20.html (1 of 16)4/1/2005 6:33:23 AM

John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: Christ, The Word (amym38) 7/8/2002 10:24 pm

489.2 in reply to 489.1
Makes sense to me. Someone would have to be in deep deception to believe any of that was spoken by God.
Not even a demon would be so ill-spoken.
Amy
Speaking the Truth in Love
Options Reply Rate

489.3 in reply to 489.1
Arrogance.
Options Reply Rate


489.4 in reply to 489.3
I'm not sure if it was arrogance or if he was just carried away by emotion and fatigue.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: MomWhoLovesJesus (Momfothree) 7/26/2002 11:53 am

489.5 in reply to 489.4
Still unexceptable.
Options Reply Rate

489.6 in reply to 489.5

True enough!
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: Watchman77 7/28/2002 5:38 pm

489.7 in reply to 489.1
what is more amazing to me than this guy claiming he spoke for God, is that anyone believed it
"And I said, Oh that I had

wings like a dove! for then
would I fly away, and be at
rest." ( Psalms 55:6 )
point cursor at doves beak to see what she has to say
Watchman77
http://forums.delphiforums.com/Godswrath/start
http://www.topsitelists.com/topsites.cgi?ID=6&user=BrookeH&area=start Vote for Watch ye

therefore in Best Forums

Art used by permission by Pat Marvenko Smith, copyright 1992.

Click here to visit her "Revelation Illustrated" site.
Pat Marvenko Smith
And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and

He that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in
righteousness He doth judge and make war. Rev 19:11
http://www.grassfire.net/16/petition.asp?PID=2287828&P=1
petition to stop internet porn.
Options Reply Rate


To: Watchman77 (8 of 21)
489.8 in reply to 489.7
That's what happens when people choose to let someone who they think is more in touch with God do all the
Bible study for them. We don't need a prophet to tell us what God wants us to know. We need the Bible and
His Spirit dwelling in us.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

489.9 in reply to 489.8
AMEN John! The people that lived in Old Testament times needed prophets to teach and guide them. But
since the apostles have written the words of Jesus and we have a COMPLETE Bible, God hasn't sent prophets
because the Bible is all we need. Jesus was the last "revealer" until the End Times. There is NO mention by
Jesus or the Apostles that God would send any more prophets until the 2 "Witnesses" that come during the
Great Tribulation (Elijah and Enoch?).
Options Reply Rate


489.10 in reply to 489.9
I agree with you for the most part. However, I don't believe that the church is without true prophets. We still
have the Spirit of prophesy within the Body, and also those who teach under a direct anointing of the Lord.
The difference between prophets of today and those of the OT and early Church is that they don't reveal new,
formerly secret truths from the Lord. Their doctrine is subject to the teachings that the Lord has already
revealed in His Word, the Bible. We know a prophet is false if he teaches anything that is not consistent with
sound biblical doctrine. We also know if he is false when he predicts events in the name of the Lord (whether
stating specifically that the prophecies are from the Lord, or he implies it by claiming that he was
commissioned as a prophet of the Lord) that don't come to pass.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: Watchman77 8/1/2002 5:57 am

489.11 in reply to 489.10
***I agree with you for the most part. However, I don't believe that the church is without true prophets. We
still have the Spirit of prophesy within the Body, and also those who teach under a direct anointing of the
Lord.***
I also agree that the Spirit of prophesy is still in the body of Christ, unfortunately for the most part it is
ignored....
***The difference between prophets of today and those of the OT and early Church is that they don't reveal
new, formerly secret truths from the Lord. ***
Amen! the old time prophets wrote the prophecies, the modern day prophets speak the prophecies.... the
words of a prophet will ALWAYS line up with the word of God....
***Their doctrine is subject to the teachings that the Lord has already revealed in His Word, the Bible. We
know a prophet is false if he teaches anything that is not consistent with sound biblical doctrine.***
Amen and amen!

***We also know if he is false when he predicts events in the name of the Lord (whether stating specifically
that the prophecies are from the Lord, or he implies it by claiming that he was commissioned as a prophet
of the Lord) that don't come to pass.***
and amen again...

Watchman77



Pat Marvenko Smith

Options Reply Rate

From: muresan1 7/2/2003 11:53 am

To: MomWhoLovesJesus (Momfothree) unread (12 of 21)
489.12 in reply to 489.9
Dear Momfothree,
How ignorant and arrogance can you be!
Read Ephes.4:11 and so forth...and see that that the Real Church HAS all the ministries(my english is not so
good)what God send to Her for the perfection.
I CAN SEE YOU,JEENA,AND ESPECIALLY MR.JONH KENNAN in the time of apostoles how much you are
against them,
I can see you in the time of Noah how you don't believe NOTHING what he said,
I can see you all ex-message believers when you left the Lord after He claim to eat and drink His blood -
shame on you! -
I can see all the Hell against The Revelation of Jesus for this Day.
God send the revelation! Satan would not stop it. Why? Because God said so! Will gather the Bride together!
When I was a young boy we learnt in the school (comunist school) concerning all Bible contradictions and
they has over 200 bible contradictions and they try to teach us that the writers of the Bible, in the New
Testament also THEY WERE LIARS AND SO FOR..."Jesus didn't exist" "Who creat God?" "In that Gospel write
so...in the others write anything else..." All kinds of unbelive thoughts which was taken from the Bible.
I felt the same fals spirit from Mr. John Kennah, and others, but not with comunist mask but with religious
mask.
Please don't be sad on me. I said what I see and feel. I pray that the Lord will help me to learn english better
and I will be back on this forum, by He's grace. The Bible and the time show to us that the ministry of my
beloved Jesus Christ trough Bro. Branham is right, true and you have nothing better in the world and
churches. NOTHING!
Here, in my land romania, many people came in The Message of the Hour because the churches don't want to
let Catolic spirits and doctrines, and they also start to smoke, looking on TV, party, adultery... the world came
in our pentecostals churches.
They preach and everybody almost sleep.I don't know how is in america but I know there is over 55%
homosexuals,also in the church,bishops corupted,do you have there a real sodom.
God, have mercy for the people who sincer are looking for salvation through Jesus, His Blood,and Calvary.
Shalom
Muresan1
Options Reply Rate

To: muresan1 (13 of 21)
489.13 in reply to 489.12

Thanks for joining in, all the way from Romania! Maybe you can tell us a little about your country and
customs, we would all enjoy that a lot.
I understand your concerns about corruption in the Catholic church and agree that accepting a Pope and
doctrines of required celibacy, worship of saints and many others are unscriptural and harmful.
Many churches are asleep here in the US also. I am very happy to have found a few good local churches,
mostly nondenominational, that preach Jesus, believe in the working of the Holy Spirit, and uphold strong
morals. There are people in any of these churches (Catholic, Baptist, nondenom, or Message)who are
adulterers, liars, homosexuals; the church can teach against such things but only Jesus can change a heart.
We haven't heard from Momofthree for a while, so she may not respond to your post.
I look forward to hearing from you!
Options Reply Rate
From: ERAK62 7/2/2003 2:39 pm

489.14 in reply to 489.1
How about post the rest of it John???
LOOKING.AT.THE.UNSEEN_ LA.CA FRIDAY_ 59-0410

E-61 Thank the Lord, there goes that man walking from his wheelchair, saved a few minutes ago, given
Eternal Life, healed of the power of God, walking away. Praise His Name.
... name, I will praise Him, (Come right on now. Feel that pulsation in your heart?)
Praise the Lamb for sinners slain;
Give Him glory all ye people,
For His blood has washed away each stain.
E-62 Think of it, that poor man awhile ago standing there raised his hand as a sinner. A black shadow flashed
over him; he was dying; and he received Christ; then his heart begin to pulsate. What happened? He begin to
believe when the Holy Spirit come in, for It just received him in his heart. There he is standing there now in
on his road to life, got Everlasting Life and going to be healed physically, brought from darkness unto life,
from--from death to life.
Oh, how can you turn such a Saviour down, when all evidence is He's right here? Come, sinner friend, come
backslider; don't be ashamed. You'll be ashamed more up there. Come now, won't you? Come on, while
they're waiting now. We're giving space and time for you to come. Come, every soul now, come, praising
Him.
E-63 How many in here is not right with God back there, raise up your hand. Be that honest. You know you're
not right with God. He knows your heart. Thank you, lady, for being that honest. Thank you, sir, for being
that honest. Thank you. Thank you. God bless you. God bless you there. Up in the balconies, not right with
God raise up your hands, be that honest, say, "I know I'm not right. I ain't got nerve enough to come, but I
know I'm not right," raise your hands. The Lord bless you. That's good. Over in here. The Lord knows you.
That's good. Come right on down.
How many in here that wants the Holy Ghost now, that hasn't got the Holy Ghost? You come down. Come
down, this is the time to receive the Holy Ghost. "Except a man be borned again, he cannot even understand
the Kingdom of God." Think of it. Come right on down now, while we sing one more time.
I will praise Him, (Come on give Him praise. Hold on to it.) will praise Him,
For His blood has wash away each stain.

