[deleted] -not interested in your false teaching

It’s is truly funny how the people who exposed this hillbilly branham as a fraud has complete biblical proofs to back it up, yet those who oppose him do not do so. Branham was a quack, his followers are dyslexic and cannot read the bible. If the father of cain is the serpent why do we have this:

genesis 4:1

New International Version (©1984)
Adam lay with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, “With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man.”

New Living Translation (©2007)
Now Adam had sexual relations with his wife, Eve, and she became pregnant. When she gave birth to Cain, she said, “With the LORD’s help, I have produced a man!”

English Standard Version (©2001)
Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, “I have gotten a man with the help of the LORD.”

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, “I have gotten a manchild with the help of the LORD.”

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

GOD’S WORD® Translation (©1995)
Adam made love to his wife Eve. She became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, “I have gotten the man that the LORD promised.”

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bore Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

American King James Version
And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bore Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

Branham is not christian at all, he does not believe in the bible.

GOD BLESS

Werner

No problem :P

Thanks Deborah,

must have been a typo, probably refered to charasmatics, and pentecostals, as their original beliefs were close to truth, not what we see today.

Werner

>> I don’t think Debs or any of those opposed to Branham, base their belief on any church fathers, i.e. calvin, augustine etc. So I don’t know why this was mentioned…

Nope, so and your guess is as good as mine.

And great post!

The first of these is a restoration of apostolic authority. That is not the apostolic authority Jesus bestowed upon Paul and the twelve Apostles., but rather what amounts to a mono-episcopal heavy shepherding (I have seen this in CRC-London, when I lived there for a few years).

The second feature they are trying to restore is a version of apostolic authority akin to the American Mike Bickel and the Kansas City false prophets, and not least of all Rick Joyner and Cindy Jacobs where pretended prophets can in God’s name predict time-spesific events that fail to happen with utter imputing, and still be revered as “prophets”…Deut. 18:22, Jer. 28:9, Ezek. 33:33.

The third component of what they are trying to restore is Kingdom Now theology uniting hyper-calvinistic reconstructionism with latter rain/manifest sons heresies of certain ultra-pentecostals in the tradition of William Branham.

Shocking isn’t it. PS, no such thing as a hyper-calvinist, they are just called Calvinists :)

The most obvious solution to this dilemma – I don’t think Debs or any of those opposed to Branham, base their belief on any church fathers, i.e. calvin, augustine etc. So I don’t know why this was mentioned…

Further, assumption is the biggest desception, why is it assumed that some have gone to theological seminary? Allot of the comments under the articles on this blog fail to address the issue at hand…is it perhaps the lying spirits steering away from the truth? I don’t know, but none of these foolish posts have in any way been able to defend their lies and heresies.

So, please, whether you have a PhD, or no education at all, at the end only God’s Word is sufficient to teach, reproof, correct, train, in rightteousness, 2 Tim 3:16, and only His Spirit can lead us into all truth, no education needed.

It is in many ways those with education that fail to see the truth and follow the teachings of men… Psalm 118:8

Most if not all the church fathers had some form of theology mixed with heretic doctrine, that is the problem with many churches, christians, and denominations like the Dutch Reformed Church here in South-Africa. The sure defence is to do as Jesus commanded, John 5:39, search the Scriptures, and the Bereans in Acts 17:11.

Back to the heretic in question, many including Branham sought to restore three things that never existed, based on a distored exegesis of Eph4.

The first of these is a restoration of apostolic authority. That is not the apostolic authority Jesus bestowed upon Paul and the twelve Apostles., but rather what amounts to a mono-episcopal heavy shepherding (I have seen this in CRC-London, when I lived there for a few years).

The second feature they are trying to restore is a version of apostolic authority akin to the American Mike Bickel and the Kansas City false prophets, and not least of all Rick Joyner and Cindy Jacobs where pretended prophets can in God’s name predict time-spesific events that fail to happen with utter imputing, and still be revered as “prophets”…Deut. 18:22, Jer. 28:9, Ezek. 33:33.

The third component of what they are trying to restore is Kingdom Now theology uniting hyper-calvinistic reconstructionism with latter rain/manifest sons heresies of certain ultra-pentecostals in the tradition of William Branham.

Jude:9-10, Even Michael showed respect for authority, in sharp constrast to the false teahers who do not. Marc Bredenkamp is one local self proclaimed prophet who likes to tease Satan as well, beware… Rather than having superior knowledge as they claim, the false teachers have only brute animal knowledge..

Follow God and not men, Rom3:4.

If Brother Branham was a true prophet of God, why didn’t he die a true prophet’s death? Weren’t all the O.T. prophets stoned to death by their own people?

hintonh

lol

[DELTED]

MATTHEW 12:32
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the [world] to come.