I will praise... (God, as long as I got breath and in my right mind.) I will praise Him,
For His blood can wash away each stain.
E-64 Can you feel that real sacred feeling coming over the church now? How many can witness that? What is
it? It's the Holy Spirit around these penitent sinners. See? It's salvation. They're moving into new life now.
Oh, we ought to bow our heads real reverently and sing quietly while the rest of them are coming.
I will praise Him, I will praise Him,
For His blood can wash away each stain.
I love Him, (Reverently now.)... love Him,
Because He first... (Sing it, Christian.)
And purchased my salvation
On Calvary's tree.
Oh, how we ought to sing it.
I... (Shut off the world now; get your senses gone. Let the Spirit come in.) I... (That moving of the Spirit)
Because He first loved me
On Calvary's tree.
[Brother Branham begins humming--Ed.] Oh, the sweetness of the Spirit. I just love to bathe in It. Blessed be
His Name. Praise God, praise God.
... purchased my salvation
On Calvary's tree.
[Brother Branham begins humming--Ed.]
E-65 You're coming to the cross where Jesus paid it all. You're coming where you're invited; you're not
expected to turn away; but you're invited to the cross. Remember Jesus said, "No man can come to Me,
except My Father draws him first." God drawed you up here. "And all that comes to Me, I'll give them Eternal
Life and will raise him up at the last day." God's eternal Spirit here giving Eternal Life...
I love Him, (Oh, worship Him, friends. The message is over; let's worship Him now.)
On Calvary's...
E-66 Just think of it, friends. Now, while sinners are being borned again around the altar, let's us Christians
worship in the Spirit again while we raise our hands quietly and sing to Him in the reverence of our heart
now; come on.
I love Him, I love Him,
On Calvary's tree.
E-67 Now, real quietly let the Christians reach around, shake hands with someone behind you, in front of you,
and at the side while we sing it again now. Make friendship, all you Baptists and Methodists, everybody.
Shake hands with a Pentecostal. And Pentecostal shake hands with them. We're all one.
I love Him, (That's it.) I... (If there's any grudges among you, settle it right now.)
On Calvary's...
Options Reply Rate


489.15 in reply to 489.12
Hiya MURESAN1, and welcome to the forum!
I agree with you that Christians need to present their bodies a living sacrifice unto the Lord - as it is their
reasonable service.
You assume that we are not born again Christians - but we love the Lord Jesus Christ with all our hearts and
have made Him Lord of our lives.
You made a very good point about communism trying to point out contradictions in scriptures. We both know
there aren't really any contradictions - and I have never found one, since knowing the Lord Jesus Christ. The
Bible is our absolute, and on this, I will not waver.
Love,

To: ERAK62 (16 of 21)
489.16 in reply to 489.14

I didn't post the rest of it because it wasn't relevant to my point, which was that Wm. Branham said God was
speaking directly through his lips when God clearly was not speaking through his lips. That makes him a
false prophet, regardless of what else he may have to say.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

489.17 in reply to 489.12
Hello Muresan, and welcome to the forum.
I can appreciate the obstacles you've had in the past. I know that unbelievers love to point out supposed
contradictions in the Bible in order to make it look like a fallible document written by men rather than the
inerrant Word of God, but they are proven wrong time and time again when we examine the Bible in light of
the facts and not by our biased, emotional preconceived notions. However, this is not the same as what we
are discussing in the Message. We use the Bible and the facts to substantiate what we've written concerning
the Message of Wm. Branham. I was a Message believer for 10 years, so I was not presupposed to
disbelieve it then twist the Message and the Scriptures to prove it isn't true, as atheists do with the Bible. I
believed the Message with all my heart, then began to see things that just could not be if Wm. Branham were
really a prophet. I am not on a crusade to disprove the Message, but a mission to stand up for the Word of
God where it has been misrepresented to me and thousands of others in the world through the Message of
William Branham. You are more than welcome to participate here, and I pray that you will read what we say
in the spirit of understanding the truth based on sound biblical doctrine. We must always be dilligiant to seek
truth through the Bible rather than accepting something as true and trying to find the right verses in the Bible
to prove our point. Lord bless!
John Kennah


Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: ERAK62 7/3/2003 11:04 am

489.18 in reply to 489.16
It was relevant, and God did speak through his lips. That makes you a liar and a blasphemer!
Options Reply Rate

To: ERAK62 (19 of 21)
489.19 in reply to 489.18
In your most humble opinion, of course.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."

(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: ERAK62 7/3/2003 12:19 pm

489.20 in reply to 489.19
Just as humble as yours... ;)
Options Reply Rate
Keep Reading>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Navigate this discussion: 1-20 21
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Games

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - The Lord Speaks Through

Subscribe
WMB's Lips (41 views)
To: ERAK62 (21 of 21)
489.21 in reply to 489.20
Perhaps, but I laid out a case for mine where yours was nothing more than a subjective, unsubstantiated
opinion. You're welcome to elaborate if you like.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Online Bibles
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
Next Discussion>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Navigate this discussion: 1-20 21
Rate My Interest:
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Lord%20thru%20WMB%20lips21.html (1 of 2)4/1/2005 6:36:16 AM

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - Sharks Will Swim in Los

Subscribe
Angeles (301 views)
To: ALL (1 of 88)
241.1
William Branham and his son Billy Paul were once standing in front of the May Company in downtown Los
Angeles. He told his son, "Billy, I may not be here but you won't be an old man until sharks will swim right
where we are standing" (See The Acts of the Prophet, by Pearry Green, page 119). He was referring to his
prophecy that California would one day sink into the ocean as the result of a catastrophic earthquake.
It is important to understand what Mr. Branham meant when he said that Billy Paul would not be an "old
man" before the coming earthquake. Mr. Branham often called himself an old man from the time he was 56
years old. It is reasonable to conclude that Mr. Branham did not believe Billy Paul would be 56 years old
before California would sink into the ocean. Billy Paul Branham was born on September 13, 1935, making him
66 years old at the time of this writing. Geologists agree that "The Big One" could come at any moment, but
according Mr. Branham's time frame, this prophecy has already failed to come to pass.
Attached is a recent photo of Billy Paul Branham
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

- Attachments follow -
billy_paul_branham.jpg
15KB
Options Reply Rate
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Sharks%20LA.1-20.html (1 of 12)4/1/2005 6:38:24 AM

From: Rheem21 2/1/2002 11:16 pm

241.3 in reply to 241.1
"Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?" (John 8:57)
William Branham regarded himself old because he had to deal with unreasonable and wicked men on a daily
basis, much the same way as Jesus did in His day. And they in His day thought He looked near fifty years old;
because it showed in his person.
You are grasping at straws here. And where do you live John. I live in California because it is a safe haven
from most of the foolishness that abounds in the Message today. I can't deal with someone who is afraid of
death. Several scarecrows were set up by William Branham on the orders of the Angel of God. And the
greatest scarecrow is California.
You have a cancer eating at your soul John, and it is worse than any physical cancer that you could have. You
have examined William Branham and determined that he was a false prophet, and you don't even realize you
are. You say he gathered doctrines from other preachers from other ages and that nothing he said was
original. But where did you get yours, from the same source and you say your interpretation is right and
others have to listen to you.
He was the wrapping up angel, to tie up all the loose ends that the reformers left off. And yes, they covered
all subject matter. It doesn't matter that you do not understand, it is only for the very few. The scarecrows
will get the others, and I see they got you. It is too bad, for you are a fairly good investigator. You
information will be used by me, but I know in what you believe, and I know you are just as false as you claim
William Branham is.
I suppose you are waiting for Billy Paul to die so that you can gloat. It seems to be your style. Yours is not to
heal, for you offer no healing in the Scriptures, as it has no life. An unlearned individual can easily be
deceived by you, but I can't. I know exactly where I stand and I intend to lets others in this forum know that
my account may stand in the Books on the Day of Judgement.
Rheem21
Options Reply Rate

From: Rheem21 2/1/2002 11:29 pm

To: 8320JOHN (4 of 88)
241.4 in reply to 241.2
I just hope your not in the vicinity when it happens, or even in Phoenix, which he said will be washed away
with a tidal wave. An earthquake of that magnitude will shake more than a few acres of California, it will
touch where you live also. Believe me, you will know when it happens.
If you do not have true Bible faith to stand with on that day, you will stand on grounds that hold no solid
support. I live in California, and stand on those grounds of faith. Faith I have garnered through the Scriptures
by using the Winzip tool of the End Time Message to unzip the compressed files contained therein.
Rheem21
Options Reply Rate

To: Rheem21 (5 of 88)
241.5 in reply to 241.4
The California quake epicentred on Northridge evidently destroyed completely the May department store in
this town. Could you verify this info for me? Could it be a warning as was the 64 quake in Alaska. This quake
caused a tidal wave which swept houses in Port Alberni ( Vancouver Island ) 50 miles inland. Port Alberni is a
small coastal community with Indian reservations close by. BB had a meeting there one time.
Options Reply Rate

241.6 in reply to 241.3

>>I suppose you are waiting for Billy Paul to die so that you can gloat. It seems to be your style. Yours is not
to heal, for you offer no healing in the Scriptures, as it has no life. <<
You are a deluded man, Mr. Rheem. If I have ever been guilty of gloating over the errors of the Message, I
ask the Lord's forgiveness. Whatever I've learned about the Message, it is by God's Grace and direction
alone. I cannot gloat over what the Lord has given me. You have badly misinterpreted this forum and my
motives. To think that any Christian would be happy that someone would die for any reason is beyond my
comprehension. What would put a thought like that in your head? No, I would be more than thrilled for Billy
Paul to live to old enough to realize that the prophecy his father made concerning him was false. I would
rejoice to see Billy Paul reject the errors of the Message and turn to the pure Gospel of Jesus Christ. I'm sure
his would be a miraculous testimony to many who wouldn't otherwise know anything except the teachings
of William Branham. I say that in full confidence, knowing that it is only through faith in the Gospel of Jesus
Christ as presented in His Word that we receive Eternal Life!
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: Herr Roeder (fromeyetoeye) 3/9/2002 4:40 pm

To: ALL (9 of 88)
241.9 in reply to 241.8
Hi folks,
this sharks-in-LA prophecy made me think as well. Some things occured to me:
1. William Branham wasnt infallible.

(only THUS SAITH THE LORD is infallible)
2. Wheres the evidence W. Branham prophesied this in the first place?
3. Can it be, that its just a tale told by Pearry Green and
Billy Paul Branham?
Whatever, even if he said so to his son... theres a huge website containing lots of "controversial prophecies
and teachings"...
Nevertheless folks, if one can proof that William Branham was a man, a sinner saved by grace just like you
and me, does this really lower the value of the truth he was speaking of and living out?

Think of it, folks!
Options Reply Rate

To: Herr Roeder (fromeyetoeye) (10 of 88)
241.10 in reply to 241.9
>>1. William Branham wasnt infallible.

(only THUS SAITH THE LORD is infallible)<<
Assuming for the sake of this post that William Branham was a prophet of the Lord, can you cite a Scriptural
precedent for your statement? The Bible places no such condition that a prophet must utter the words "THUS
SAITH THE LORD" while prophesying or speaking in His name.
>>2. Wheres the evidence W. Branham prophesied this in the first place?<<
The only evidence is the testimony of Billy Paul Branham.
>>3. Can it be, that its just a tale told by Pearry Green and
Billy Paul Branham?<>Whatever, even if he said so to his son... theres a huge website containing lots of "controversial
prophecies and teachings"...<<
Would that be http://people.delphiforums.com/JohnK63/home.htm by any chance? If not, I'd be interested

in knowing the Web address, if you wouldn't mind telling me.
>>Nevertheless folks, if one can proof that William Branham was a man, a sinner saved by grace just like
you and me, does this really lower the value of the truth he was speaking of and living out?<<
There has never been a prophet of the Lord who was not a sinner. William Branham may have been a sinner
saved by grace, but that has nothing to do with whether his teachings were the truth or not. The standard by
which we must judge any man's teaching is the inerrant written Word of God, the Bible. It is the revealed
Truth of God's Word in the Bible that proves that many of Mr. Branham's teachings are not inspired of the
Lord.
John Kennah


Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: RonD15 3/9/2002 9:06 pm

241.11 in reply to 241.9
Hi I2I,
>>Nevertheless folks, if one can proof that William Branham was a man, a sinner saved by grace just like
you and me, does this really lower the value of the truth he was speaking of and living out?
Think of it, folks!<<
It's not the truth we should be concerned with regarding WMB. It's the many parts, spoken from the pulpit,
that weren't true.
Deut 18:20-22
20 'But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak,
or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.'
21 "And if you say in your heart, 'How shall we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?'--
22 "when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is
the thing which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid
of him.
(NKJ)
Could it be that verse 20 was fulfilled by a drunk driver?
Options Reply Rate


241.12 in reply to 241.9
To look at BB as a fallible sinner, saved by grace would not be a problem at all except for the fact that his
claims were much greater than that. His frequent reiteration that evidence of the holy ghost was absolute
belief in the word of the prophet of the age raised a "fear barrier" to simple christians whose hearts didn't
quite go along with some of his more extravagant claims.
Regarding whether the sharks in LA statement was a prophecy or not: It was like a light turned on to me
when this forum raised the question of how many times can you remember any prophecy given by BB in
advance publicly or on tape? I can't think of more than one or two, such as the famous 7 visions from 1933 I
think it was (although again, I don't think anyone has supporting evidence from the time they were given).
Almost all of BB's prophecies were reported after the fact.
Options Reply Rate
From: rklute 3/10/2002 5:47 pm

241.13 in reply to 241.12
"Almost all of Branham's prophecies were reported after the fact."
I would say ALL of them!
Rod
Options Reply Rate

To: ALL (14 of 88)
241.14 in reply to 241.13

Folks, you bridle the horse from the wrong side,

(german saying, I hope it does make sense in english, lol)
you shouldnt try and proof that William Branham is a false prophet, for who does it help?
1. You dont believe he is a prophet? - Your choice.

2. I believe he is a prophet! - My choice.
What harm can I do to you? - None.

What harm can you do to me? - None.
Jesus says, "My sheep know my voice, and my sheep wont follow any other voice." - Fine, thats for you and
thats for me.
So, we both can be relaxed, ok? I dont have to proof that he is a prophet and you dont have to proof that he
is no prophet, ok?
I believe that he is a servant of God, that he is the messenger for the laodicean church age and that he is a
prophet not because my neighbours told me, not because it is a creed of my church, not because my parents
raised me "message-like", but because I was listening to his sermons and perceived that he is such.
Just like the samaritan woman perceived that Jesus is a prophet, when he told her about the men she had.
I think any more explanation on details is just squabbling.
Options Reply Rate

241.15 in reply to 241.10
....yes John, it was your website about controvercial prophecies and teachings. Quite interesting in fact.
Makes one think. Your former "message" church must have really disappointed you. Which if it was so, is
your own fault, because you should never put your trust in men.
I did write you an email after I read your sites, was some weeks ago..... but you never replied.
Options Reply Rate

From: rklute 3/18/2002 8:09 pm

241.16 in reply to 241.14
"What harm can I do to you".
Probably nothing on your own but Branham's message tends to be destructive and has ruined the lives of too
many people because of their intense fear of being Serpent Seed and not living up to the perfect standard.
Perhaps you are not as aberant as some groups teach but his message seems to breed destruction because of
the confusion and instistance that only Branham has the truth.
Rod
Options Reply Rate

241.17 in reply to 241.14
I was going to answer along the lines of Rod, but he said it well enough in his reply.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


241.18 in reply to 241.15
>>Your former "message" church must have really disappointed you. Which if it was so, is your own fault,
because you should never put your trust in men.<<
If you haven't already, please read my testimony. It was not my church that disappointed me--it was the
discovery that a man who I believed to be a prophet of God really was not! It actually was not a
disappointment. After the initial shock, I was quite relieved that I no longer had to blindly accept many of Mr.
Branham's teachings that sometimes contradicted themselves and the Bible.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

241.19 in reply to 241.18
John, you certainly never believed in William Branham being a prophet. You adopted the preaching of your
former pastor. But it didnt become life in you. Then God stopped you:
<<<>>>
Praise God for that! Hallelujah! God looks after His children!!!!
I once listened to a brother who told me some of "Mr. Branham's teaching" - Probably the biggest mistake I
ever done in my life. I'm still paying for that and my wife and my children.
You know what it was? It was nothing but his personal understanding of what William Branham was preaching
and he even proved it with the bible. All wrong!!! False doctrine!!! (By the way, William Branham never
preached it the way he was telling me, although he gave me tons of quotes to prove his version)
Cursed be the one that trusteth in man!!!
But please, now let God's Angel lead and guide you. Don't even lean on your own understanding.

Options Reply Rate

241.20 in reply to 241.19
>>John, you certainly never believed in William Branham being a prophet. You adopted the preaching of your
former pastor. But it didnt become life in you. Then God stopped you<<
The information at this forum and on my Website came directly from the taped sermons of William Branham,
not my former pastor or anyone else (except for a few isolated items, such as the "Sharks in LA prophecy). I
have actually learned a few things about the Message I didn't know as a Message believer just by listening to
his tapes and researching his teachings.
>>But please, now let God's Angel lead and guide you. Don't even lean on your own understanding.<<
Thank you for your admonishment, but I must study the Word and accept only that which the Holy Spirit
teaches me. There is no "Angel" of God who will lead and guide one to anything that contradicts God's
revelation to man as written in the Bible.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
Keep Reading>>


Subscribe
Angeles (303 views)
From: Herr Roeder (fromeyetoeye) 3/23/2002 10:34 am
241.21 in reply to 241.20
<<<<Thank you for your admonishment, but I must study the Word and accept only that which the Holy
Spirit teaches me. There is no "Angel" of God who will lead and guide one to anything that contradicts God's
revelation to man as written in the Bible.>>>>>
why "but I must..."???? - I agree with you. I never said anything contrary.
Options Reply Rate
From: Herr Roeder (fromeyetoeye) 3/23/2002 10:43 am

241.22 in reply to 241.20
ohhh, you dont like my expression "Angel of the Lord". Ok, call it "Holy Spirit". Im sorry, Im not that
scholared. I bet there are lots of scholars that will happily start a discussion with me about the difference
between Angel of the Lord and Holy Spirit. Anyway, what I mean is this Voice thats talking to me and guiding
me, and that I try to follow the best I can, for it never lead me wrong so far.
Options Reply Rate

241.23 in reply to 241.21

Because if I don't, I won't know the difference between truth and error. My ignorance of the Scriptures is
why I was so easily convinced that William Branham's Message was the true Message of the Hour.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

241.24 in reply to 241.22
Actually, I thought you were talking about the "angel" that accompanied William Branham throughout his life.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


241.25 in reply to 241.24
might be the same angel :))
I CHRONICLES 21:18 Then the angel of the LORD commanded Gad to say to David, that David should go up,
and set up an altar unto the LORD in the threshingfloor of Ornan the Jebusite.
LUKE 2:9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them:
and they were sore afraid.
ACTS 8:26 And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way
that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert.
Options Reply Rate

241.26 in reply to 241.25
I don't think so. Mr. Branham said that his angel said he was sent from the presence of God, not that he was
God.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

From: Rheem21 3/26/2002 3:29 am

241.27 in reply to 241.20
Since I can not find your posts on the seven visions of William Branham in 1933; explicitly the one dealing
with what he said about Roosevelt bringing the whole world to war, here is the evidence you desire. Even
though you will argue with it, it is for the benefit of all those in this post to show that he was a true Prophet
of God, whether you personally chose to believe that or not.
I will not proceed to post my findings about Roosevelt bringing the whole world into war:
Nelson Rockefeller also stepped into active planning for World War II. The war was to be used both to take
over the Saudi Arabian oil interests of Great Britain and also to crush Japan, which was trying to open up vast
Chinese oil fields that the Rockefeller interests had suppressed for years for monopolistic purposes. In his
very first Cabinet meeting in 1933, Roosevelt reportedly startled everyone by declaring that he wanted to be
a wartime president and wondered if a war with Japan could somehow be arranged. But he had to be patient.
It took eight years for the Rockefeller-financed "Institute of Pacific Relations" to give him his wish.
The matter of Saudi Arabia was a holdover from World War I which the Rockefellers had used to their own
ends. Rockefeller support behind the scenes made Germany such a threat to Britain that the British concluded
the Allies could not win World War I without American help. As the price for an American intervention, the
Rockefellers extracted a deal from the British turning over the Saudi Arabian oil concessions to them to
exploit. In return, the Rockefellers withdrew support from the Kaiser and quickly arranged through Woodrow
Wilson, the first president to be a complete puppet of the Rockefellers, to have American soldiers sent to fight
"The War to End All Wars." The Saudi Arabian oil concessions thus cost the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests
nothing--but they cost America a quarter of a million lives and a huge national debt!
But not satisfied with merely the Saudi Arabian oil concessions, the Rockefellers also proceeded after the first
World War to wrestle control of the German chemical, dye, drug, and dope companies away from the British,
merging them in 1926 into the world-wide cartel known as the I.G. Farben Industry, AG. This so infuriated
Churchill and the British that they used boycott tactics to block the Rockefellers from actually developing the
Saudi Arabian oil, refusing to grant visas to Standard Oil employees, turning down clearances to ships trying
to carry needed supplies and the like. The Rockefellers concluded that a second World War would be just the
right medicine to cure Great Britain's embargo on Saudi Arabia. The German war machine which they had
supported in World War I had produced a cooperative British attitude before, and it would presumably do so
again. A man by the name of Adolf Hitler, who at the time was a minor factor in Germany, was selected for
this purpose and was brought to power through the support of the Rockefeller-controlled I.G. Farben
industries and other German-controlled industries of the Rockefeller family. Nelson Rockefeller observed Hitler
closely during his world-wide honeymoon trip mentioned earlier and participated in Hitler's rise to power and
the strengthening of Nazi Germany, whose rise to power has always been a puzzling phenomenon to most
observers.
In 1929 the Rockefeller Standard Oil of New Jersey, now known as Exxon, made a cartel agreement with the
Rockefellers' I.G. Farben Industry to avoid destructive competition in one another's markets. The Rockefellers
supplied Hitler with great reserves of petroleum products without which war could not have been waged.
Their I.G. Farben Industry also assured Hitler of reliable supplies of glycerine for munitions from a source
which is seldom mentioned in this connection--the rendering of fat from Concentration Camp victims who died
in the infamous ovens! The cartel arrangement operated completely to the benefit of Germany--and
completely to the detriment of the United States, as was brought out in devastating detail by the hearings
held by Senator Harry S. Truman during the first half of 1942. As documented in those hearings, the
Rockefeller Standard Oil treated its agreements with the Rockefellers' I.G. Farben Industry as taking
precedence over any considerations of patriotism or duty to America; and continued to block all efforts to
make synthetic rubber and other critical war supplies available even after we were at war. Thus the Nazi war
machine of Adolf Hitler was built up to provide the menace to Britain which the Rockefellers desired as a
means of opening up the Saudi Arabian oil concessions permanently to themselves.

The strategy would be as in World War I--to get Britain on the ropes, extract the desired concessions, and
then engineer America's entry into the war to save Britain. But if there was one thing Americans did not want
to do, it was to go to war again. Isolationist sentiment was strong, therefore an attack on America would
have to be arranged. Nelson Rockefeller made sure that President Roosevelt's preparations for the war were
coordinated precisely with the Rockefeller machinations overseas, including Hitler's build-up on the one hand
and the plotting of the Pearl Harbor attack on the other.
The Pearl Harbor attack was the crowning achievement of the "Institute of Pacific Relations" (or IPR) which
was heavily financed by the Rockefellers and their tax-exempt foundations and which was dominated by
Nelson's brother John D. Rockefeller III. As brought out later in the Congressional investigation of the IPR,
John D. Rockefeller III participated in the activities of Edward C. Carter, IPR secretary, in a hideaway
disguised as a barn at Lee, Massachusetts. It was there that the groundwork was laid for engineering the
Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The existence of the Germany-Italy-Japan Axis meant that we would
automatically be at war with Germany, which was menacing Britain as soon as we were attacked by Japan.
Once Churchill and the British saw after Dunkirk that they were doomed without American help, a deal was
made to open up the Saudi Arabian oil concessions to the Rockefellers. The Pearl Harbor disaster was then
arranged in order to galvanize Americans into support for going into war. Needed defenses were denied to the
Naval Commanders at Pearl Harbor. The American warships at Pearl Harbor were all brought in and bottled up
within the harbor like sitting ducks in spite of growing tensions with Japan and even rumors of imminent
attack. Finally when the attack itself came, advanced warnings from several sources were all ignored--
suppressed in Washington! The actual day and hour of the attack was known to President Roosevelt and his
boss Nelson Rockefeller one week ahead of time, and nothing was done but to sit tight and make sure that
the Pearl Harbor attack occurred as planned.
As World War II came on, Nelson Rockefeller maneuvered Roosevelt through war preparations at home. He
dictated the passage of a Universal Military Training Bill and the drafting of our youth to serve the Rockefeller
cause at taxpayer expense in the forthcoming war. This done, he himself promptly evaded the draft, ordering
that he be appointed "Coordinator of Hemispheric Defense" as far away as possible from the war front, in ...
[Message truncated]
View Full Message
Options Reply Rate

241.28 in reply to 241.27

I won't pretend to have studied these things nearly as vigorously as you apparently have, but as I mentioned
before, I am not prone to placing much stock into conspiracy theories. In my opinion, if one is willing to dig
deep enough, one can find a source to "prove" almost any conspiracy one might imagine.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: Rheem21 3/26/2002 8:49 pm

241.29 in reply to 241.28
John, neither am I. I am not prone to just accepting anything. First of all though I believe everything I hear.
You make think this quite odd, but in doing so I collect information others would miss, or be blinded to
because of their prior thought patterns.
Then over a period of time I test it with other information, contantly putting it through the test of time and
material from other sources. Then I present the whole thing to God and forget it. In this way it is transferred
to the subconcious realm where in my sleep God seals my instruction. Then I just leave the information alone
and let it take care of itself. If after all that and years sometimes of search, it comes back into my life, I
might regard it with some stock. What I previously presented to you in the last post I have always known to
be true, but it was just the other night that I had it verbalized by this latest discovery. His name is David
Peter Beter. And he has about 80 of these messages. The information strikes so many cords I can not
mention them here now. I did not come to Christianity to just sit on a pew and argue over a jot and a tittle. I
came to discover new worlds and to live forever.
I understand that you can not readily accept anything outside of your present knowledge, but this is the only
information I had that in its own right shows what was happening behind the scenes. You may chose not to
believe it; but I have finished that statement of my case knowing through years of experience that this
information is true. I didn't know these taped messages were available before the other night. Don't you think
that that is sort of a coincidence, or even more so; in that I was seeking to validate my point. Even so, come
Lord Jesus!
Rheem21
Options Reply Rate

From: mikegju 3/27/2002 10:44 pm

241.30 in reply to 241.28
conspiracy theory.the very phrase concocted by the mass media.do you place much stock in the "mass
media"??how about revelation 12.9 he that deceiveth the WHOLE world!!the lord jesus said"thy word is
truth"---i wonder if you"believe" in secret societies?or "place stock"in the sixth seal revelation.when it
happens-then we will all "place stock!!!by the way-if i did not have a love for you-i would not post!
Options Reply Rate

To: mikegju (31 of 88)
241.31 in reply to 241.30
I believe the Bible. For reasons I have prolifically stated at this forum, my Website and my other writings, I
do not believe Mr. Branham was the fulfillment of Malachi 4:5,6, Luke 17:30, Revelation 3:14, Revelation
10:7,etc.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


241.32 in reply to 241.1
Billy Paul Branham won't be an old man at the wedding supper

http://www.branham.org/Message%20Infobase.htm
Options Reply Rate

To: ALL (33 of 88)
241.33 in reply to 241.32
Folks, do you notice that this discussion is not being fruitful? We better stop. You wanna be right? Fine. Its
between God and you, not between you and me.
I noticed, that hardly anybody in here is thirsty for thruth. Most are just defending their point of view.
We are posting letters in vain.
REVELATION 22:11
11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is
righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
Options Reply Rate
From: Nicknack7 3/28/2002 10:34 pm

241.34 in reply to 241.27
Interesting post.
I agree with much of what you wrote although you are far more factual. I have knowledge that during WW2 ,
US oil was shipped to fuel the German war machine via Switzerland.( Purchased from Standard Oil of NJ ) I
was under the impression that it was the John Paul Getty Standard Oil Co. not the Nelson Rockefeller owned
company. What a paradox ! US energy used by the enemy to kill American servicmen in the European
theatre. Stinking politics. Same as the pope refusing to intervene on behalf of the Jews in the Nazi camps.
Stinking religious politics & people curse & reject the honest humble prophetic message of Jesus Christ which
WMB brought. Thank God for His refuge.
Even this Afghanistan thing has an "Oil " based motive. Huge untapped resources there & Bush is from an
"Oil" state, & his family have huge interest in this resource. There is something going on with all this
Afghanistan & 9/11 theories. Also the Enron collapse happened at the same time as all this activity involving
US troops is taking place over there. I smell a stinking political rat here. Blood , Oil & Money smelling rat.

Options Reply Rate

To: Nicknack7 unread (35 of 88)
241.35 in reply to 241.34
please go to 'the message of the hour forum" and read all posts on"EARTHQUAKE"this may be enlightening
Options Reply Rate

241.36 in reply to 241.27
please go to "the message of the hour forum"by bible believers.read all posts on the
subject"EARTHQUAKE"please note my posts.many people "cant handle the truth"!!!!!!just like the phrase says.
its too deep,and their minds are brainwashed by the media,and the world system
Options Reply Rate
From: Rheem21 3/29/2002 10:52 pm

To: mikegju (37 of 88)
241.37 in reply to 241.36
Way ahead of you Mike. I read your posts and appreciate more information on any subject matter that you
have. This is a very serious time in history, and America's heros today are the comics, such as Jay Leno and
Conan Obrien. Anyone that can bring a smile to your face is rated great in the eyes of the world.
Rheem21
Options Reply Rate


241.38 in reply to 241.27
Before you get too involved in this discussion, please start a new thread on this topic rather than continuing it
in the "Sharks. . ." thread. Thanks.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

To: Nicknack7 unread (39 of 88)
241.39 in reply to 241.34
Before you get too involved in this discussion, please start a new thread on this topic rather than continuing it
in the "Sharks. . ." thread. Thanks.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

From: Rheem21 3/30/2002 7:34 pm

241.40 in reply to 241.38
K, but I thought I had the right thread, as the Rockerfeller Brothers are a bunch of sharks!
Rheem21
Options Reply Rate
Keep Reading>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Navigate this discussion: 1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-88
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Games


Subscribe
Angeles (303 views)
241.41 in reply to 241.40
posted new thread -what is truth-..enjoy all your posts very much.will look forward to more discourse!!
Options Reply Rate

241.42 in reply to 241.40
Perhaps, but they were never found swimming in front of the May Company!
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


241.43 in reply to 241.29
>>I understand that you can not readily accept anything outside of your present knowledge...<<
I'm not sure where you got such an understanding. I am learning all the time. What I don't readily accept
are doctrines that are not based on the Word of God and conspiracy theories which cannot be proven by
credible evidence.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

241.44 in reply to 241.1

35-3 That's solemn warning. We don't know what time. And you don't know what time that this city one day
is going to be laying out here in the bottom of this ocean.
ASHAMED.OF.HIM_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-9 SUNDAY_ 65-0711

52 And then prophesying, "Los Angeles will be in the bottom of the sea."
WORKS.IS.FAITH.EXPRESSED_ SHREVEPORT.LA V-7 N-1 FRIDAY_ 65-1126

62 Now, the last few days, the great roaring and popping. Then, here come out a paper of science, said, "It's
all honeycombed; it's got to go under." They just know it.
And you watch, the water will come plumb back into the Salton Sea. Los Angeles is doomed for judgment. I
tell you before it happened, that you might know when it does happen. I never spoke that by myself. And I've
never had Him to tell me one thing but what happened. And you can bear record of that. That's right. When?
I don't know.
Options Reply Rate


241.45 in reply to 241.44
I'm not saying Mr. Branham didn't prophesy that L.A. would sink. I'm saying that he told Billy Paul that it
would happen before he (Billy Paul) became an old man. I believe we've passed that point.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

241.46 in reply to 241.45
Yes, very sorry.

God bless.
Options Reply Rate


241.48 in reply to 241.1
If you would accept William Branham's standards in ALL your calculating, then I think you would have a much
better view of some things.
Who told you what Br. Branham said is an old man? When he turned 50, he said he was turning 25 - the
second time. So I guess he felt pretty young with 50.
It is reasonable to conclude that Br. Branham did not believe Billy Paul would be 112 years old before
California would sink into the ocean.
> 59-0419
And I was born on April the--the 6th, 1909. 'Course, you know, that makes me a little over twenty-five now.
<
PaulSilas
Edited 7/24/2002 8:58:26 AM ET by PAULSILAS
Options Reply Rate

241.49 in reply to 241.48
How about using this standard:
I don't mean to be a baby. I'm forty-five years old. I'm an old man.
--William Branham
AT.THY.WORD.LORD_ JOHNSON.CITY.NY TUESDAY_ 54-1207
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)

Options Reply Rate

241.50 in reply to 241.49
See? There is no use in trying to base a discussion about age on quotes from William Branham. Good that
you acknowledged that.
Also you have to show that William Branham said what he said about Billy Paul because of a Vision he saw,
where he saw Billy Paul not being an old man and sharks at that place.
But Mr. Kennah, I am honest with you: I came to this forum to see whether or not there is something about
what you are claiming to know. After several days and several talks with you I have come to the conclusions
that even if you try to do something good, your motives and your intentions are despicable. You even try to
find a hair in a soup where there is no soup. All laws of logic are null and void when you begin to open your
mouth (or rather: move your fingers) and in every attemp you make to show something, you go in the realm
imagination. That is the realm where you can show so many things, which burst like a soap bubble when you
bring them back to reality.
PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate

241.51 in reply to 241.50
I'm sorry you feel that way.
My motives have been to defend the integrity of God's Word against a system of ambiguous and contradictory
teachings and false prophecies as presented in the Message of William Branham. I followed his teachings for
10 years and learned that there is a vast amount of doctrine that I could not defend biblically with those who
did not believe it. My response was the same as Message believers present me with to this very day: You
must have a revelation to believe it. With all due respect, that does not answer the errors of his Message.
Why should we believe that Mr. Branham had the true understanding of the Scriptures? I don't believe that I
have strayed from the laws of logic, nor out of the boundaries of sound biblical teachings. I believe followers
of the Message do precisely that when defending the Message.
I am not here to obfuscate any true meaning of the Message. I am here to point out that the errors in the
doctrines and prophecies of the Message are indication that it could not be the end-time message from our
Almighty God. The only reliable answer to the errors of the Message is to be found while studying the Bible
and prayerfully considering what we read there. Then we must act on what weve learned by sharing it with a
lost and dying world.
John Kennah


Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: PaulSilas 7/24/2002 4:37 pm

241.52 in reply to 241.51
> I am here to point out that the errors in the doctrines and prophecies of the Message are indication that it
could not be the end-time message from our Almighty God. <
If that is your goal, and you mean it with a pure heart, then you wouldn't take slices from the Message (of
course the slices which you personally "like" best), but you would take the whole picture. You had 10 years to
do that, and I believe that you know a lot more than the 3-4 quotes that you give. I believe that you indeed
often know better than what you are writing, but that the thought of disproving the Message has become an
obsession to you and that you purposely rather take quotes who are easy to misunderstand if the context is
missing, than giving a complete picture about what William Branham taught or said about a certain thing.
Your personal attitude towards William Branham is made clear in almost every scentence, and your
preconception is the red thread through your website, the forum and perhaps even your hair-cut.
If you would present your ideas a little more neutral and not so much demagogic, then I think you would be
better off.
As I said, I just wanted to see if there is anything about this Forum which could help me, but there isn't.
I enjoyed the time in here, and it made me thank God even more for Holy Ghost lead men like William
Branham, who really have a burden for the people and not against them.
Your Webpage and your Forum made me search the Message even more closely (and also more critical) and I
am now even more convinced that it is from God than before.
So I guess I have to say THANK YOU!
PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate


241.53 in reply to 241.52
How can a person give their (ideas) views in a neutral manner? That's an oxymoron, isn't it? (Neutral
view????????)
<>
If so, then what would be John's point for doing that? If he felt that WMB was correct, then why would he
post things against his doctrine? If he believed in WMB then he'd be lauding him, not trying to disprove him.
It's a shame that this website has brought you closer to the Message. I think it's purpose is to bring people
closer to the BIBLE.
Options Reply Rate

241.54 in reply to 241.53
> It's a shame that this website has brought you closer to the Message. I think it's purpose is to bring people
closer to the BIBLE. <
I CORINTHIANS 11:1
1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also [am] of Christ.
I bet in Pauls time you would have said the same: ME follow PAUL???
Dear MOMFOTHREE. Just like in Pauls time there was nobody following Christ like Paul, there wasn't anybody
in this time who followed Jesus Christ like William Branham. At no point do I follow the person William
Branham to become like William Branham. But since he followed God in such a wonderful way, I can learn a
lot from him how I can follow God.
PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate


241.55 in reply to 241.52
>>If that is your goal, and you mean it with a pure heart, then you wouldn't take slices from the Message (of
course the slices which you personally "like" best), but you would take the whole picture.<<
When Satan presented Jesus with the Truth mixed with error, did Jesus give Satan the benefit of the doubt
and say, "You make some good points! Even though I disagree with you, I will have to tell others how
you have shared the Scriptures with me!" I don't mean to compare William Branham with Satan, but Mr.
Branham taught much error mixed with some truth, all in the guise of a Message from God. His Message has
been the spiritual ruin of many people who have sincerely sought to follow Christ with all their hearts. It is
the result of his Message, not the Bible, that many Message families have been broken, relatives disowned
and friendships severed. I know those who have committed suicide and those who have contemplated it
because their lives did not measure up to Mr. Branham's views of what attributes a real Christian should
have. While attending Tucson Tabernacle, I was shocked to learn at the level of disunity among sister
Message churches here in town. I later learned that this disunity was not limited to Tucson, but it is a
characteristic of the Message in general. When one looks at the whole picture, as you call it, there are not
many redeeming qualities in the Message. The disharmony the false aspects of the Message creates far
outweigh any good that might be associated with it. I feel I have a responsibility to shine the light of the
Bible on every error disguised as truth so that as many as possible will avoid its pitfalls and turn to the
simplicity of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as found in His Word.
BTW, you mentioned that you follow William Branham as Paul told the the Corinthians to follow him.
Actually, Paul had earlier in the same letter advised against following personalities as this caused division
within the Body. We see that in the Message and other sects which look to a single leader as their source of
Bible interpretation. So what did Paul mean when he said, "Follow me"? The term wasn't used in an attempt
to gain followers to himself as Mr. Branham did. In modern English, Paul was saying, "Follow my example as
I follow Christ's example." That is how it is presented in modern translations. We are to follow the examples
of those who follow Christ as presented in the Bible.
You said that you are even more convinced that the Message is from God after having visited this forum than
you were before. If I may ask, why is that?
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


241.56 in reply to 241.54
<><<At no point do I follow
the person William Branham to become like William Branham. But since he followed God in such a wonderful
way, I can learn a lot from him how I can follow God. >>
You have a good attitude, PaulSilas. I also value some of BBs teaching (the early Holy Ghost series, for
example) and respect him as a man who devoted his life to God.
Unfortunately, he himself demands that you accept every word he spoke as evidence that you have the Holy
Spirit. Brother Branham taught us that a prophet-leader was sent to give the Word to each gentile church
age; that acceptance of every word taught by this prophet (making his word law) is evidence that the Holy
Spirit dwells in the individual; and that the age will be judged on the basis of his message. That doesnt
sound to me like follow me as I follow Christ.
Please read on in I Corinthians 1:12: Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of
Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. 13. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye
baptized in the name of Paul? I Corinthians3 :3": For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you
envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? "4": For while one saith, I am of Paul;
and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?
Options Reply Rate

241.57 in reply to 241.55
> In modern English, Paul was saying, "Follow my example as I follow Christ's example." That is how it is
presented in modern translations. We are to follow the examples of those who follow Christ as presented in
the Bible. <
If you had read my post closely, you would have seen that that is exactly what I do: follow the example of
William Branham as he followed the example of Christ. I am not following the person, but since I find no
other person/preacher who lives and teaches more like Christ than William Branham, I rather listen to what
he has to say than others.
> You said that you are even more convinced that the Message is from God after having visited this forum
than you were before. If I may ask, why is that? <
I have always been a critical person. I also am critical with everything I hear about doctrine etc. And when
you claimed to have found contradictions in the Message, then I became big ears. I read what you think is
against the Word of God in his teachings and what you think are false prophecies. I compared it with the
whole picture I had about these things, and began to read and search even more for things William Branham
said about certain things.
While doing this I couldn't agree with your point of view, because William Branham sometimes simply didn't
say things the way you presented it, or I thought that you exaggerated in what you said purposely, making a
normal sentence a prophecy or a review a vision.
I am thankful to God that he opened my eyes a little more.

PaulSilas
Options Reply Rate

241.58 in reply to 241.55
<<It is the result of his Message that many families have been broken, relatives disowned,.........I know
those who have contemplated suicide because their lives did not measure up to Mr Branham's views of what
attitudes a real Christian should have.>>
John, do you personally know my family?! Because you have nailed them to a T!! (I'm speaking about my
mother's side of my family: my grandmother, aunts, uncles and cousins.) If you knew them all before
encountering The Message and could see the BIG difference now, you'd cry (as I have). My mother has 11
brothers and sisters and BM (before the Message) they were all one big, happy, loving family. They reminded
me of that TV family the Waltons. Now, they have broken up into little "factions" and are behaving in very un-
Christian-like ways to each other. I place the blame on the man that was a Message follower who married my
aunt and got them all to believe in the Message. My wonderful, Christian, saint-like Grandmother had a
nervous breakdown over the Message and never fully recovered. In my life, the Message has been my
family's downfall.
You hit the nail on the head with the "disunity among sister churches" too. My family believes that THEIR
church and a particular one in Georgia are the only ones that are right. My Uncle Richard broke off and
formed his own Message Church. There is also another Message Church in the nearest town, but they (my
family) all believe they are wrong. Talk about disunity!!
Edited 7/25/2002 3:22:03 PM ET by MOMFOTHREE
Options Reply Rate


241.59 in reply to 241.57
>>I am not following the person, but since I find no other person/preacher who lives and teaches more like
Christ than William Branham, I rather listen to what he has to say than others.<<
Does that mean that if you found another person who lived and taught even more like Christ than Mr.
Branham, you would be open to leaving Mr. Branham's teachings to follow this new preacher? We know Mr.
Branham was not perfect like Jesus was. How would you recognize someone who lived and taught even more
like Jesus than William Branham?
The Bible does not teach that we are to follow the exclusive teachings of any one man for our doctrine. Not
even in the days of the early Church did Christians follow the teachings of only man (other than Jesus). None
of the Apostles were the sole expounder of biblical doctrine to the Church as William Branham presented
himself to be. Neither does the Bible suggest that we are ever receive one man's teachings as the final
authority of biblical doctrine. If we are tempted to follow the exclusive instructions of just one man because
he says his message is the Word of the Lord for the hour, and he seems to be more Christ-like than anyone
else, I would interpret that as a red flag of warning because Paul said,
Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing,
and [that] there be no divisions among you; but [that] ye be perfectly joined together in the same
mind and in the same judgment.
For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them [which are of the house] of Chloe,
that there are contentions among you.
Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of
Christ.
Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.
For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross
of Christ should be made of none effect.
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the
power of God. (I Corinthians 1:10-18)
Paul did not seek a following as William Branham did. Paul did not say that he alone had the exclusive
message of the hour. In fact, his doctrine was nothing more than the preaching of the Gospel, which the
other Apostles also taught. So basic to our salvation was the preaching of the cross, that Paul said the
wisdom of words would make it of non effect. Peter himself said of the Church in his own day:
According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that [pertain] unto life and godliness,
through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be
partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust" (II
Peter 1:3,4).
The early Church already had the whole Truth necessary for salvation. Who are we to say that God has
required more Truth in our day in order to be a part of His Body, the Church? I believe when men turn to only
one man for the ultimate interpretation of God's Word, it can only lead to sectarianism and the acceptance of
a host of false teachings that must be blindly accepted along with any truth that might be taught. That is not
a biblical description of the Church. Unfortunately, it describes the Message movement all too well. I say that
in most sincere, Christian love.
As to your examinations of my portrayal of Mr. Branhams teachings, I would be happy if you would give us

some examples of where you say I've taken things out of context or applied meanings to them that Mr.
Branham did not intend. I have been listening to tapes now for over 22 years. I honestly do not think I've
taken anything out of context or misrepresented Mr. Branham's teachings in any way.
Mr. Branham said that his ministry was the last sign to the Church and that his Message was the revealed
Word of God for the Hour. He has said that his Message is Jesus Christ Himself. Having been presented as
such, we have the biblical responsibility to examine it by the highest standards (Compare with Acts 17:11).
Why should we expect anything less than perfection if it is indeed the Message from God? Why should we
accept it as the Message of the Hour if it is anything less than perfect?
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

241.60 in reply to 241.58
God bless you, sister. You and your family are on my prayer list.
John Kennah

Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


Subscribe
Angeles (303 views)
From: IM4WMB 7/28/2002 2:37 pm
241.61 in reply to 241.1
Who is to say that Billy Paul has Had a body change at this time? How old was Sarah when the promised son
arrived? I believe that this earthquake wil happen during the time of the resuurection of the saints. For There
was a great earthquake when the Lord Jesus Died on the cross and the graves were opened. This prophecy
will come to pass.
Options Reply Rate

To: IM4WMB (62 of 88)
241.62 in reply to 241.61
According to the prophecy, Mr. Branham said that Billy Paul wouldn't be an old man until sharks swam where
they were standing. In my opinion (and everyone who I've showed a photo of Billy Paul, along with telling
them his age), Billy Paul already qualifies as an "old man" (the American Heritage Dictionary, under
synonyms for old, specifies that an elderly person is one who is past late middle ages without necessarily
implying marked decline). Of course, the meaning of the term "old man" may be subject to the context in
which it is used, but I believe this prediction has failed to come to pass according
to a reasonable person's interpretation of what Mr. Branham said.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


241.63 in reply to 241.62
Praise the Lord, since I live 20 minutes from LA! ;)
Options Reply Rate
From: IM4WMB 7/30/2002 4:25 pm

241.64 in reply to 241.62
I notice you try to act like this is an exact quote when you italicize "until". Could you direct me to the quote,
if it is found in the message? This is a second hand story as told by Billy Paul as far as I know. Also to note is
your definition of "reasonable". Wonder if Moses was considered "reasonable" when he challenged the
Pharoah of egypt with only a stick in his hand? Bottom line is, is that if Billy Paul received a body change at
the time of the resurrecton, this prophecy CAN be fulfilled. As far as saying the Prophecy failed that is far
from the truth.
Options Reply Rate

241.65 in reply to 241.64
As I said in my opening post, this quote came from Pearry Green's book. As I understand it, Pearry Green
repeated this story from Billy Paul Branham. Billy Paul hasn't challenged the accuracy of the quote.
>>Bottom line is, is that if Billy Paul received a body change at the time of the resurrecton, this prophecy
CAN be fulfilled.<<
Let's say that you are correct in assuming that Mr. Branham meant that Billy Paul would have received his
glorified body by the time sharks swim where they were standing. If that were so, what did Mr. Branham
mean when he said, "I might not be here...?" I believe it's clear that Mr. Branham believed he might be
dead by the time LA sinks. This would imply that Billy Paul would receive a glorified body but his father would
not.
I believe the obvious meaning, whether quoted by Billy Paul second hand or not, is as I presented it in my
post. I would gather that before now, nobody has tried to make the prophecy say what you have suggested.
John Kennah
Contact Me

Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

241.66 in reply to 241.65
I've heard Bro. Billy tell this story, and he says he isn't an old man yet because LA is still standing.
Options Reply Rate
From: IM4WMB 7/31/2002 5:05 pm

241.67 in reply to 241.65
I have a YES or NO question for you. Nothing more is required, simply respond yes or no. Could GOD bring
this prophecy to pass if he wanted to?
Options Reply Rate
From: Watchman77 8/1/2002 6:05 am

241.68 in reply to 241.23

***Because if I don't, I won't know the difference between truth and error. My ignorance of the Scriptures is
why I was so easily convinced that William Branham's Message was the true Message of the Hour.***
I was wondering about that... you seem like a very intelligent person, to intelligent to have believed these
teachings for so long.... but the bible does say 1Corinthians 1:27, But God hath chosen the foolish things of
the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things
which are mighty;

Watchman77



Pat Marvenko Smith

Options Reply Rate


To: Watchman77 (69 of 88)
241.69 in reply to 241.68
Message believers use I Corinthians 1:27 precisely to justify their distrust of intellectual reasoning where it
pertains to their faith. Intellect is not considered a virtue in the Message. William Branham taught that man's
wisdom, which he equated with the intellect, always leads men away from God. In order to avoid that pitfall, I
accepted that I must receive the Message on the basis of a "revelation," regardless of whether it made sense
to my way of understanding. A favorite verse in the Bible among followers of the Message is "Trust in the
LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding" (Proverbs 3:5).
Mr. Branham taught that "revelation" was central to having "Rapturing Faith." He frequently referred to this
verse: " And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath
not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter,
and upon this rock I will build my church" (Matthew 16:17,18). Mr. Branham taught that the "rock" Jesus
referred to is revelation. He said that we might not understand a revelation, but we must accept it rather than
trust our own intellect. And, of course, a true revelation is only sent through a vindicated Word prophet. I
believed the prophet with God's revelation for our day was William Branham.
The Bible says that faith comes by hearing the Word of Christ (Romans 10:17). Jesus Christ has given us a
tremendous supply of veritable evidence we can refer to when making a choice to believe what the Bible says
about Him and the Gospel. We don't have to accept the Gospel on blind faith as followers of the Message
suggest we do regarding Mr. Branham's ambiguous and contradictory teachings.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: IM4WMB 8/1/2002 3:04 pm

241.70 in reply to 241.69
I'm still waiting on that simple yes or no answer Mr. Kennah. Could GOD, if he wanted to, Bring this prophecy
to pass? yes or no?
Options Reply Rate

From: Watchman77 8/1/2002 3:25 pm

241.71 in reply to 241.70
and could God make a rock so big He couldn't lift it... the answer to that is, Why would He want to

Watchman77



Pat Marvenko Smith

Options Reply Rate


241.72 in reply to 241.70
Usually, loaded questions like the one you asked of me require more than just a yes or no answer. A
common example is the question, "Yes or no: have you stopped beating your wife?"
God could very easily cause a catastrophic earthquake to submerge LA. The point I'm making is that,
according to the time frame provided by Mr. Branham, it is already a failed prophecy.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate
From: IM4WMB 8/1/2002 9:49 pm

241.73 in reply to 241.72
You still fail to see that even if Billy Paul died the prophecy could still be fulfilled when the resurrection occurs.
When I heard Billy Pauls testimony he said brother Branham told him that he would not be an old man when
Los angeles sank. You dismissed my earlier post's point by simply telling me what you thought brother
Branham might have been implying....thats not good enough. Your opinions of what something might imply,
and your "opinions" of what you think Brother Branham might have meant are both null and void to me.
Everyone and their uncle has an opinion.
Options Reply Rate


241.74 in reply to 241.70
IM4WMB, God could cause LA to sink, or it could occur as a result of natural causes. Either way, at Bro. Billy's
present age, the prophecy would not have been fulfilled.
I wanted to add to this - if the prophecy means it could happen before Bro. Billy becomes old, OR at the time
of the rapture, OR after Bro. Billy's death when he is young again on the other side - it becomes meaningless.
It just means that LA will sink someday, an event predicted by countless scientists and psychics in some
degree or other.
Edited 8/5/2002 9:21:40 AM ET by NEWCLOTHES
Options Reply Rate

241.75 in reply to 241.73
>>Your opinions of what something might imply, and your "opinions" of what you think Brother Branham
might have meant are both null and void to me. Everyone and their uncle has an opinion. <<
And you're entiteled to yours.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


To: kw500r (78 of 88)
241.78 in reply to 241.76
>>Come on John - did not God command Moses to speak in the name of the Lord, and what about Samuel
and Nathan. All had Thus Saith the Lord and then there's Deut 18.<<
True, but the Bible doesn't say that God's prophets were required to precede a prophecy with the phrase,
"thus saith the Lord," for it to be considered legitimate. This is nothing more than a man-made stipulation
created by Message believers in order to explain away the errors in prophecy he made.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

To: kw500r (79 of 88)
241.79 in reply to 241.77
>>Did Bro Branham say that to Billy Paul in the name of the Lord or was it just his opinion based on the sign
of the times?<<
You'll have to ask Billy Paul how Mr. Branham phrased the prediction. In any case, Billy Paul took it as a
prophecy. Pearry Green concurred and presented it as such on page 119 of his book, The Acts of the
Prophet.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


241.80 in reply to 241.78
"Thus Saith The Lord" sometimes strikes me the same way as when my kids would tell fibs, and later when I
caught them, they said they had their fingers crossed behind their backs. Or, the cases where kids say things
and feel they are more believed or credible if they add "pinky swear" to their statement. Is this discussion to
argue the point that if WMB doesn't say " Thus saith the Lord", then it doesn't matter what he said? Does
this mean that a man of God can say pretty much anything they want, as long as they don't say "Thus saith
the Lord" with it???
Ok, let's assume this is what message believers are saying - has anyone every compiled ONLY the statements
William Branham made which have the "Thus saith the Lord" accompanying them? Does that mean people
are safe to throw out anything without those words?
Love,
Keep Reading>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On


Subscribe
Angeles (306 views)
241.81 in reply to 241.80
Some interesting points! Well said, Jeena.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

241.82 in reply to 241.80
He was both a prophet and a man.
When god was speaking through him "thus saith the lord" it was God; Even Balaam could not control what
god said through him.
When god wasn't speaking it was billy branham; Elijah made mistakes about the number of israelites in
israel, and Jerimiah had to be told to go back to Hananih and prophesy after he walked away, and
2 Sam 7:3 And Nathan said to the king, Go, do all that is in thine heart; for the LORD is with thee. 4 And it
came to pass that night, that the word of the LORD came unto Nathan, saying, 5 Go and tell my servant F38
David, Thus saith the LORD, Shalt thou build me an house for me to dwell in?
Even samuel spoke out of turn and had to make a change. Men can be in error, God cannot.
Options Reply Rate


241.83 in reply to 241.82
There is a distinct difference between the prophets you cited and William Branham. Although the biblical
prophets were human and sometimes made mistakes in judgment, they never made prophetic statements
that did not come to pass. William Branham's statement regarding sharks swimming in LA was a prophetic
statement, not a human error in judgment. It did not come to pass.
There were many times when Wm. Branham presumably spoke under the anointing of the Holy Spirit and
made a wrong discernment or a false prophecy, including times that he said "thus saith the Lord." Please
click on Controversial Prophecies for a few examples.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

241.84 in reply to 241.83
Well buddy, move to LA and wait. It took over 700 years for the prophesy
Isa 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call
his name Immanuel.
to come to pass. Just hang around there for a while, and buy yourself a boat; it could let a little damp.
Options Reply Rate


241.85 in reply to 241.84
You missed the point. Geologists had predicted a major California earthquake before Wm. Branham did.
Edgar Cayce prophesied of it back in the 1940's. The problem is that it did not happen within the parameters
of Wm. Branham's prediction. The time timeframe for which he said it was to occur in his prophecy has
passed. Therefore, it is false.
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

241.86 in reply to 241.85
there was no timeframe. He just said it would happen. You assume a timeframe.
"O, Capernaum," said Jesus, "thou who exalted into heaven will be brought down into hell, for if the mighty
works had been done in Sodom and Gomorrah, it'd have been standing till this day." And Sodom and
Gomorrah lays at the bottom of the Dead Sea, and Capernaum's in the bottom of the sea.
Thou city, who claims to be the city of the Angels, who's exalted yourself into heaven and sent all the dirty
filthy things of fashions and things, till even the foreign countries come here to pick up our filth and send it
away, with your fine churches and steeples, and so forth the way you do; remember, one day you'll be laying
in the bottom of this sea. You're great honeycomb under you right now. The wrath of God is belching right
beneath you. How much longer He'll hold this sandbar hanging over that, when that ocean out yonder a mile
deep will slide in there plumb back to the Salton Sea. It'll be worse than the last day of Pompeii. Repent, Los
Angeles. Repent the rest of you and turn to God. The hour of His wrath is upon the earth. Flee while there's
time to flee and come into Christ." Let us pray.
Options Reply Rate


241.87 in reply to 241.86
"Billy, I may not be here but you won't be an old man until sharks will swim right where we are
standing" (See The Acts of the Prophet, by Pearry Green, page 119, emphasis added).
Billy Paul is now 67 years old. There's the timeframe.
The quote you posted happens to be a prophecy which Wm. Branham said he made while unconscious. It
happens to contain a major error that could not have been made if it were truly the Holy Spirit speaking
through him as he claimed. See Does Capernaum Lie Beneath the Sea?
John Kennah
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

241.88 in reply to 241.87
he compared LA to capernaum, which doesn't make sense on the surface. Yosimite is a giant supervlocano.
When LA goes down, the volcanic events will be like those at capernaum.
Options Reply Rate
Next Discussion>>

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - The Tent Vision (32 views) Subscribe
To: ALL (1 of 8)
928.1
William Branham made a Thus Saith the Lord prophecy in which he was to hold a healing revival like none
other that hed ever had. He describes this prophecy which he received in the form of a vision:
Then He taken me from there, and I seen a great huge tent. I never seen such a--a tent. And
it was packed and lined everywhere with people. And I walked out to the... Looked like I was
standing above the people, looking down, where I'd just made an altar call; and hundreds and
hundreds of people were weeping and rejoicing after they had accepted the Lord Jesus as
their Saviour.
And I looked, and then heard a man get up and say, "Call the prayer line." And people begin
to line up over on this side, the left from where I was looking down towards the platform, and
they lined all the way up and down the street for a prayer line. I noticed to my left, which
would've been to my right if I was on the platform, a little wooden building. And I seen that
Light, that all--they have the picture of, you know, that's always in the meetings; I seen that
Light leave me, and go to that building, and go in that building; and a Voice said to me, "I'll
meet you in there; that'll be the third pull."
I said, "Why?"
He said, "Well, it won't be a public show like they had it." And I came to.
And I... Now, at the beginning of this new year, back to my tabernacle where I started from
(See?), back to the beginning where I--I started... I--I am very grateful to God for these
things.
And many of you know that just before leaving on the other crusade, about eight or ten
years... I think about ten years since... Well, nine years it has been. It was... These things
were told exactly how the auditorium services (You remember.), exactly how that Brother
Lawton would live exactly three years, and then be taken away; that Brother Ward would
build a tabernacle down in this position, this direction here, and all of it just exactly. You
know it, you old timers. It happened just that way, and so will this, for it's THUS SAITH THE
LORD. And you'll know.
And now is, I believe, that the--that the brink of the greatest meetings that's ever--we've
ever--I've ever held for the Lord Jesus is laying right in the future before me now.
Why Are People So Tossed About?, January 1, 1956 (tape #.56-0101)
Later, he further described his anticipation of having this vision fulfilled, even preparing the tent in which he
would hold this change in his ministry:
He said, "I'll meet you in there and this time it won't be a public show." And the vision left me.
Now, we got the tent in making. And then in there I'll be able to carry a prayer line right on
through. Now, you remember, I speak this before it comes to pass. The exceedingly
abundantly is fixing to take place. I can't wait till I get into that place. I just... My heart's a
yearning and burning.
Being Led of the Holy Spirit, February 19, 1956 (tape #56-0219)
As late as 1962, Wm. Branham continued to look forward to the fulfillment of this vision, which, up to this
point, had yet to come to pass:
And so far as I know, that every vision that He's ever give me has been fulfilled except the
one that I'm a change in my ministry to where I'm to pray for people in a little place like a
little room under a tent, or a big auditorium or something. It looked to me like a tent. You
remember that, two or three years ago?
Present Stage of My Ministry, September 8, 1962 (tape #62-0908)
file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/Tent%20Vision1-20.html (1 of 6)4/1/2005 7:04:10 AM

A little over three years later, Wm. Branham was killed in an automobile accident, leaving this thus saith the
Lord vision unfulfilled.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate

928.2 in reply to 928.1
My friend,
You are misrepresenting the tent vision. Funny, this is even a misunderstood thing within the Message, and
has caused quite a division between the churches. However, that aside, I have to say this. I used to wonder
about this, and so I looked into it, to find some kind of answers. This tent vision, if you look, Brother
Branham was not on the platform. The man said, "While our Brother Branham is resting...." Now, we all know
that a Christian does not die, he goes to sleep, a rest. Now, you have the congregation sitting there. Then
you have some gathered around the altar, and then the small building on the platform. As I looked into this, I
immediately thought of the tabernacle in the wilderness, and I started considering that a human is a tri-uned
being. Now, the prayer line is formed, and the people are going forward, and entering the little building,
crippled, and so on, and here they come out healed. Then the Light left the Angel, and went to the building.
The Angel then told him that he would meet him in that secret place. And the Angel had told him a secret,
and he said that he would keep that to his grave. However, he said this, "Just watch what happens next."
Think about the vision before, where he was fishing for the trout, and the shoe. They all will line up, if you
look at it right. The tent vision was showing the third pull in it's full manifestation. The whole time, Brother
Branham is WATCHING, not doing a thing. That vision is being fulfilled this day. What was the building on the
platform? The Holiest of Holies, where God sat between the wings of the cheribums, the mercy seat, and this
is the type of the heart, soul. They enter into the presence of the Lord, and they come out different. It's not
that he missed it, it's that the truth of it has never really been told. Brother Branham was never given the
interpretation of that vision, and so he always talked about getting a tent and holding that meeting. The truth
is, that it is unfolding around you, and you don't see it.

Shaun

Options Reply Rate

928.3 in reply to 928.2
I agree that there is no consensus on the meaning of the tent vision. When I was in the message, my earliest
understanding of that was WMB coming back with the dead in Christ and holding the meeting during a (30
day) short quick work. Later, our understanding was that it could be fulfilled through his son or some other
minister (obviously,a forlorn hope). Still later, that idea wearing thin, we considered it a spiritual tent, the
Bride progressing to the plane WMB was in when God worked through him (manifested sons of God). The
problem with that theory is that it isn't happening.
Mens ministries blossom and wither, healing happens occasionally as it does in all religions, people wear the
garments but don't have the Life. . . . and the greatest of the gifts is love.
Options Reply Rate

928.4 in reply to 928.3
My friend,
Healings, and so on, are good, however the devil can reproduce those. Yet, there is one thing that he cannot
reproduce, and that is the Word. If you want to talk miracles, I have seen them, and know many that have a
testimony of what God has done in their lives. I know a couple of people who have been healed of AIDS, as
well as many from cancer, even some raised from the dead, and the list goes on and on. (Talking about
things that have happened within about the past 5 years.) BUT, the real miracle is, that they have recieved
the Word. I can testify of visions I have seen, and the miracles that have been done in my life, but that is
small when it comes to the fact that I am a Christian, believing the Word of God. "One soul is worth a
thousand worlds." The point I was making, those people were entering into the presence of the Lord, and
coming out healed, and that Brother Branham was on the outside, watching, not doing a thing. He saw it, but
was not a part of it as far as being up there praying for the people. The three visions were pretty much one
vision, because they all went together. If you take JUST the tent vision, and run with that, then you might
find yourself all mixed up. Remeber this also about the tent vision, the Angel said it would be a private thing,
this wasn't to be public.
The thing that really gets to me, is when people will take what a person says, and only use a part of it to
prove their point. They will totally cut away the part that shows that what they are saying is wrong. I always
seem to find myself telling these people to read the verse before that one, or to read this one over here. You
can't take one verse, OR quote, and build a doctrine, your boat will sink.
May the Lord richly bless you,

Shaun

Edited 3/20/2003 8:11:47 PM ET by LILEAGLET
Options Reply Rate

928.5 in reply to 928.2
>>You are misrepresenting the tent vision. Funny, this is even a misunderstood thing within the Message,
and has caused quite a division between the churches. <<
It isn't my interpretation. I only restated what Wm. Branham said. Before Mr. Branham died, nobody
misinterpreted it. Everyone expected it to come to pass. The confusion only came after Mr. Branham died
before the vision came to pass. Your interpretation is one of several made by Message believers who seek to
rationalize a failed vision. The truth is, God told us how to recognize a false prophet in Deuteronomy 18:22
when He said, "If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is
a message the LORD has not spoken." In the case of the Tent Vision, it seems that you are trying get around
this by saying that the vision didn't really mean what the "prophet" said it meant. That effectively
circumvents the criteria God told Moses to look for in a false prophet.
John Kennah

Apologetics Index
Contact Me
Amen."
(I Timothy 1:17)
Options Reply Rate


928.6 in reply to 928.4
You are right about healings; they are not proof of correct doctrine, only of faith.
<<The thing that really gets to me, is when people will take what a person says, and only use a part of it to
prove their point. They will totally cut away the part that shows that what they are saying is wrong. >>
Right again. Since WMB did not not understand what this vision or several visions/dreams meant, I don't
know how any of his followers can claim to. I found an interesting study on the 3rd Pull on a message church
website, you could find it by searching on Tabernacle of the Spoken Word.
Options Reply Rate

928.7 in reply to 928.6
See, I don't claim to know it all about this. I only know what was revealed to me. I know that God will move
on a person, and lead them in certain directions, showing them the answers. I can only say what I have seen.
I don't know if what I have said about it is 100% correct, however, I do know that what I have said is a part
of the full meaning of the vision. The fact is, none of us know all the answers, show me someone that says
they do, and I can show you someone anointed with a lying spirit.
I love the people, and it says to even love the sinners, right? However, you don't love their sins, just the
person. I don't want anyone to think I don't love them because I don't agree with them, even John. I don't
know him, don't know most of these on here, however, I do love them all. It's funny, not long ago, I would
have wrote everyone off, that didn't agree with me, as reprobates. I am glad that God delivered me of that
devil, and has helped me to learn to love people.
I do have to admit, when I see someone go and tear someone down, indignation does rise up, BUT I still
don't hate, or even dislike them. And I hope that everyone on here that I have disagreed with, or have
maybe rubbed wrong read this.
Anyways, I am only human, as we all are. I make mistakes, and fall down daily, the thing is, what I do when
I fall. So, I ask that all would pray for me, as I will pray for them.

Shaun
Options Reply Rate


928.8 in reply to 928.7
That's a great attitude, Shaun - you'll go far with it.
Options Reply Rate
Next Discussion>>

WYSIWYG Editor:
On
Delphi Messenger
Off On
Rate My Interest:
Adjust text size: 8
Games

Prophecies Web

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Prophecies Web

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Examining the Message of William Branham

Controversial Prophecies (Reply-Only Folder) - 2nd Coming of the Lord by

William Branham and His Message

Edited 7/4/2003 10:35:57 AM ET by KENNAH (JOHNK63)

Options Reply Rate

file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/2%20Coming%201977_1-20.html (1 of 12)4/1/2005 3:49:04 AM

Message 2 of 30 was Deleted

From: KENNAH (JohnK63) 6/27/2002 11:42 am

Nonetheless, William Branham is still on record as saying:

William Branham and His Message

Options Reply Rate

Message 4 of 30 was Deleted

file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/2%20Coming%201977_1-20.html (2 of 12)4/1/2005 3:49:04 AM

From: KENNAH (JohnK63) 6/28/2002 10:33 am

William Branham and His Message

Options Reply Rate

Message 6 of 30 was Deleted

From: PaulSilas 7/21/2002 1:24 pm

you don't seem to know what false prphesy is.

file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/2%20Coming%201977_1-20.html (3 of 12)4/1/2005 3:49:04 AM

I predict, not the Lord told me, but I predict

Let's listen again to what Br. Branham said concerning 1977:

Now let's take a look at another Quote:

Options Reply Rate

file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/2%20Coming%201977_1-20.html (4 of 12)4/1/2005 3:49:04 AM

From: KENNAH (JohnK63) 7/22/2002 9:00 am

William Branham and His Message

Edited 7/22/2002 10:12:07 AM ET by KENNAH (JOHNK63)

Options Reply Rate

From: Bulls_Eye 7/22/2002 10:30 am

file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/2%20Coming%201977_1-20.html (5 of 12)4/1/2005 3:49:04 AM

Options Reply Rate

From: PaulSilas 7/22/2002 10:50 am

Well Mr. Kennah,

Options Reply Rate

file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/2%20Coming%201977_1-20.html (6 of 12)4/1/2005 3:49:04 AM

From: philrickerby 7/23/2002 6:42 am

Options Reply Rate

From: PaulSilas 7/23/2002 11:24 am

Edited 7/23/2002 12:26:26 PM ET by PAULSILAS

Options Reply Rate

file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/2%20Coming%201977_1-20.html (7 of 12)4/1/2005 3:49:04 AM

From: MomWhoLovesJesus (Momfothree) 7/23/2002 6:41 pm

"I could miss it a 100 years."

They why even mention 1977 at all?!

Options Reply Rate

From: PaulSilas 7/24/2002 7:22 am

> They why even mention 1977 at all?! <

It is not my buisiness and I think it isn't yours as well.

Options Reply Rate

From: MomWhoLovesJesus (Momfothree) 7/24/2002 2:12 pm

Options Reply Rate

file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/2%20Coming%201977_1-20.html (8 of 12)4/1/2005 3:49:04 AM

From: philrickerby 7/27/2002 8:36 am

Options Reply Rate

From: PaulSilas 7/28/2002 6:10 am

Hope this helped you understand my view,

file:///Volumes/JK%20FRM%20BKP%2010_04/Controversial%20Prophecies/2%20Coming%201977_1-20.html (9 of 12)4/1/2005 3:49:04 AM

Options Reply Rate

From: Nicknack7 8/1/2002 10:27 am

JUDGEMENT my friend. The Judge is here now.

Options Reply Rate

From: KENNAH (JohnK63) 8/1/2002 7:04 pm

Here is the actual quote you're referring to: