This eBook is dedicated to my family

Acknowledgment
All prior researchers and writers focused on this topic Your courage led the way

This eBook may be shared, but ONLY under these conditions This eBook is copyrighted. However, it may be shared freely, but only as a whole and in its original PDF format. The right of the reader to print it out or convert it into other digital formats is NOT granted by the author. This measure is designed to preserve the integrity of its contents. Please adhere to this rule itll encourage more people to write.
Tell me what youre thinking The author is always happy to receive feedback from readers. Tell me what youre thinking by email, nathanrivera001@gmail.com. Please remember to tell me a little about your background and where youre writing from. If you decide to write, please avoid throwing insults, curses and warnings if you disagree with anything you come across. Theyve never been demonstrated as effective in improving the quality of any discussion. However, Ill be more than happy to receive messages with factual, sound arguments supporting or rejecting any of my ideas. I look forward to hearing from you.

A Logical Refutation of Branhams Message

Table of Contents
A Brief Introduction...4 Chapter 1: Fear is the Name of the Game............................................6 Chapter 2: A Little Thought into the Matter11 Chapter 3: A Cloudy Lie..18 Chapter 4: Branhams Splendid Creation..46 Chapter 5: The Very Fallible Prophet.61 Chapter 6: The Dark Side of the Message.83 Chapter 7: Closing Arguments..95 A List of Utilized Resources104

A Brief Introduction
I was born and raised a Message Believer, and my parents, brothers and sisters are strict followers of the Message. I have had the privilege of spending a lot of time with Message Believers ever since I can remember, and their company is all Ive known for my entire life. Even as I write this, more than eighty per cent of all my friends are Message Believers. This is why I have to clarify that this book is not an attack on Message Believers and it is the wish of the author that the material contained within this book will not be used to maliciously attack and disrespect them. Time and again it has been shown that religious belief is not based on the truth of religious teachings. People do not follow certain teachings because it can be shown that those teachings are true; rather they follow those teachings because they believe that they are true, whether or not they are. The conditioning takes place from infancy to adulthood and from there becomes entrenched within the mind. This explains why it is often futile to try and talk people out of what they believe in by proving that what they believe in is false. It is because of this that I am assured that this material might not be seriously considered to be true and will be very offensive to the Message Believer, whether or not its contents are true. After examining the evidence contained here, you might rise up with emotion and resentment without considering the facts. If you do this, I am afraid this book will be of no help to you. I feel, however, that this material will be of great help to the uncomfortable, doubting person who has never felt at home in the Message. It will also be helpful to those who are no longer in the Message and need assurance that they did the right thing by walking away. I feel I need to share what I discovered when I became of age and decided to investigate what I had believed in for so many years. We are living in very different times compared to those that saw the rise and spread of the Message of William Branham. We are living in an era of technology, one that has seen oppressive regimes in the Middle East brought down by the use of simple social technologies. The people living in this age are very informed. This cannot be said of Brother Branhams times and the years that followed. Information was not as easy to access as it is today. As a result, people did not have the capacity to carry out research and cross check what they were told by men of God such as Brother Branham. This was the state of affairs when our parents got to hear about the message, and I am convinced that the believability of the Message was greatly enhanced by this kind of helplessness of the masses, the inability to easily access information. It was like a natural North Korea. This is no longer the case. Through the use of simple technology, for example, we can cross check every historical statement made by Brother Branham for its authenticity. We can also carry out research about major incidents surrounding his ministry, such as the cloud on Mt. Sunset. We can also contact and hear from people who have testimonies about Brother Branham. This was not quite easy to do a long time ago as it is now, and it is totally up to you to decide whether youll take advantage of this opportunity and seek some verification, or youll continue believing just because its what youve believed in for a long time. 4

I consciously took great caution not to be too technical in explaining the facts that I have discovered since the day I decided to do some further reading on Brother Branham and his Message. You shouldnt believe what I tell you just because it is written on this book. For you to appreciate this and have no doubt at all that what I am about to present is true, you owe it to yourself to investigate and verify all that is presented to you in this book. Until such a time as you do this, you will be swayed by even the simplest rebuttals coming from people who are still in the Message. I sincerely do hope that Ill make a difference in your life. It would be my wish that you do not skip a single word written in this book; and to this end I took conscious effort to keep things brief, including the book itself. I am not a native English speaker. In fact, I learnt the English language after I could communicate in two other languages, which makes it my third language and due to budgetary constraints, I wasnt able to hire a professional to proofread my work, but I really needed to get the word out. Because of this my grammar might not be very good, but I request you to please consider the message contained herein objectively, without affiliating the credibility of the book to its level of grammatical accuracy. Some people will also gauge a speakers intelligence by considering his or her grammar, but before you apply the same procedure here please remember that English is my third language. However, I am still sure that Ill be able to pass my message effectively in the English language. Ive been there. I was a dedicated follower of the Message. I used to talk to people about it; I converted my childhood best friend into it. I used to sing to people about it. Thats why I am convinced that its a long shot to try and convince you to leave the Message, and that just holding this book is already a big deal. But please, calm down friend, indulge me for a few moments and hear my side of the story, then you can decide. For your freedom, Nathan.

Chapter 1: Fear Is The Name Of The Game

"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself - nameless, unreasoning, unjustified, terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance." Franklin Roosevelt.

It was around 7.00 oclock in the evening when one of the ministers was invited to conclude the mid week church service. The minister carried some tragic news: we had lost a brother - a former brother at least - but this was not your usual death announcement. This brother tried to disprove the Mt Sunset cloud that appeared to the prophet, the pastor said, pointing towards a picture of the cloud hanging on the wall of the church. He tried to prove the prophet wrong. Yesterday he was involved in a road accident, and he died. He did not explicitly claim that his death was a punishment for what he had done, but clearly, that was the implication. I sat there shocked but scared at the same time I strongly believed in Branhams doctrine - and it teaches that whatever the pastor says is directly inspired of the Lord. The implied message from that announcement was clear: if you try to speak against the prophet, God will punish you severely, even with death. Since we were little, we have been taught that doers of good will be rewarded with a great time in the heavens, while doers of evil will be thrown into a place that burns in super high temperatures for millions of years. William Branham claims to have been taken on a tour of this place when he was young and describes it as a place that is so hot - having red hot wires piercing their way through your body would be a luxury compared to the suffering that is experienced in hell. Branham says that all sins may be forgiven except one: blaspheming the Holy Spirit. He claims that the Bible says that whoever commits blasphemy against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven in this world and in the next. This is correctly obtained from the gospel of Mathew. This threat is meant to deter skeptics from speaking out against inconsistencies in the doctrines given to us by servants of the Lord such as William Branham. If you speak against what he says, if you speak against his inspiration, you wont be accorded a fair trial in the Day of Judgment like the other sinners; your fate will stand decided there and then. You will burn for millions of years in hell. A lad came forward to test the prophet (tape number 57-0630). While William Branham was preaching in Canada, the lad wrote down upon a prayer card that he had cancer and tuberculosis, while in real fact, he didnt. During the prayer service he went up to the line and said that he had those diseases and confronted the prophet to heal them. The prophet repeatedly told him to stop - but the warning fell on deaf years. As a consequence the prophet smote him with both cancer and tuberculosis. The prophet told him: "The things that you put on your card, you have. Both cancer and TB." And he fell down on the platform. But the last time I heard him, I never heard no more, just a letter from some of the people, that he was in a serious condition. So we're not playing church. Although no medical records, testimony from medical personnel, friends or family have since been obtained to corroborate Branhams claim that the lad acquired these diseases, this is a scary story that would make a person desist from ever playing around with the prophets doctrines. Woe unto you if you miss the rapture, William Branham teaches. From Conduct Order Doctrine of the Church, in response to question 392, he says that the tribulation will set in upon the sleeping virgin for three and a half years and then the battle of Armageddon will break out and destroy all things. This is just a single quote among hundreds in which he describes the coming of great confusion, suffering and awe for those who shall not satisfy the criteria for being part of the bride. No one would wish the suffering that is supposedly coming onto this sinful world on their worst enemy. Just before the rapture 7

is to take place, the city of Los Angeles will, according to William Branham, sink deep into the ocean. Millions of people will perish during this event that will move and shock the world. See, the end times are described using these scary events and threats that would make a person submit themselves totally to the doctrine presented together with these threats as a package. Meet fear. Its probably what youre beginning to experience after reading the first few paragraphs of this chapter. Right now, if you were born and raised in the Message, or have been its long time adherent, you probably are filled with fear just for daring to read this book. You even might be filled with pity for the author because of the curses he is attracting towards himself for speaking against the prophet of our age. But for you to really engage and accompany me to a simple and practical journey that lies in the chapters ahead, this is a feeling you will have to conquer. Its a feeling I had to conquer myself before I abandoned Branhamism, before I gained the courage to speak against it, and before I set out to begin research work on this book about a year ago. I guess my initial remarks concerning fear at this point would be to point out that those feelings are absolutely normal. Adherents and apologists of questioned doctrines will often pick a few cases of terrible things that happened to people who opposed them and present it as proof of supernatural endorsement of their false doctrines. This hopeless technique is achieved by relating bad things that would normally occur to people to their unbelief in the doctrine being protected. To illustrate this point, take the case of the brother who got involved in a road accident, described in the first chapter of this book. Anyone on this planet may be unfortunate enough to get involved in a road accident. That being said, all kinds of people - strict adherents of the message, indifferent church members and those bitterly opposed to the message may be involved in a fatal road accident, and it does happen from time to time. But when it happens to someone who was trying to disprove the prophet, it just happens that the road accident was as a result of that person opposing the Message. Perhaps the fear generated from this painfully desperate technique may be temporarily addressed by thinking about the thousands who have spoken against the message for virtually their entire lifetimes and theyre still walking tall and strong on Gods green earth. However, as the truth begins to set in, the fear will gradually disappear. The tiny bit they usually leave out when they are talking to you about bad things that happened to people who spoke against the message is the millions of people who have been introduced to the message but were pragmatic enough not only to reject it but to speak and warn others against it, and are still living happy lives free from bondage of false doctrines. Launch your research today. Investigate how many online groups, individuals across the world, Christian groups and counter-cult organizations are speaking against and fighting Branhamism on this planet and you will find that they are so many that it would be futile to attempt to number them. These groups and organizations jointly have hundreds of thousands of personnel. Add to this number the millions of people who have been introduced to the message and have gone on to rubbish it and the number of religious leaders who constantly warn their members against Branhamism. Therefore, if speaking against Branhamism brings about serious consequences such as death, anti-Branhamism would be ranked among top killers in the world amongst the likes of malaria and AIDS.

Supernatural There is a thought that might pop up in your mind shortly if it hasnt already: what about the signs and wonders that William Branham performed? Wouldnt a person in their right mind fear and respect what he had to say? Sure we should give credit where its due: Mr. Branham dazzled hundreds of thousands of people with his wonders. I am not declaring their authenticity, but I have not come across any report of an investigation that totally disproves that his miracles were real. We can get into a debate on whether his miracles were real or not and we will in the coming chapters but for the sake of this particular argument, let us assume that his signs, wonders and miracles were real. If we were to believe every Tom, Dick and Harry that serves a dinner of great miracles and then offers a dessert of doctrines for us to believe in, then the world would be overwhelmed with countless true beliefs. At this point I would like to point out the fact that William Branham did not possess a monopoly on signs and wonders, and if you are a Message Believer just for the fact that William Branham performed miracles then its high time you abandoned your beliefs. Supernatural powers have been claimed by founders of almost all major religious establishments in the world, including Islam, and not all of these supernatural abilities have been disputed. Prophet Muhammad also had supernatural experiences according to many documents of history that are available. Supernatural abilities cannot be relied on to establish the truth of any proposition. Many charismatic Christian leaders have been said to possess phenomenal supernatural abilities. These include the likes of Smith Wigglesworth, Benny Hinn, Oral Roberts and Aimee McPherson. There are many testimonies of people who have been miraculously healed by these people including the blind being able to see, people with terminal diseases testing negative and the lame being able to walk. Yet these religious figures carry with them very divergent doctrines - some even directly contradicting each other therefore offering us a red light when it comes to relying on supernatural abilities to authenticate doctrines. There are numerous people and you should investigate that are endowed with amazing supernatural talents and many of them do not even profess any religion. Thus in the many debates about Branhamism Ive been involved in, such a response as the one above is what I usually give when proponents of Mr. Branham start mentioning things such as mysterious lights in his photographs as Gods vindication of Branhams message. If you consult books such as Supernatural by Owen Jorgensen, you will come across phenomenal supernatural things that Mr. Branham used to do. He could tell his friends what kind of fish they would catch and at what time before they set off for a fishing trip, and it would happen exactly as he said according to this book. At this point were not questioning whether or not Mr. Branham possessed these capabilities; were questioning whether the fact that he possessed them should be grounds for believing everything that he told us. If you believe in Branhams Message, then it also follows that you also believe in the Bible. Since Mr. Branham claimed to derive all authority from the Bible, we may then use the Bible to examine each and every one of his moves. If we find Mr. Branham preaching a doctrine that is against biblical teaching yet claiming to uphold every teaching of that Bible, then we will have caught him in a lie. This is the reason

the author chooses to use biblical verses in this book. Back to our current topic, the Bible offers some guidance on whether to believe what a person says based on their miracles. Visit Mathew 7:22-23.
On that day many will say to me, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name? And I will declare to them, I never knew you; depart from me, you evil doers. (Revised Standard Version)

We may draw several conclusions from this verse. First and most important of all, the Bible is saying that there are people who perform miracles but the miracles are not from God, and even worse, will end up in hell. Secondly, we see from the above verse that evil people have the ability to perform miracles, according to the Bible. Therefore we cannot prove or disprove doctrine based on signs and wonders performed by the preacher of said doctrine. Keep this in mind as we move ahead since you will realize that the Bible shatters any claim of legitimacy by a religious teacher based on miracles performed. Therefore if your preacher gathers some quotes from the Message in which the prophet says that his signs and wonders were proof that what he was saying was true, you know how to respond at least in your mind since Message churches do not allow for too much, if any, questioning of commonly held doctrines however ridiculous they might be. A tiny measure of psychology Fear is a physiological mechanism present in all animals. There are regions of the brain that are responsible for eliciting the responses we commonly package and label as fear. Every time you experience the feelings of fear, there are certain chemicals that are released in your brain that trigger the feelings of alarm youre experiencing. That being said, it is important for you to realize that the source of fear is within you. Secondly, the experience of fear does not always mean the presence of danger or imminent harm to the organism. If I placed a small non venomous snake on your lap, youd probably be filled with fear of enormous proportions. This will be the case despite the fact that the animal offers no possible form of danger. Therefore, the presence of fear is not necessarily proof of imminent danger, I would like to emphasize. If youre filled with fear of confronting the truth behind Branhams teachings, its important for you to realize that your feelings are not proof of imminent danger, and second of all, the source of those feelings of fear is within you, theyre not by any means being brought about by some supernatural power as many people would like to believe.

10

Chapter 2: A Little Thought Into The Matter

I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei

11

Message Believers may be grouped into two: those who were born and raised in the message, and those who were not originally believers but were introduced to the doctrine later on in life. When engaging in debates about the message, Ive come to realize that the hardest people to dissuade from Branhams Message are those who were born and raised in the Message. Those who were introduced to the Message know why they decided to get into it. If you then target the pillars of their belief and disprove them, youve got them hooked. If for example they were dazzled by the pillars of fire, the cloud at Mt. Sunset, the healings and the prophecies - and from there began giving attention to Mr. Branhams doctrines, then you may easily target and disprove these initial attractions and youll leave their faith at a very fragile state. The hardest people to convince are people like me those of us who were born and raised in the Message. This is because their belief is implanted deep within the self since childhood; its a form of mental conditioning that takes place and has some permanency. Many of my friends with whom Ive grown up with in the message cannot explain convincingly the major tenets of Branhamic faith, but they are strong Message Believers. They just believe it. And if they question it, they feel as guilty as a first time murderer. If they hear you oppose it, youre accorded a mad man status, literally. This happens despite the fact that a majority of young Message Believers do not even come close to satisfying the criteria for those who will make it into the rapture they live as they wish, but they cling tight to Branhamic doctrines they deal with the guilt on Sundays. This is the group I would like to address first. If you do a little observation, youll come to find out that most children born to Muslim parents become Muslims; most children born to Message Believers become Message Believers; most children born to Hindu parents turn out as Hindus; and most children born to indifferent parents turn out to be indifferent when it comes to religious beliefs. This is no accident, friends. There exists a systematic process, even if we do not realize it - that permanently conditions the mind of a child as he or she grows up that ensures that they cling exclusively to the belief introduced by the parent; however ridiculous the belief might be. Lets take an example of a baby who has just been born into a Muslim family. The minds of children are born blank: therefore all children just coming into this world do not believe in any religion. As soon as the kid can mumble a few words, among the first words the kid is introduced to will include Allah and Muhammad. As soon as the kid learns how sing, among the first songs the kid learns to sing are Islamic songs. As soon as the kid learns how to read and write, among the first texts he or she will read is the Quran. When the kid is old enough to comprehend ideas, among the first ideas he or she is introduced to are Islamic teachings: that Islam is the one and only true religion, that Muhammad is Allahs only true prophet, and that all other religions and false and evil. To enhance the conditioning, the parents utilize a method similar to the one used to shoot electrons in a cathode ray tube, which is usually very effective. On one side, from which the electrons originate, they are repelled using a powerful negative charge, and on the other end towards which they are supposed to travel, they are attracted using a powerful positive charge. This causes them to travel in super high speeds towards the attractive direction. The kid is repeatedly told that if they adhere to Islamic teaching, there is a big reward: eternal life in heaven (attraction). Further the kid is warned that if they do not 12

adhere to Islamic teaching the will go to hell and burn forever (repulsion). This causes them to travel in super high speeds towards Islam. Whats worse, when a baby comes into this world, he or she learns to trust the parents, unreservedly. Whatever they say is more often than not held as absolute truth by the kid as he or she grows up. The important point Id like you to note at this point is that it does not matter whether what the parents are saying is true or not, the kid believes it anyway. Secondly, when the kid becomes of age, they do not bother to investigate the truth behind the beliefs introduced to them by their parents; since it would amount to investigating obviously true facts. Therefore as a young Muslim grows up, they come to regard teachings of the Quran as the absolute and indisputable truth. Were you born and raised in the message and still hold on to it as the absolute truth? Then you are a victim of the above process. Allow me to get a little, just a little into your face and suggest that had you been born into a Catholic family, you most probably would be a strong believer in Catholicism as you are in the Message right now. When you come into this world as a baby, youre the most vulnerable intelligent organism on the planet. Whatever your mind shall be trained to believe as you grow up, you shall strongly believe even unto your adulthood, regardless of whether or not it is true. As soon as you could speak, among the first words you were introduced to included God and Branham. As soon as you could sing, the first songs you were introduced to were songs from the book Only Believe. As soon as you could read, among the first books you held in your hands were Message books. As soon as you were old enough to grasp some ideas, the first ideas you were taught included the fact that Branham was a true prophet of God and that all other Christian denominations, let alone other religions, are of the devil. And finally, the worst of them all, as you grew up, you grasped onto these ideas as absolute truth and since they are obviously factual, then you, as a grown up individual intellectually independent of your parents, have never taken the initiative to investigate whether everything you were told about Branham is true. Instead, youve grown up believing that such an investigation would amount to questioning the word of God, which is an enormous sin. But there is another perspective I would like to introduce you to. Its called the use of reason. Okay calm down friend: we are all familiar with what the Message says about the use of reason. It strongly forbids the use of reason when it comes to matters spiritual there are many quotes on that. But I want us to dive into this sea of reason and see what causes all faiths to heavily discourage its use. Among many other definitions of reason, it may be described as thinking that is coherent and logical (Princeton Education). If youre familiar with any academic concepts of logic, then you would agree with me if I said: If a gazelle is an animal; and all animals are living things; it then follows that all gazelles are living things. Do you agree? I bet after reading that question, you have given an answer in your mind as yes or no. Whichever way you have answered, I want to believe that you believe your answer to be correct. In the above paragraph, I have taken you through a simple process through which you were able to employ the use of reason, where you were able to establish whether the statement provided was true 13

or false. Notice that through the use of reason, you have been able to establish whether something is true or false. The ability to reason is one of the biggest endowments the creator of the universe afforded mankind. Why is this so its because we have been able to conquer our environment through its use. When religious leaders tell you not to employ the use of reason in spiritual matters, its a bit ironical since you came to believe in religion through the use of reason. When you were a child, you were presented with two options: believe the Message and go to heaven; fail to believe it and burn in hell. You therefore employed the use of reason to come to the conclusion that between the two, heaven would be much more desirable, since burning results in excruciating pain that would be undesirable and on the other hand heaven flows with milk and honey. You also employed the use of reason and realized that to keep your parents happy youd have to adhere to the Message and its practices; and also in order to fit in within your group of playmates youd have to attend Sunday school and even be familiar with songs sang within the Message fraternity. When we become of age, we carry along all the beliefs that were entrenched within us through prolonged mental conditioning. Some of these beliefs may be true, others may be false. To debunk some of these beliefs, some serious investigation and thinking will have to be employed. The adherent will have to employ the use of reason in order to establish the truth of what he or she has believed in for a long time. This is where the intelligence factor comes in. Dr. Jason Long observes that for a person to abandon their religious beliefs, it most often takes a combination of low exposure (to the religious teachings) and any level of intelligence, or high exposure and a high level of intelligence. A combination of high exposure and low intelligence will unfortunately very often yield a very strong adherent who can never abandon their beliefs. All Message Believers share a similar environment of high exposure. Message Believers encourage isolation from other religious groups and saturate their members minds with high doses of doctrine regularly. The average Branhamite may be said to be under a high level of exposure to Branhamic doctrines. With that established, its easy to see why only the individuals with high intelligence will possess the ability to figure out the lies and abandon the beliefs: its because it will take a little reasoning to discover that Mr. Branham was lying in several vital instances. If it was obviously clear that many of Mr. Branhams allegations were open lies, then we wouldnt have millions of people as adherents of the Message. We will need to get a bit technical to disprove these widely held beliefs and this is the point where I am concerned many readers might opt out. However, I would like to believe that you possess what it takes to find out the truth. Through the use of reason, we are able to come to a conclusion on whether something presented to us is true or false. You will realize that by using your reasoning ability, youll end up realizing the truth. Even Mr. Branham knew it; despite the numerous times he said we shouldnt reason out things to do with Gods word, he clearly advocates the use of reason in order to debunk the absurdity behind the doctrine of the Trinity:
How can three persons be in one God? Not only is there no Bible for it, but it shows even a lack of intelligent reasoning. (An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages)

14

Notice: the truth always endures the test of reason. So you shouldnt be scared to dive into the practice of reasoning, since: if its the truth, itll come out standing. If its false, itll tumble down like a house of cards. This should afford you some peace of mind, knowing that at the other side of reason, the truth abides. If Branhams Message is true, itll happily be waiting for you on the other side of reason, with open arms. Cognitive Dissonance This is a feeling you will soon begin to experience as you start discovering the truth about Mr. Branham, therefore its important that we address it beforehand to ensure that it does not become a hindrance to further discovery once it sets in. Dr. Jason Long demonstrates this phenomenon impressively, so I will employ the use of an illustration to introduce you to his explanation of cognitive dissonance. Suppose someone named John was raised by parents who are strong Christians and have tutored him in biblical teachings faithfully since his childhood. He has a loving mother and a loving father he has accompanied to church as long as he can remember. Daddy was always there for the family, faithfully serving, protecting, guiding and leading. He never in a single instance saw Daddy raise a hand or throw harsh words towards his mother theirs was always a peaceful and loving family. The devil however decides to pay a visit to their home. One day, John decides to pay his parents a visit. Once he gets home, he rings the door bell but no one answers the door. He does this several times but still no one responds. He then rushes back to his vehicle and obtains a copy of the house keys, opens up the door and find his way in. The house is dead silent; it seems that no one is present. As he slowly makes his way towards the living room, he notices a trail of blood drops. He immediately panics but keeps on following the blood trail nevertheless. Once he gets to the living room, he finds his mother lying on a big pool of blood it looks like she was a victim of a very brutal murder. John tries to contact the father but the call does not go through. He calls the police. Once they arrive, they cordon off the area and begin their investigation. Shocked and grief stricken, John goes back to the city to inform his friends and family about this incident as he awaits results of the police investigation. But the investigation is carried out more swiftly than John expected and after two days, he gets a call from the police station and he is requested to come in. Once he gets there, he is informed that the police have apprehended the person who killed his mom and that the man is now in custody. The police then inform John that the man has since requested to speak to him. This outrageous request from the man who killed his mother infuriates him but the police convince him to go see the murderer. John is slowly led towards the heavily guarded cells and they finally get to the cell where they are holding his mothers murderer. Its his father behind the bars. The man who has been arrested for his mothers murder is none other than Johns father. He murdered his wife. John now turns his anger towards the police. He refuses to accept that his father is capable of murder. He goes into an enraged outburst. Carefully put yourself in Johns shoes and notice that youd have the exact same initial reaction since he has always known his father to be a kind and loving person. He has never exhibited violent behavior, and for this reason, he refuses to accept the allegations. The police

15

then guide John to a holding room, at least to calm him down. After ten minutes the police show up with a bunch of clear bags labeled evidence. They then begin presenting it to John. To begin with, they show him the murder weapon a large, blood-stained kitchen knife. John recognizes the knife from their home cutlery collection. The police then inform him that his fathers fingerprints were all over the murder weapon. Next, they inform him that they caught Johns father in a lie since his alibi claim was disproved. They then bring in a young man, who apparently was supposed to be collecting garbage from their home at around the time the murder took place. It turns out that the young man saw Johns father hurriedly washing his hands and quickly taking off in his car. And to cap it all up, DNA examination on the blood stains found on his fathers sweater that he dumped along the way as he ran off found that the blood was his mothers. John now breaks into a heavy sob. He begins wailing loudly wondering how this could have happened. He appears to have calmed down but then all over sudden gets into another outburst. Despite the overwhelming evidence presented before him, John refuses again to accept that his father committed the murder. He accuses the police of fabricating evidence and planting a false witness alleging that the police are known to be corrupt and undependable. As a final blow that is supposed to kill all doubt, they escort John back to his fathers cell. His father looks him straight in the eyes and confesses to the murder and informs his son that he would be pleading guilty for murder when he is charged before a court of law. John resumes his wailing and still refuses to accept, accusing the police of coercing his father for a confession. Notice the psychological forces that are playing out in Johns mind during this incident. Since john was a child, he has known his father to be loving and kind. This he has learnt to believe with his heart and soul as he grew up. This became entrenched within himself and convincing him otherwise would prove an arduous task. Therefore, when he hears that his father committed murder, despite the fact that it is true, the entrenched belief (that his father is kind and loving) will hurl him into a denial and provide possible explanations for the news he is receiving. This is known as cognitive dissonance. The first time, it threw him into a denial and provided an explanation that the police fabricated the evidence. This happens again when he hears a confession from the father, when the same entrenched belief throws him into a denial and provides the possible explanation that his father was coerced for a confession. Even if the father is convicted for the crime, John might go to the grave still claiming his fathers innocence. Cognitive dissonance is a powerful psychological occurrence; neutralizing it may be impossible. If you have been a believer of Branhams message for a long time, or if you were born and raised in the Message, these beliefs are entrenched within you. If youre told that William Branhams Message is not true, you will not believe it. Cognitive dissonance will offer an explanation that whoever says so bears no proof and that the prophet said that you should not subject Gods matters to human reasoning. If the proof is presented before you, for example if the Mt. Sunset cloud is proven to be a hoax and outright lie, cognitive dissonance will still be there to hurl you back to what youve been believing in since time immemorial, however clear it might be that Mr. Branham was a dishonest man. But that will not change

16

the fact that what you believe in is not true, just like Johns refusal doesnt change the fact that his father killed his mother. Suppose the prophet sprang back to life again, literally lets say his grave bursts wide open and out strides the prophet himself. Everyone agrees that it is the real William Branham, including his children. He even performs great miracles like he used to, to prove that hes the real guy. No one is left with a doubt that the prophet of the age has risen from the dead. He then proclaims that he has come to rectify the mistake he made during his lifetime. With that being said, he begins by saying that his Message was an outright lie. He then goes round the world telling people to abandon his message since it is not the truth from God. Interestingly, I am persuaded to think that Message Believers all over the world will dismiss this William Branham as an imposter. You see, cognitive dissonance is a powerful psychological force that does not easily relent. Due to their entrenched beliefs, Believers will offer possible explanations and even offer quotes that say that something like this could happen near the end. The William Branham raised from the dead would ironically be banned from all Branham Tabernacles all over the world. Please note how powerful this psychological force is: nothing can convince Message Believers that the message is not true. Not even William Branham himself. My favorite saying - that demonstrates this - comes from a preacher who used to frequent our church when I was little. He said: If I live according to the message and yet find myself in hell, I still will not dismiss the Message as not true. I will say to the people I find there: I dont know why I am here. Looks like cognitive dissonance would still affect him in the other world. In order to face the truth, friends, this is a battle we will have to fight. We will have to fight the force that throws us into denial when were faced with the truth that sharply contrasts what we have believed in for so many years. The voice that persuades us to cling to our previously held beliefs is your biggest enemy when it comes to unraveling the truth about many religions.

17

Chapter 3: A Cloudy Deception

Arizona The Grand Canyon State Welcomes You Arizona welcome sign located 360'52"N 11444'0"W

18

The supernatural cloud that appeared on Mt. Sunset

There are photographs you will find in Message Believers churches, homes and offices and among them is the photograph of the stratospheric cloud that appeared over northern Arizona in 1963. A lot of information has been put forward by Message Believers concerning this cloud. Mr. Branham claims that this extra ordinary cloud was formed by angels who commissioned him to head back east and reveal the seven seals. He further claims the cloud formed the face of Jesus. Mr. Branham calls this place Sunset Mountain hence many believers refer to this cloud as the Mt. Sunset cloud. The name of the peak Mr. Branham was referring to is actually known as Sunset Peak. We have in our possession as a body of believers and former believers verbatim utterances by Mr. Branham concerning this cloud that will be presented here in order to compare his account with scientific reports of what actually happened that day. I would like to point out that a lot of information was gathered by many individuals about that particular cloud. As a matter of fact, coincidentally, the cloud appeared within a few tens of miles of the U.S. Weather Bureau radiosonde station at Winslow, Arizona, and a high-altitude sounding had been completed there only an hour before the appearance of the cloud. This is according to Dr. James McDonald in an article we will introduce to you shortly. Over 150 reports and 80 photographs of the cloud were submitted at the request of Dr. McDonald of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics at the University of Arizona in Tucson. We therefore have extensive reports about the cloud from spectators, photographers, journalists and scientists. Here we henceforth will present two accounts: one from Mr. Branham and one from people who actually saw the cloud accompanied by reports from scientists who carried out studies about the cloud. Since Mr. Branham says that he saw the cloud, then his account should be congruent to all other numerous eye witness accounts and photographs that were submitted concerning the cloud. Therefore to establish the truth about this cloud, we will begin by establishing what Mr. Branham told us about the cloud, after which we will compare it with what actually happened that day. Then we will leave the judgment to you, hoping that to thine own self, at least, youll be true.

19

Whats the big deal with the cloud anyway? Message defenders often criticize Branham refuters for spending a lot of time and energy disputing the cloud occurrence. Brian Gan Arts ask, And why are the anti-Branham people so taken up with this CLOUD or even the Supernatural Light (halo above Branham's head) more than the Word of God? Why are there all the questions and arguments about the CLOUD? Such things are unprofitable and useless. Just get into THE WORD! Such a position tends to break my heart. Are they trying to ask Christians why theyre so taken up with the appearance of Jesus in a cloud while its the very same thing theyve been waiting for since 2,000 years ago? In fact, the very basic tenet of Christianity is that Jesus Christ will return in the skies and therefore Christians should prepare for this day by living a righteous life. Asking why Christians are so taken up with the cloud is like asking why an army is so taken up with a declaration of war. Secondly, when incidents such as the cloud and the halo of light are used as proof of The Word you want us to get into, it only follows that we should first and foremost be sure that the said proof is watertight! William Branhams Story The prophet claims that the cloud appeared when they were out on a trip to hunt javelina with two of his friends, Gene Norman and Fred Sothmann, on a place known as Sunset Mountain which is located north east of Tucson. This trip happened between March 6 through 9 (see the magazine Only Believe "On the Road to Sunset", June 1992, a magazine written by Rebekah Branham Smith, Mr. Branhams eldest daughter.) What follows is one among many of Mr. Branhams accounts of the occurrence. Many of his accounts are not entirely similar but we need to hear him out directly as he tells us the story: TRYING.TO.DO.GOD.A.SERVICE_ SHP.LA V-7 N-2 SATURDAY_ 65-1127B
So then, and going back, I went up in the mountain and I went with Brother Fred Sothmann. He's here somewhere. Brother Fred, where are you at? Right here. Brother Fred Sothmann, Brother Gene Norman; one day, the second day setting there, the Angel of the Lord came right down into the camp where we was at and begin to tell about their children and things they were doing. I left and went back on the hill. And I'd already got my javelina; I was trying to chase one around to Brother Fred. So I found where they'd been eating on the side of a hill, and I said, "Well, now, I'll tell you what I'll do, Brother Fred." I said, "Now, you go over on that point in the morning." We go up there at daylight, climb up over the mountain. "And go there at daylight, I'll get over on the other side. Now, I won't shoot one, but if they run this way, I'll shoot in front of them and turn them back. You pick out a big one." "All right," he said. So Brother Fred went over there. And Brother Gene Norman (I don't think Brother Gene come, did he?), he was--he was on the other side. Many of you know Gene Norman, a bosom friend of many, fine brother. And he went down a little below where the--them pigs, they just wasn't there that morning. I could see Brother Fred, wave at him, he was about a mile away from me. Well, I thought, "Where could they have went?" I went down into a great ravine, and come

20

down; I thought, "I'll see if I can find where they're at." Started back up. It was just a little after daylight; the sun was just begin coming up. And I went around a great big chasm, oh, my, hundreds and hundreds of feet, just great rocks in the great canyon there, them big walls. And it was kindly getting... The sun was raising up, about seven o'clock, I guess, or something like that. And I set down and I was looking around; I happened to look down on my trouser leg and there was that bull-header, burr. And I said, "You know, that seems strange. You know, the Angel of the Lord told me I'd be about forty miles northeast of Tucson; I'd be picking a bull-header off of my leg." You remember I seen it? Uh-huh. See? And I said, "That's strange." I was holding it. And just as I looked up, I seen about twenty hogs about five hundred yards from me, come out eating this little phyllary and laid down. I said, "Now, if I can just get Brother Fred and get him around to that point there, he'll get his hog right there. But I know he's about a mile or two from me now." So I said, "if I could cross over this little ridge without them seeing me, up by this little juniper tree there," I said, "if I get around this side, there's a deer trail comes down this side; I can run up there and get out of the way. And hang a little piece of paper here where I know which one of the fingers to go out on, on the canyon, and get Brother Fred there just in time." I throwed this little bull-header down, forgetting about that, and started across the hill real easy and looked back, they didn't see me, and run down and hit this deer trail. I had a great big black hat on. I started running up through this canyon real fast, and it happened. The whole earth shook, everywhere. Rocks that size rolled down, dust flying like that. And I looked, and standing before me stood seven Angels, just exactly the way it was. I felt like I was standing way up off the ground. First, I thought somebody'd shot me, you know, with that black hat on; looked like a javelina hog, anyhow, you know, they're dark. I thought somebody'd shot me, such a... right close. And I--I seen then what it was. Well, as soon as... I got my commission, and the Scripture, "The Seven Seals which is the seven mysteries..." See? Someone said to me, said, "Now..." Oh, he said, "Well, now, someday the Lord, probably you seeing visions, Brother Branham, will reveal to you what these things are; we can all get closer to God and have more power than we get in speaking in tongues and things." I said, "It can't be that way." 'Cause, see, I believe the Word to be the Truth. And the Bible said, "Whosoever shall add one word or take one Word from It." It has to be in this Word. See? It's the mysteries that the people's overlooked. Well, right there is where come my Message of serpent seed and the true belief of the security of the believer. I'm not disgrading my Presbyterian brethren there, and some of you Baptist brethren on the way you have security. I'm not saying this to be different, but you didn't have it just right. See? That's right. See? But I had it wrong too. But when an Angel stands from heaven and tells you, and here it is right in the Scripture, that--that's true. See? That's right. See, He always speaks exact with the Scripture.

21

In there I watched it until that circle went up, started sweeping up, and they turned into like a mystic light, like a fog. Just exactly the way... How many seen the picture of It that was taken in Houston? Nearly all. See? Well, that's just the way this was. It turned into the same thing, It kept going higher and higher. I was running and running, trying to find Brother Fred and them. After while, about a half hour later, I could see him way down, waving his hands; and Brother Gene coming, waving. They knowed something had happened. And so then I got with them. That's Brother Fred setting right there. As it went up, I didn't know that the observatories and things, plumb into Mexico, was taking that picture. "Life" magazine packed it as It went up. And many of you... Here's "Life" magazine packing the picture of It. A mysterious thing here, they said they don't know where it come from; it's too high. It's above all the spheres and everything else to be... It's too high for fog, because it's thirty miles high and twenty-seven miles across after it got up that high. There's not even humidity nor nothing up there. You see? And they thought of a plane; so they checked all the places, no planes up that day. See, they have to, on account of shaking windows and things. "There's no planes up." Here it is right here in the magazine, will tell you the same thing. And--and it went on and on. And today right in the... Here it is in "Science" magazine, where they can't understand; they don't know what It is. Tucson, at the university, a friend of mine went over the other day and was talking to them about it. Said, "We can't understand what..." I said, "Don't say nothing, don't do no good. 'Cast not your pearls before swine.'" See? It's to the church, to the elected, the called-out. See? And then each one was coming, saying, "Brother Branham, I see your picture here. I see this. I..." You know how it is. But that--that long sweep as this brother has on here where its... Excuse me [Brother Branham gets the photograph--Ed.]. Here's the way It started up, sweeping up. Actually this was on the right hand side. And you all remember I said, "The noted Angel was the one that talked to me, was on the right hand side," even before it happened. You remember? His wings pointed back like that, that's exactly the wings of that Angel as it went up. See, as it... So they started taking the pictures because it was so mysterious. But when the last picture, when It formed Itself into the skies and so forth, this is it as "Look" here packed it. You see how it rose up just as they begin to see it. You see? And there comes the--the real main and last picture, when it formed. They don't know where it come from or where it went; they don't know yet. Science is completely stumped about it, don't know what happened. But we know; "there shall be signs in the heaven above." We know it. See? And He promised these things. See? And the only thing that this was permitted to be taken... I know we're just home folks here this morning. If I ever impress you brethren or sisters as a know-it-all, please forgive me. I don't mean to be that. I'm stand--setting here this morning

22

talking before men who are scholars, men who are smart; now, I--I'm a illiterate; I can't even pronounce my Scriptures right. I got a chapter to read this morning, I'm... was going to ask one of the brothers here to read it for me, 'cause I can't even pronounce the names in it, I Chronicles 13 (if you will, Brother Jack, you be hunting it up), for my subject. I--I can't even pronounce those names; I'm letting him do it, 'cause he can pronounce them. And I know I'm talking to smart men. But, brethren, these things are done that you might not look at my illiteracy, but believe that I'm telling you the Truth. It's God telling you the Truth. That's the Truth. See? Now, and when I speak of denominations, I'm not meaning for you to be so cruel and... No, I don't mean for you not to go to your church. Go to your church, what you're supposed to do. But just don't join up with them organizations, because one day I'll be telling you and prove it by the Scripture; it is the mark of the beast. And you just remember, it's the mark. I'm preaching... I wouldn't preach it in Brother Jack's church, he'd tell me, "Go ahead and do it"; but I'm going to the Tabernacle, it'll be about four hours long. And my subject is: The Beast at the Beginning and the Beast at the End, Through the Trail of a Serpent. See? Takes about four hours. I got my Scriptures all laying out. The beast from the beginning, he was the beast at the garden of Eden; he's the beast at the end, and show that he's a religious person and a denomination (that made the denomination); and come right through the trail of it, and prove it to you by the Scriptures that it is. I didn't know that till the Holy Spirit give it to me the other day up there. Now, in this, I was watching this one day, standing, and something said to me... looking at it, and I thought... Brother Hickerson, one of my trustees--or deacons at the church at Jeffersonville... If I don't believe in going to church, why do I have churches? We had them all across the country, hooked up the other night, every two hundred square miles had one of my churches. Now, this--this picture, I was standing, looking at it, and something... I was standing in my room. Something said, "Turn it to the right." Now, listen. I know that sounds like somebody's a little mentally upset, but (You see?), as I said the other night, all these great things are so scholarly... Now, I'm not against that. Remember, we have to have... Now, send your children to school and get education and so forth; but I'll tell you right now, it won't do them no good in the world that is to come, 'cause there'll be another civilization, only so far above this. That civilization won't even have any... It won't have any schools in it; it won't have any death in it, won't be any sin in it. This has all that; no matter how much civilized we get, more and more death is added all the time. See? That one will be without death. But now we have to have school; we have to wear clothes, we... I was going to speak this morning on Satan's Eden (many of you's got the tape of it), Satan's Eden. He has made another garden of Eden, and six thousand years it's taken him to make it, just like God did His at the beginning. God made His Eden, and Satan corrupted it. Now, Satan's made his own Eden, and God's going to destroy it (That's right.) and put His own. Something said to me, "Turn it right."

23

I thought, "I think I'm looking at it right." Said, "Turn it right." See? I thought, "Maybe that Voice means turn it to the right." And when I did, you see what it is: Hofmann's Head of Christ, at thirty-three. Here, looky here, see His dark beard, His face, His eyes, His nose, and everything else. See the part in His hair here coming up. And He's wigged with that white Angel wig to show that the Message of Him being God is the Truth. He is the supreme Judge of the universe, supreme Judge of heaven and earth. He is God, and nothing else but God. He is God expressed in human form called the Son of God, which the Son was the mask. And if that don't make our Message exactly right: identified by the Scripture, identified in service, identified by His Presence, the same yesterday, today, and forever... Therefore those Seven Seals are the Truth, brethren. Might disagree with them, but just set down and study with a open heart one time, just let the Holy Spirit lead you from... Here, when Brother Jack... I called him before preaching this and talked to him one time about "What was this white wig?" He said, "Well, Brother Branham, I declare it to be that it was in His--after His resurrection in His glorified body." I was talking to Brother Jack. And there's... I don't know of anybody in the world that I'd rely on anymore of their teachings on theology and things as I would like Brother Jack Moore and Brother Vayle, and such men as--as that, real theologians, that's read all kinds of books and different angles from everything. Well, but (You see?), even with that, and my bosom friend, I--I--I just couldn't receive it; there was something there just wouldn't take it. And then when it come, this, then I see what it is. Here's His dark beard. You seen It, I guess. See? His dark beard and dark hair, His eyes, nose, everything, just perfectly, and even the part in His hair coming over on this side. He is God. See? And He's the same yesterday, today, and forever. And this is "Look" magazine--or "Life" magazine. I think this is the... I forget what issue it is now; oh, May the seventeenth, 1963. That's when it come out, if anybody wants the magazine. It's the same picture that's got Rockefeller and his--his wife on the back of it. And this is the new "Science" magazine that "it's still a mystery."

The above account provides several details about this trip. From this story we see that Mr. Branham says that the cloud formed or appeared at sunrise; secondly he indicates the location of this occurrence in many other quotes as Sunset peak, which is part of the Galiuro Mountains within Coronado Forest 40 miles north east of Tucson, Arizona. Seven angels appeared to him after the blast; they then turned into fog and began ascending and kept going higher. When the angels were high up in the stratosphere, they formed the face of Jesus. As bizarre as this account may already seem to a non Branhamite, at this juncture it makes perfect sense to a Believer. Further Mr. Branham emphasizes that he was standing right under the cloud when he was at sunset:
Now, science took the picture of It, you seen It, went on Associated Press. They didn't know what It was. There's a Cloud hanging, twenty-six miles high. That's fifteen miles, or twenty, above even where vapor's at. They don't know what it's all going about, and they're trying to investigate It. And there, right under It, I was standing. And those seven Angels roaring out

24

their voices, of those Seven Seals, standing there. And the witness, three of us, as a witness of the things that was prophesied on the tape, "Sirs, What Time Is It?" And there now they're trying to find out. It's a mystery to them .(LORD.JUST.ONCE.MORE_ HOT.SPRINGS.AR V-20 N-10 FRIDAY_ 63-0628A)

The quote above places the stratospheric cloud at Sunset peak sometime during the day they were on the hunting trip. Additionally, he claims that the famous cloud photograph (that allegedly forms an outline of Jesus face) was a picture of the cloud that stood directly above him at Sunset peak. And even further the photograph was taken the same time he was there.
And He said, "He is wigged." Watch in the book, before it ever happened, I said that. And that day when that happened, it went up. And then you turn that picture sideways, if you've got "Look" magazine or "Life" magazine. Turn it sideways. There He is, just perfectly Hofmann's Head of Christ, looking right down where I was standing; there It is in the magazine. How many's ever seen It? 'Course, you've all seen. There, looking right back, proved exactly the revelation was correct. [WORKS.IS.FAITH.EXPRESSED_ SHREVEPORT.LA V-7 N-1 FRIDAY_ 651126] Lets see the hands. And now, the "Life" Magazine picked it up. And I have the--the article here this morning in the "Life" Magazine there, of the show... Now, here it is, the same time I was there. See the pyramid or the Cloud? (STANDING.IN.THE.GAP_ JEFF.IN V-6 N-7 SUNDAY_ 630623M)

Serious Problems Now that we have a fairly clear understanding of what Mr. Branham says about the cloud, the reader is ripe to be introduced to the painful pile of problems created by his narrations of this incident. First and foremost, the stratospheric cloud over northern Arizona appeared in the evening of February 28 1963 (See May 17, 1963 issue of LIFE magazine). Mr. Branham, Gene Norman and Fred Sothmann went hunting javelina on March 6 through 9. (Only Believe "On the Road to Sunset", June 1992) Indeed, javelina hunting season that year ran from March 1 through 10. This clearly indicates that the occurrence of the cloud happened first, then about a week later, Mr. Branham and his friends went on the hunting trip. Therefore, there exists no connection whatsoever between the hunting trip at Sunset Peak and the occurrence of the cloud. By giving this cloud story, Mr. Branham is attempting to set us off into some kind of weird time travel to connect two entirely different occurrences. It is clear that Mr. Branham went on the hunting trip several days after the cloud occurrence. Yet he held up a picture of the February 28 cloud over Flagstaff and explicitly stated that he was standing right below it the day the picture was taken, while in real fact, the trip took place several days later. As the objective reader can already see, there is no connection whatsoever between Mr. Branhams hunting trip and the stratospheric cloud. This conclusion by itself is enough to show that Mr. Branham lied about the cloud, but as expected, some cognitive dissonance may be kicking in so I guess we will have to table further proof that the cloud story was a complete and blatant lie. The second equally painful problem with the cloud story is the discrepancy between the location of Sunset peak and the actual location of the cloud. Reproduced below is Dr. James McDonalds write up in 25

March 1963 regarding the cloud. The prophet likes referring to McDonalds work and in particular, the following article that appeared on Science magazine in April 1963, hence the reader is encouraged to examine the article carefully:

Science Magazine 19 April 1963 Vol. 140 No. 3564 Cover: Ring-shaped cloud seen at sunset on 28 February 1963 in northern Arizona and areas of nearby states. The height, as estimated from four photographs made in Tucson, Arizona, about 190 miles to the south of the cloud (which appeared overhead near Flagstaff), is about 35 kilometers. This photo was taken by Clarence E. Peterson of Bremerton, Washington, while he was looking almost due north from near Camp Verde, Arizona. The unusual nature of the cloud was evident to observers who noted its striking luminosity long after the sun had set at ground level. It was at least 11 kilometers higher than the upper limit of possible jet contrail formation, and was at least 5 kilometers higher than previously

26

reported nacreous clouds of the arctic type. Its true nature is still unknown; more photos are being sought for triangulation purposes. See page 292.

Stratospheric Cloud over Northern Arizona Abstract. An unusual ring-shaped cloud was widely observed over northern Arizona near sunset on 28 February 1963. From a large number of observers reports it is known to have appeared overhead near Flagstaff, Arizona. From initial computations based on four photos taken in Tucson, 190 miles south of the cloud, its altitude was approximately 35 kilometers. The most distant observation reported was made 280 miles from the cloud. The cloud remained sunlit for 28 minutes after local sunset. Iridescence was noted by many observers. Tentatively, the cloud may be regarded as similar to a nacreous cloud; but its unusually great height and unusually low altitude, plus its remarkable shape, suggest that it was a cloud of previously unrecorded type. Near sunset, on 28 February 1963, a cloud of unusual configuration and coloration was observed in widely scattered localities in Arizona and some surrounding states. The cloud took the form of a large oval ring (clear in the middle) with the long axis running north and south (Fig. 1 and cover photograph, this issue). It remained brightly illuminated well after the sun had set on high cirrus clouds to the west. From Tucson, 190 miles to the south, its angular elevation appeared to be about 6 degrees. A rough computation of its height, based on sunset geometry, (1) made immediately after the cloud entered the earths shadow, led me to appeal by press and radio for confirmatory reports in order to establish the approximate location and to secure descriptions from the largest possible number of other observers. From approximately 150 reports, many communicated by persons well aware that they had seen a type of cloud unprecedented in years of sky watching, it was quickly established that the cloud lay overhead in the vicinity of Flagstaff, Arizona, that it exhibited iridescence of the sort associated with stratospheric nacreous clouds in the arctic (2,3), and that its internal structure was very peculiar. To observers nearly underneath, the colors green and blue were visible, and a pinkish cast was noted at times. A fibrous texture, described by several independent observers as resembling a wood grain appearance, was present over much of its northern extent, but its southern end was denser and more cumuliform. Its overall shape was compared by some (ranchers) to a horseshoe or a horse collar if it was viewed from south; from the north it appeared as a closed loop with a long thin trail that could be seen extending northward, from the oval, and several observers in that sector compared its shape with that of a hangmans noose. The cloud was seen from distances as great as 280 miles (near Douglas, Arizona and Albuquerque, New Mexico, respectively).

27

Many observers reported a second cloud off to the northwest of the main cloud, with shape very much like that of the main cloud, but only about a quarter as large. Correctness of these reports has been established from some of the first photographs that have come in from northern Arizona. The cloud was evidently moving generally south-eastward, though visual reports are in some conflict on this point; this point can only be resolved from further studies by triangulation. By fortunate coincidence, the cloud appeared within a few tens of miles of the U.S. Weather Bureau radiosonde station at Winslow, Arizona, and a high-altitude sounding had been completed there only an hour before the appearance of the cloud. A jet stream lay almost directly under the cloud and over Flagstaff, and there were peak winds of 98 knots from the northwest occurring over Winslow at an altitude of about 11 kilometers. The radiosonde run terminated at the 13-millibar level of atmospheric pressure (about 29 km), where the temperature was -46 degrees C. There was very little direction shear in the Winslow wind sounding, a condition known to favor formation of mountain waves and believed to be conducive to nacreous clouds, at least in Scandinavia (2). It is possible, therefore, that the San Francisco Peaks just north of Flagstaff disturbed the flow so that wave motion was set up in the stratosphere, but this remains a conjecture, pending further study of reports of first appearance. Whereas some recent studies (4) suggest strong local stratospheric cooling as a prerequisite for the formation of nacreous clouds, the sounding at Winslow showed little departure from average temperature conditions in the lower and middle stratosphere. Photogrammetric analysis of the four photographs known to have been taken in the Tucson area have yielded elevation angles of the near point ranging from 5.9 to 6.2 degrees. Because the exact range to 28

the nearest point of the cloud is not yet known to better than 10 or 15 miles in 190 miles, the exact height cannot yet be determined. However, the cited elevation angles plus allowance for earth curvature give a cloud height of 35 kilometers, possibly a bit higher if the range to the near point proves to be greater than 190 miles. This height is distinctly greater than that of reported Scandinavian nacreous clouds. Photogrammetric heights obtained over many years by Stormer and others (2,3) are no higher than 30 kilometers, and the majority lie between 22 and 28 kilometers. The estimated height of 35 kilometers rules out the possibility that the Flagstaff cloud could have been the condensation trail from a jet plane. The present American altitude record, made under the most favorable conditions directly above the home field by a Lockheed F-104 in 1959, is 103,395 feet (31.6 kilometers). Perhaps more conclusive is the fact that the upper limit of height for possible contrail formation (5) as indicated by the sounding from Winslow was just under 24 kilometers at the time of the clouds appearance. These preliminary indications mark the Flagstaff cloud of 28 February as a most unusual phenomenon of considerable meteorological interest. Requests for photographs, still being made at time of this writing, have already brought promises of photographs from a total of 16 sites reasonably well dispersed around Arizona, so fairly precise data on the clouds height, shape, and dimensions should be obtainable by triangulation. A conflict between heights estimated from the Tucson photos and from sunset geometry is under study (the indicated height based on available reports of fadeout time is about 25 kilometers). Premature fadeout may have been due to cirrus clouds between the cloud and the ray tangency point, computed to lie at or very near Los Angeles. The hydrodynamics of the field of vertical motion that produced such a toroidal cloud form are very puzzling. Present estimates give the closed oval a length of about 60 kilometers and a width of about 30 kilometers, with a ring cross section of perhaps 3 to 4 kilometers in the horizontal. I am not aware that a cloud of such form and size has been observed at any level within the atmosphere before. Interesting questions about the source of the requisite water vapor are posed by its unprecedented altitude. (6) James E. McDonald Institute of Atmospheric Physics, University of Arizona, Tucson References and Notes 1. S.K. Mitra, The Upper Atmosphere (Asiatic Society, Calcutta, ed.2, 1952). 2. E. Hesstvedt, Geofys. Publikasjoner Norske Videnskaps. Akad. Oslo 20, No. 10 (1959). 3. A. Y. Driving, Bull. Acad. Sci. U.S.S.R. Geophys. Ser. 3, English Transl. (1959), pp. 279-286. 4. Y. Gotaas, Geofys. Publikasjoner Norske Videnskaps Akas. Oslo 22, No. 4 (1961); A. Y.Driving and A. I. Smirnova, Bull. Acad. Sci. U.S.S.R. 5. H. Appleman, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 34, 14 (1953). 6. I thank Leon Salanave for alerting me to the cloud when it became visible in the Tucson sky and for further technical assistance, and I. E. Daniels and C. E. Peterson for permission to reproduce their photographs. The cooperation of the numerous Arizonians submitting reports is gratefully 29

acknowledged. Supported by the Office of Naval Research under contract NR 082-164. 20 March 1963

At this point its important to indicate that this was just one among several reports that Dr. McDonald subsequently published. Therefore the questions left unanswered in the above article were the subjects of further investigation and as further reports will show, a lot more was discovered about the cloud that was not known at the time the above article was written and hence the interesting questions left unanswered by Dr. McDonald should not be used to support the idea that the stratospheric cloud was a miracle cloud. Further reports by the same scholar will be introduced shortly that will shed light on what happened that day. At this juncture I would like to address the impossibility of Mr. Branham being anywhere near the location of the cloud. The prophet claims that he was hunting at Sunset Peak and that he was standing right below the cloud, as shown previously in provided quotes, when the famous cloud photograph was taken. Let the author point the reader to the above article on Science magazine by Dr. McDonald that clearly states that the cloud appeared overhead at Flagstaff, Arizona which is over 320 kilometers northwest of sunset peak, where Mr. Branham was allegedly on a hunting trip!
From approximately 150 reports, many communicated by persons well aware that they had seen a type of cloud unprecedented in years of sky watching, it was quickly established that the cloud lay overhead in the vicinity of Flagstaff, Arizona, that it exhibited iridescence of the sort associated with stratospheric nacreous clouds in the arctic (2,3), and that its internal structure was very peculiar. (Dr. James McDonald)

Therefore if you have always thought that the cloud ascended from where Branham was at Sunset peak until it attained the previously unrecorded elevation high up where it formed the face of Jesus, no one would blame you since this is what Mr. Branham indicates in his sermons. But its high time you now acquaint yourself with the truth, now that it has been laid bare. Displayed below is the map of the state of Arizona. It shows the enormous distance between where Mr. Branham was allegedly hunting (Sunset Peak) and the location over which the cloud appeared overhead (Flagstaff.)

30

Further, examine the following quote:

And now, the Life Magazine picked it up. And I have thethe article here this morning in the Life Magazine there, of the show Now, here it is, the same time I was there. See the pyramid or the Cloud? I was standing just below this. (STANDING.IN.THE.GAP_ JEFF.IN V-6 N7 SUNDAY_ 63-0623M)

31

The photographs that Life magazine furnished us with, referred to above by Mr. Branham and displayed below, were pictures of the stratospheric cloud that appeared over Flagstaff. Mr. Branham in the above quote says he was standing right below that cloud. Mr. Branham on the other hand has explicitly told us that he was at Sunset Peak far to the south this day. So this begs the obvious question, how could he be over 320 kilometers from the cloud yet still be standing below it? Mr. Branham is now insulting the intelligence of his audience. In order to leave no doubt whatsoever in the readers mind that the cloud was not at Sunset Peak where Branham was, but at Flagstaff, over 320 km to the north, we will visit the photographs that appeared on the May 17 issue of Life magazine and examine what was recorded beneath the photographs:

By furnishing its audience with the above photographs, Life magazine equipped us with important information that we may use to determine the location of the cloud that evening. At 6.10 pm it was photographed north east of Prescott, at 6.15 pm it was photographed north of Phoenix and at 6.30 pm it was photographed west north West of Winslow. Flagstaff indeed is located north east of Prescott, north of Phoenix and North West of Winslow. No photographs, eye witness accounts, or calculations of the clouds movement places it at Mr. Branhams hunting location where he says the cloud was. Once more we have overwhelming proof that debunks Mr. Branhams claim that the cloud was with him at Sunset Peak, over 320 kilometers to the South. 32

Theres a question that might pop up in your mind soon if it hasnt already: what if the cloud did indeed originate from Sunset Peak at sunrise as Mr. Branham claims, then it travelled northwards and appeared over Flagstaff near and after the time of the setting of the sun? The hypothesis of the Sunset Peak to Flagstaff cloud movement has to be excluded immediately, since the same way hundreds of photographs of the cloud were taken and used to establish that the cloud was overhead at Flagstaff, the cloud would have been spotted and even probably photographed while it hovered low and ascended over Sunset Peak (as Branham claims) and it quickly wouldve been determined that it had been overhead over Sunset Peak some time during the day. But there were no sightings overhead at southern Arizona at any time of the day. All sightings of the cloud placed it to the north, at Flagstaff. Mr. Branham, it seems, did not carry out enough research about the cloud before he decided to use it. Mr. Branham would have you think that the cloud indeed was at Sunset Peak but him only and his friends Gene and Fred saw the cloud while it was low near the ground and as it gradually ascended, yet this was a huge cloud (30 miles wide!) that was visible from hundreds of miles away while it hovered above the skies over Flagstaff. Had the cloud been overhead at Sunset Peak at any time, especially at the low elevation Mr. Branham claims the cloud originated, numerous eye witnesses, photographs and scientific reports would have led investigators to conclude that the cloud appeared over the Sunset Peak area at some time of the day, but this did not happen. All reports indicate that the cloud hovered above the stratosphere over 320 kilometers to the north. Absence of sightings at the Mt. Sunset area only casts doubt, but does not prove that the cloud wasnt there one might argue. Thats right but theres scientific data that goes beyond casting doubt. Whats more, and even more critical, is that the clouds path of movement was recorded. In Dr. McDonalds report entitled Status of the Investigation of the Northern Arizona Stratospheric Cloud of February 28 1963, which will be introduced to the reader shortly, the scholar indicates preliminary reports about the clouds motion:
Preliminary analysis of the McSpadden photos from Lordsburg indicate an eastward cloud drift speed of 95 mph for the upper limit, and 77 mph for the lower limit (Dr. McDonald)

From Dr. McDonalds report, we may demonstrate this eastward motion on the map of Arizona so that we may realize that there is no way the cloud could have originated from Sunset Peak. Examine the following map. The brown lines indicate the general direction of the wind and of the cloud that evening. Its also important to note that the mystery cloud was moving eastward because it was obeying the wind direction that was carrying it towards that direction, hence the idea that God was miraculously taking the cloud on a tour of Arizona to his desired positions at different times of the day is infeasible. The cloud was obeying wind direction as has been demonstrated by Dr. James McDonald.

33

Having established that the cloud was obeying the wind drift in its motion, we may now ask ourselves whether there were any winds blowing from the Sunset Peak area travelling northwards towards Flagstaff (where the cloud was overhead) that could have transported the cloud to that area. But according to weather reports for that day, there werent. No winds were blowing from Sunset Peak towards Flagstaff, at any level that day. The cloud, according to recorded facts by Dr. McDonald, was being blown at 208 kilometers per hour headed due east from the west that evening when it appeared over Flagstaff. This speed and direction is critical in showing that the cloud could not have originated from Sunset Peak. If the cloud was travelling due east at 208 kilometers per hour, this means that two to three hours before the cloud was photographed at Flagstaff, the cloud was not even within the state of Arizona it

34

was in California, to the west. The possibility of the cloud hovering low at Sunset Peak and then ascending and finally travelling to Flagstaff is clearly shattered. How Mr. Branham Learnt about the Cloud It might also interest you to know that Mr. Branham never mentioned anything about the cloud until it was reported on Life and Science magazines, much later. As a matter of fact, he preached several sermons after he apparently experienced the cloud phenomenon. What follows is a list of all the sermons that Mr. Branham preached after the supposed encounter with the angels at Sunset Peak on February 28 1963. He makes no mention of the cloud whatsoever: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. ABSOLUTE.A_ HOUSTON.TX MONDAY_ 63-0304 FIRST.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN MONDAY_ 63-0318 SECOND.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN TUESDAY_ 63-0319 THIRD.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN WEDNESDAY_ 63-0320 FOURTH.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN THURSDAY_ 63-0321 FIFTH.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN FRIDAY_ 63-0322 SIXTH.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN SATURDAY_ 63-0323 SEVENTH.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN SUNDAY_ 63-0324E

One might argue that his silence about the cloud during these sermons is not proof of its non occurrence. Maybe it happened its just that he talked to no one about it as uncharacteristic of him as this would be. But is this really this case? Lets examine this scenario. During this particular hunting trip at Sunset Peak, Mr. Branham also mentions an occurrence at Sabino Canyon (located within the same forest as Sunset Peak) during which he held the Kings sword. These two events happened the same day according to Mr. Branham, theres no mistake about that:
I saw seven angels come. Didn't "Life" Magazine pack it, just a fog of It floated across here twentyseven miles high and thirty miles across. Is not Fred Sothmann and these others, Gene Norman and them setting back there, stood right there when them seven Angels appeared right there on the hill? It shook the hills for miles around like that. There stood seven Angels and throwed a sword in a hand and said, "Go home and open these Seven Seals that are given." (EASTER.SEAL_ PHOENIX.AZ V-2 N-6 SATURDAY_ 65-0410)

Let the author now point the reader to one of Mr. Branhams accounts of the very same Sunset Peak hunting trip where the angels appeared as usual, formed the V shaped constellation as usual, turned him eastward as usual, the sword is placed in his hands as usual. Here it is:
Now, I went up in the canyon, and I climbed way as high as I could go, and I--I--I asked the Lord, while setting up in there, what all this meant and so forth. I was kinda bothered and didn't know just what to do. And so, while I was praying, and strange thing happened. I--I--I want to be honest. Now, I could've fallen asleep. It could've been like a trance, or it could've been a--a vision. I'm more less inclined to believe that it was a vision that... I had my hands out saying, "Lord, what does this blast mean,

35

and what does these seven Angels in a constellation of--of the pyramid, picking me up from off the ground and turning eastward: what does it mean?" I was standing there in prayer, and something happened. And now, something fell in my hand. Now, I know if you don't understand spiritual things, it may seem very strange. But something struck in my hand; and when I looked, it was a sword. And the handle was made of pearl, the prettiest pearl I ever seen. And the--the guard (you know, where I guess, it's to keep your hands from being lanced, you know, while you're--the--the people were dueling) was gold. And the saber's blade wasn't too long, but it was just razor sharp, and it was glistening silver. And it was the prettiest thing I ever seen. It just fit my hand exactly, and I was holding it. I said, "Isn't that pretty?" I looked at it, and I thought, "But you know, I always afraid of a sword." I was kind of glad that I lived out of the days that they used them, because I--I'm afraid of a knife. And so I--I thought, "What would I do with that?" And while holding it in my hand, a voice from somewhere said, "That is the King's sword." And then it left me (BREACH.THE_ JEFF.IN SUNDAY_ 63-0317E)

But why am I pointing you towards this particular account? The above sermon was delivered on March 17 1963. ALL details of the Mt. Sunset hunting trip are present except one the cloud! (Youre free to read the entire sermon and verify that the cloud was not mentioned at all during the sermon.) Why would he leave out the salient occurrence of the occurrence the formation of the cloud which then proceeded to form the face of Jesus while in the stratosphere while describing this incident if it indeed happened during this hunting trip? Why are all prior accounts of this hunting trip lacking the cloud story? The answer is obvious, simple and open for all to see: he had not learnt about the cloud. A majority of the public, including Mr. Branham, never learnt about the cloud until the story was featured on Science magazine on April 19 1963, and again on Life magazine on May 17 1963. After this story of the unexplained cloud hit the media on these magazines (which Mr. Branham likes referring to), it also conveniently found its way into Mr. Branhams hunting trip. The famous cloud that allegedly forms the face of Jesus was published in these magazines thats where Branham came across them. Mr. Branham never talked about the appearance of Jesus in the clouds until after these magazines ran the story. After these publications of the mystery cloud on Science and Life magazines, Mr. Branhams accounts of this hunting trip are inundated with stories about the stratospheric cloud: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. STANDING.IN.THE.GAP_ JEFF.IN V-6 N-7 SUNDAY_ 63-0623M LORD.JUST.ONCE.MORE_ HOT.SPRINGS.AR V-20 N-10 FRIDAY_ 63-0628A CHRIST.IS.THE.MYSTERY_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-7 SUNDAY_ 63-0728 PERSEVERANT_ CHICAGO.IL V-21 N-4 FRIDAY_ 63-0802 SHALOM_ PHOENIX.AZ V-22 N-1 SUNDAY_ 64-0119 RECOGNIZING.YOUR.DAY_ JEFF.IN V-5 N-1 SUNDAY_ 64-0726M MARRIAGE.AND.DIVORCE_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-13 SUNDAY_ 65-0221M RISING.OF.THE.SUN_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-12 SUNDAY_ 65-0418M CHOOSING.OF.A.BRIDE_ LA.CA V-2 N-28 THURSDAY_ 65-0429E SPIRITUAL.FOOD.IN.DUE.SEASON_ JEFF.IN V-8 N-7 SUNDAY_ 65-0718E 36

11. 12. 13. 14.

WHAT.IS.THE.ATTRACTION?_ JEFF.IN V-8 N-8 SUNDAY_ 65-0725E WORKS.IS.FAITH.EXPRESSED_ SHREVEPORT.LA V-7 N-1 FRIDAY_ 65-1126 TRYING.TO.DO.GOD.A.SERVICE_ SHP.LA V-7 N-2 SATURDAY_ 65-1127B RAPTURE.THE_ YUMA.AZ V-5 N-14 SATURDAY_ 65-1204

To the objective reader, all logic debunks the impossibility of a connection between Mr. Branham and the stratospheric cloud that appeared over northern Arizona on February 28 1963. Secondary Cloud There is another problem that arises out of Mr. Branhams explanation of the cloud. According to the above report by Dr. McDonald, there was another cloud identical to the original one - that appeared that day:
Many observers reported a second cloud off to the northwest of the main cloud, with shape very much like that of the main cloud, but only about a quarter as large. Correctness of these reports has been established from some of the first photographs that have come in from northern Arizona. The cloud was evidently moving generally south-eastward, though visual reports are in some conflict on this point; this point can only be resolved from further studies by triangulation. (Dr. James McDonald)

Mr. Branham gives no explanation of this second cloud but going by the explanation of the other cloud that it was Jesus we can only be left wondering who the other cloud might have been. A Handsome Share of Absurdity Now that we have established that there was no connection whatsoever between Branham and the unusual cloud, we may now explore further ludicrousness behind his explanations of this cloud. Mr. Branham claims a lot of things about the February 28 1963 Northern Arizona stratospheric cloud. But mightily ridiculous are the various horrifically different things he claims the cloud was. From the quotes displayed in this chapter, at different points he claims that the cloud: 1. Was a group of angels 2. Was mist and fog 3. Was Jesus No matter how much you stretch your imagination, how can a physical entity be an angel, a fog and Jesus at the same time? Even if you give a leeway for this ludicrous claim and assert that they were angels to begin with; who turned into fog and later turned into Jesus, how come over 80 photographs of the cloud depict a physical entity that didnt change form whatsoever only its shape being altered? All in all, the claim that fatally shatters Branhams cloud explanation is his claim that the cloud was Jesus:
Well, if you'll turn the picture like this and look (and you can probably see it from the audience), it's Christ. See His eyes looking here just as perfect as it could be, wearing the white wig of supreme Deity and Judge of all heavens and earth? Can you see His eyes, nose, His mouth? Just turn the picture from this (the way they had it), this a-way, the way it's supposed to be. And you... Can you see it? He is supreme Judge; there's none other but Him. And that is a

37

perfect identification again, a vindication that this Message is the truth. It is true. And making Him, not a third person, but the only Person with the white... See, you see the dark, His face, His beard, and His eyes? And notice, He's looking; from Him comes this Light shining on the right-hand side to which He's looking to. And on the cross that's where He looked, to the right, where He pardoned the sinner. In the light of His resurrection we still go forth in His Name.(RISING.OF.THE.SUN_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-12 SUNDAY_ 65-0418M)

Examine the photograph below that Mr. Branham is referring to that appeared on the May 17 1963 issue of Life magazine. The picture has been rotated like the prophet instructed us to.

It is difficult to see any human nose, mouth or eyes in the above cloud photograph that Mr. Branham was pointing us towards, unless the observer has very serious eye sight problems or is under heavy medication, because there are none. In order to verify this, circulate this picture amongst non Message Believers and ask them what they see within the cloud and theyll point you towards nothing. The general outline formed by the cloud may be indeed of a human face (albeit a much disfigured one) but what physical features of a human face are visible in the above photograph? Mr. Branham told you there are eyes, a mouth and a nose and Message Believers decided to believe it despite that fact that its a blatant lie. Besides, did someone cut off Christs head and throw it into the skies over Flagstaff how come we cant see the rest of the body despite the fact that the skies were clear? 38

The actual Jesus

Above: A picture designed and used by Message Believers to demonstrate that the cloud was Jesus

Mr. Branham does not claim that the cloud formed an outline of the face of Jesus in the above quote, he says that literally, the cloud was Jesus. He even points to the physical features of his face such as his nose, eyes and mouth. The prophet claims that the cloud was Jesus, literally. Examining reports from various media publications such as the May 17 1963 issue of Life magazine, we find that the cloud was about 42 kilometers (26 miles) in height and about 48 kilometers (30 miles) wide. Therefore by claiming that the cloud was Jesus, Mr. Branham is telling you that Jesus has a face that is 42 kilometers wide and 48 kilometers long. Yet according to the Bible, Jesus Christ was a person of normal size. How could a person that had a face that was 42 kilometers long: have ridden a normal sized ass (when getting into Jerusalem), fitted into normal sized buildings such as the court buildings he attended just before his crucifixion, boarded normal sized boats where he calmed a storm and even more absurd how were the authorities able to apprehend a giant that was more than a hundred kilometers tall (if the head alone was 48 kilometers long) and how on earth did Mary and Joseph manage to raise a baby that was normal sized at birth but more than a hundred kilometers tall at 33? Once again, and even more severely, Mr. Branham is insulting the intelligence of his audience! Further, examine the following report from Science magazine that was introduced to you earlier in this chapter:
To observers nearly underneath, the colors green and blue were visible, and a pinkish cast was noted at times. [Dr. James McDonald]

Mr. Branham is now telling us that Jesus had a face that had green, blue and pink colors. Setting aside the fact that coming across such an individual would be a traumatizing experience, Jesus was a Jew and were all familiar with what they look like. Besides, no individual on earth naturally possesses these colors on their face unless theyve been to a tattoo parlor or a face painters booth. Unless Mr. Branham is telling us that Jesus visited a heavenly tattooist or face painter before appearing over Flagstaff, the idea that the cloud was Jesus is a ridiculous one.

39

To cap it all up, the photograph that shows Jesus face is just one of 80 photographs of the cloud that were submitted. How come all other photographs do not show Jesus? Again from the Science magazine article in this chapter:
Its overall shape was compared by some (ranchers) to a horseshoe or a horse collar if it was viewed from south; from the north it appeared as a closed loop with a long thin trail that could be seen extending northward, from the oval, and several observers in that sector compared its shape with that of a hangmans noose.

The cloud took different shapes when viewed from different directions. The cloud photograph that supposedly forms the face of Jesus was taken by C. E. Peterson of Bremerton, Washington, from just one of over tens of positions from which photographs of the cloud were taken. If indeed the cloud was the face of Jesus, Id like a Branhamite to come forward and inform us why the face changed its shape numerous times Since we all know solids dont behave like gases. Where is the face of Jesus on the following three photos of that very same cloud, or to which direction should we turn them in order to see it, or, from which perspective are we seeing the face of Jesus?

40

41

What then was the explanation behind the mystery cloud? The stratospheric cloud over Northern Arizona was not a supernatural one. Dr James McDonald discovered that on that day (February 28 1963), the Air Force deliberately destroyed a secret satellite and they launched it aboard a TAT (Thrust Augmented Thor) rocket at Vandenberg Air Force Base in nearby California. The cloud, Dr. McDonald came to conclude, was an aftermath of that detonation. The Air Force has since declassified the launch history of Vandenberg Air Force Base. By examining the report its clear that indeed there was launch activity on that day:

Let the author now point the reader to a progress report of the investigation by Dr. James McDonald of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics of the University of Arizona at Tucson, entitled Status of Investigation of the Northern Arizona Stratospheric Cloud of February 28, 1963, published on May 31, 1963. I should place a caveat here that this was a progress report and not a final report. Reproduced below is a section of that report:

V. A possible explanation - a Vandenberg AFB rocket explosion. A. Thor booster explosion. A search of West Coast newspapers for the 28th disclosed a brief note on a intentional destruction of a military-satellite launch booster sometime on the 28th. Further information was found in the March 11, 1963, issue of Missiles and Rockets, which contained the following item: The Air Force deliberately destroyed a secret satellite, believed to be of the Discoverer series, after launching it aboard the souped up Thor Feb. 28 from Vandenberg AFB. All four motors were ignited at launch, but deviation from the programmed trajectory forced safety officials to destroy the booster before payload separation. The thrust-augmented Thor (TAT) is a liquid-fueled Thor with three Thiokol

42

solid rockets spaced around the Thor case. This was the combinations first test. It became essential to find the time of this detonation and to explore further details bearing on the cloud, so both by direct inquiry and by inquiry through the Office of Naval Research in Pasadena, further information was sought. Mr. E. E. Clary, Chief Scientist at Vandenberg, has very kindly provided unclassified information on this flight. The booster was destroyed at an altitude of 146,000 ft, almost directly overhead (but a bit south) of Vandenberg AFB at 1352 PST. As soon as this information was received, it appeared to offer the first solid clue as to the Flagstaff clouds origin. The altitude at detonation was close to the photogrammetrically estimated cloud altitude, and the time of detonation made it necessary to consider very seriously the possibility that the Flagstaff cloud was some aftermath of the detonation. A crucial question was whether the time interval between the detonation over Vandenberg and the passage of the cloud over Flagstaff would match photogrammetrically estimated cloud-drift speed and/or other independent wind-speed observations. Taking 1840 MST as the time of passage over Flagstaff, the 1452 MST ( = 1352 PST) detonation time implies a hypothetical drift-time of 3 hours and 48 minutes. The airline distance to Vandenberg from Flagstaff is 510 miles, so the minimum mean drift speed required to associate these two events is very nearly 135 mph. This required drift speed is substantially larger than Schleys roughly estimated 110 mph, and even further from the 77-95 mph estimated from the Lordsburg photos. Thus the agreement with respect to drift speed seemed rather poor, even though the height agreement between detonation and cloud seemed very encouraging. It was clearly necessary to seek further wind data, so inquiry was made concerning possible observational data from the Meteorological Rocket Network. B. Rocket wind-data. The two nearest rocket-wind observation points happen to be rather well located to indicate winds along the trajectory that might have carried some explosion aftermath from Vandenberg to Flagstaff: One station is at Pt. Mugu, Calif., and the next nearest one is at White Sands, N. M. Queries were sent to both stations. White Sands sent a Judi sounding rocket up at 0800MST on 28 February, about 10 hours before the Flagstaff passage. At 140,000 ft. the winds were 109 mph from WSW; at 150,000 ft. the winds were 97 mph from WSW. The following day, March 1, at 1215 MST, White Sands launched a Loki II sounding rocket that indicated winds of just over 90 mph from WSW at both 140,000 and 150,000 ft. No sounding was available from Pt. Mugu on the 28th; but an Arcas launched at 0800 PST on March 1 indicated winds of 127 mph from the west at 140,000 ft. and 112 mph from the west at 150,000 at that time. The rocket-sounding winds come tantalizingly close to fitting the hypothesis that the Flagstaff cloud was some byproduct of the Vandenberg detonation; yet the agreement is not quite close enough to be conclusive. The White Sands winds of the morning of the 28th seem significantly too low to match the required drift speed of 135 mph; but they agree rather well with the maximum cloud-drift speed estimated from the Lordsburg photos. It is regrettable that no Pt. Mugu winds were measured on the 28th. They would have shown whether the winds at that upwind location were enough higher than those at White Sands to imply a mean drift speed of around 135 mph. (A West Coast speed of something like 160 mph would be needed to yield the required mean of 135 mph, if we take the White Sands 0800 speed of 109 mph as typical of the stratosphere over

43

Flagstaff near 140,000 to 150,000 ft. at 1840 MST on the 28th.) Although Mr. Willis Webb of the White Sands missile Range emphasized, in phone conversation on the problem, that variations above or below measured winds at times between observations might well approach 20 per cent of the measured values at these levels, it remains uncertain whether one may concluded that the Flagstaff cloud was due to the detonation at Vandenberg. It is necessary to seek still further crosschecks. C. Unsettled questions. At this writing, further inquiries are being sent to the Chief Scientist of the Pacific Missile Range, to whom I have been directed by Vandenberg AFB for further information. It is hoped that phototheodolite movie records of the detonation may exist and may yield data on the initial drift speed and drift direction of the explosion cloud. Also, the initial configuration of the explosion cloud will be sought, along with information on possible presence of a side-explosion to the west of the main explosion. The latter item bears on the interesting problem of the secondary cloud west of the main one at Flagstaff. Many photos and still more letterdescriptions establish the presence of a smaller, roughly similar cloud some twenty miles west of the main ring. This cloud was definitely seen to form and to dissipate during the period of prominent visibility of the main cloud. Photos show it to have a more pear-shaped form than the main ring; and a short fish-tail formation existed at its northern extremity. It is difficult to see how a single detonation over Vandenberg could have also led to this secondary cloud. Mr. Clary, at Vandenberg, was fairly certain that no side explosions occurred; but this will be checked further. In addition, information will be sought concerning the weight of liquid propellant still unburnt in the Thor at instant of detonation. This item of information will permit quantitative estimates to be made of the total water of combustion released in the explosion, as well as the heat release (for use in estimating buoyant circulation generation). These points, if they can be cleared up, may finally settle the question of whether the Flagstaff cloud can plausibly be identified as an aftermath of the Thor detonation over the California coast.

This document points us towards strong clues of what the origin of the stratospheric cloud could have been. But it also raises some questions on whether the real origin was the Vandenberg explosion. Therefore when you begin your research about this cloud, youll find Message Believers using this report to dispute the fact that the clouds origin was the Vandenberg AFB explosion but Dr. Mc Donald clearly states above that the unsettled questions would be checked further. In this same report he stated that he would publish no further progress reports. It was later established that indeed the cloud originated from the aftermath of the explosion at Vandenberg AFB. I see no better way to conclude this chapter than to insert John Kennahs article about the stratospheric cloud, the article that motivated me to do some further reading on the topic. Reproduced below is an extract of John Kennahs report on the research he has done concerning the cloud. It appears on his web page entitled William Branham and His Message. The reader is free to independently verify and confirm the articles contents for verification.

44

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. (John Kennah)

The truth is now in your hands To the objective reader, its now clear that there was no connection whatsoever between Mr. Branham and the stratospheric cloud. Whether you can excuse him for this and continue embracing him as your prophet, thats completely up to you.

45

Chapter 4: Branhams Splendid Creation

This composition is set forth in the first person as it is a message from my heart to the hearts of the people. William Branham on his message about the seven church ages

46

The discussion contained within this chapter will focus on a book that Branham wrote, called An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages. It is a product of further reading on the subject that I did after coming across Ken Jacobsens article, A Refutation of William Marion Branham. To begin with, its important for the reader to note that unlike other message books, the Seven Church Ages book was not transcribed from a sermon that the prophet delivered. He wrote this book personally. Although this is obvious, known and undisputed, not all Message Believers are aware of this fact. But if you refer to the introduction of the book, you will find Mr. Branham telling you that what youre holding is a book he personally wrote:
Though this volume will concern itself with various major doctrines (such as the Godhead, Water Baptism, etc.) found in Revelation, chapters One through Three, its main theme is the setting forth of a detailed study of the Seven Church Ages. Particular pains have been taken to capitalize all names and titles, nouns and pronouns, etc., that relate to Godhead, and also the words Bible, Scripture, and the Word, as we hold this only proper in speaking of the majesty and Person of God and His Holy Word. I pray the blessing of God upon each reader; and may illumination by the Spirit of God be each one's special portion. (William Branham).

The above statements cannot be made during a sermon, since we normally do not read live sermons, we sit and listen; and its also impossible to capitalize names and titles when expressing them verbally. This should eradicate all doubt that the book was personally written by Mr. Branham. By presenting the work An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, Mr. Branham is claiming originality for the material contained within the pages of that book. This is especially so because he does not provide any references at the end of his treatise and he even goes further and tells severally that the things contained within that book were revealed to him directly by God. Plagiarism is the practice of presenting someone elses work as your own. It includes copying work from another author without referencing the material, leaving the reader to think that the author composed the material presented. Like my law lecturer used to tell us from time to time: Plagiarism is theft intellectual theft. Legal action can be taken against perpetrators of plagiarism in many countries, especially when it can be shown that the perpetrator gained commercially from his or her publication. The book An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages is a product of broad plagiarism on the part of Mr. Branham. He copied many parts from the volume The Book of Revelation by Clarence Larkin (Larkin, C. (1919), The Book of Revelation, Erwin W. Moyer.) This is a book that was written and published when Mr. Branham was only about ten years of age. I would encourage anyone reading this at this moment to take a break and obtain the two books, Larkins and Branhams. Once you go through the two books, youll be shocked at the level of theft perpetrated by Mr. Branham. At many instances he literally copypasted what Larkin had written into his own book. Whats further painful about this particular act of plagiarism is the fact that Larkins book was a result of very many years of research, and yet Mr. Branham took his work and repackaged it in order to propagate his doctrinal assertions. Its also heart breaking when you consider that Mr. Branham knew a 47

lot of people revered him as their true prophet and yet went ahead with the blatant perpetration of the lie that the things contained within that book were all revealed directly by God while in real fact he obtained many of the ideas from Clarence Larkins book. As stated earlier, the author encourages the reader to obtain the two books and verify this claim. But for a start, examine the following two excerpts from the two books. The wording and ideas are remarkably similar. These two excerpts that follow are a bit lengthy; but they are not intended for you to read continuously. Rather, read what Larkin had to say about a particular heading (His Eyes for instance), then go on and read what Branham had to say about that similar heading. Go back and re-examine Larkins work under the next heading, and read Branhams words similarly, and so forth. A striking similarity is under the heading His Eyes where Larkin ponders how Those eyes that had often been dimmed with human tears, and that wept at the grave of Lazarus were pictured as burning with an "omniscient flame." Larkins words are plagiarized by Branham under the same heading, where Branham states: Think of it. Those eyes that were once dimmed with tears of sorrow and pity. Those eyes that wept with compassion at the grave of Lazarus. Those eyes that saw not the evil of the murderers who hanged Him on a cross but in sorrow cried, "Father forgive them." Now those eyes are a flame of fire, the eyes of the Judge Who will recompence those who rejected Him. As you examine the two books yourself you will unravel many other instances of plagiarism committed by Mr. Branham. Since Larkin wrote his book in 1919, long before Mr. Branham was literate enough to write a book, we can only conclude that he stole ideas from Larkin, many years later.

Larkin, Clarence (1919) Book of Revelation from Page 11:

SEVENFOLD GLORY OF HIS PERSON 1. HIS "HEAD AND HIS HAIR." His "Head" and "Hair" were "WHITE LIKE WOOL," as "WHITE AS SNOW." Here there is a correspondence to the "Snow White Wig" worn by English judges. This description of Christ reminds us of Daniel's vision of the "ANCIENT OF DAYS," "whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the PURE WOOL." Dan. 7:9. Daniel refers three times to the "Ancient Of Days." In Chap. 7:13, he distinguishes between the "Son of Man" and the "Ancient of Days," but in verses 9 and 22 he associates the "Ancient of Days" with a "Throne of Judgment," and as God the Father has committed all judgment to the Son (John 5:22), and the Father and the Son are one, the title "Ancient Of Days" is used interchangeably. And as the title "Ancient of Days" is applied to the "Son of Man" (Christ) at the time He assumes the Judgeship (Dan. 7:9-10), which is not until after the Rapture of the Church, we have here additional corroborative proof that John's Vision belongs to the "Day of the Lord." The "White Hair" of the Son of Man refers to His ANTIQUITY, to His patriarchal dignity, not that His hair was made white by age, for the Eternal never grows old, but it bespeaks wisdom and experience, and the venerableness of His character.

48

2. HIS EYES. '"His Eyes were a FLAME OF FIRE." Those eyes that had often been dimmed with human tears, and that wept at the grave of Lazarus, are here pictured as burning with an "OMNISCIENT FLAME." How often when on the earth those eyes read the inner-most thoughts of men, and even soldiers quailed before His soul penetrating gaze, so when He sits as the Judge of men all things will be NAKED and OPEN before Him. 3. HIS FEET. "His Feet like unto fine BRASS, as if they BURNED IN A FURNACE." In that day those feet that trod the Via Dolorosa of suffering will be like unto INCANDESCENT BRASS, that shall tread and crush Antichrist and Satan when He comes to "Tread the WINE-PRESS of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God." Rev. 19:15. 4. HIS VOICE. "His Voice as the SOUND OF MANY WATERS." There is nothing more melodious or musical than the babbling brook, or more thunderous than the rush of the cataract over the falls, and there is nothing more fearful to the criminal than the words of the Judge as he passes sentence; but how terrifying will be the sentence when with a strong voice the Son of Man shall say in the Judgment Day, "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his angels." Matt. 25:41. 5. HIS HAND. "In His Right Hand SEVEN STARS." We are told in verse 20, that the "Seven Stars" stand for the "ANGELS" of the "Seven Churches." These "Angels" are not angelic beings but the Messengers or Ministers of the churches. What a beautiful and solemn lesson is taught here. It is that the ministers of Christ derive their power and office from Him, and that He holds them in His hand. If they are false to Him, no one can deliver them from His power, and if they are true and loyal, no one can touch or molest, or do them harm. 6. HIS MOUTH. "Out of His Mouth went a SHARP TWO-EDGED SWORD." While the "Sword of the Spirit" is the "Word of God" (Eph. 6:17), and the "Word of God" is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any TWO-EDGED SWORD, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow (the body), (Heb. 4:12), that is not the sword meant here. The "Sword of the Spirit" is the Holy Spirit's SWORD, and He alone wields it. The sword meant here is the Sword of the Son of Man (Christ), and it is the "SWORD OF JUSTICE," for the Son of Man, out of whose mouth this sword comes, is the "White Horse Rider" of Rev. 19:11-15, "out of whose mouth goeth a SHARP SWORD, that with it He should smite the nations." And that sword, like the "Sword of the Spirit" will be TWO-EDGED also, for the protection of His people, and the

49

destruction of His enemies. This is still further proof that John's vision of Christ was as He shall appear in the "DAY OF THE LORD."

7. HIS COUNTENANCE. "His Countenance was as the SUN SHINETH IN HIS STRENGTH." This recalls to our memory His appearance on the Mount of Transfiguration when "His Face did shine AS THE SUN," Matt. 17:2. And we read of the New Jerusalem that the inhabitants thereof have no need of the SUN, for the LAMB is the Light thereof. Rev. 21:23. And when we recall that the Prophet Malachi tells us that when Jesus comes back He will be the SUN OF RIGHTEOUSNESS (Malachi 4:2), we see that John's vision of the Son of Man was as He shall appear at the Second Stage of His Return, the "Revelation." Thus we have in John's "Seven-Fold" description of the person of the "Glorified Son of Man" circumstantial or indirect evidence that John saw his vision of the Son of Man, not on a Sabbath Day (or the "Lord's Day" as we now call it), but was projected by the Holy Spirit forward into the "Day of the Lord" and saw Him as He will appear then as the Judge, and the coming "SUN OF RIGHTEOUSNESS." (Clarence Larkin).

Branham, William (1964) An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, Chapter Two:
THE SEVENFOLD GLORY OF HIS PERSON Revelation 1:14-16, "His head and His hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and His eyes were as a flame of fire. And His feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and His voice as the sound of many waters. And He had in His right hand seven stars: and out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword: and His countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength." How deeply moving and inspiring was the appearing of Jesus to John, who was in exile for the cause of the Word, and behold, the Living WORD now stands before him. What an illuminating vision, for every descriptive attribute has a significance. What a revelation of His glorious Being. 1.His Hair as White as Snow. John first notices and mentions the whiteness of His hair. It was white, and as bright as snow. This was not because of His age. Oh, no. The brilliantly white hair does not signify age but experience, maturity, and wisdom. The Eternal One does not age. What is time to God? Time means little to God, but wisdom means much. It is as when Solomon called to God for wisdom to judge the people of Israel. Now He is coming, the Judge of all the earth. He will be crowned with wisdom. That is what the white and glistening hair signifies. See this in Daniel 7:9-14, "I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of Days did sit, Whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of His head like the pure wool: His throne was like the fiery flame, and His wheels as burning fire

50

Even the world understands this symbology, for in ancient times the judge would appear and convene court, dressed in a white wig and a long robe that signified his complete authority (head to foot robe) to mete out justice. 2. His Eyes as Fire. Think of it. Those eyes that were once dimmed with tears of sorrow and pity. Those eyes that wept with compassion at the grave of Lazarus. Those eyes that saw not the evil of the murderers who hanged Him on a cross but in sorrow cried, "Father forgive them." Now those eyes are a flame of fire, the eyes of the Judge Who will recompence those who rejected Him Those fiery flaming eyes of the Judge are even now recording the lives of all flesh. Running to and fro throughout the earth, there is nothing He does not know. He knows the desires of the heart and what each one intends to do. There is nothing hidden that shall not be revealed, for all things are naked before Him with Whom we have to do. Think of it, He knows even now what you are thinking 3. The Feet of Brass. Those feet of brass will crush the enemy. They will destroy the anti-christ, the beast and the image and all that is vile in His sight. He will destroy the church systems that have taken His Name only to corrupt its brilliance and crush them along with the antichrist. All the wicked, the atheists, the agnostics, the modernists, the liberals, will all be there 4. His Voice Was as the Sound of Many Waters. Have you ever thought how terrifying it is to a man drifting helplessly toward a cataract? Think now of that roar as he approaches his sure and certain doom. And just exactly like that is coming the day of judgment when the roar of the multitude of voices condemns you for not having paid heed ere it was too late. Take heed this very hour. For at this moment your thoughts are being recorded in heaven. There your thoughts speak louder than your words. Like the Pharisee who claimed so much with his mouth, but not listening to the Lord, his heart became corrupt and evil until it was too late, even now this could be your last call to hear the Word and receive it unto eternal life. It will be too late when you approach the roar of the many voices of judgment and doom 5. In His Right Hand Were Seven Stars. "And He had in His right hand seven stars." Now of course we already know from verse twenty what the seven stars actually are. "And the mystery of the seven stars are the angels (messengers) of the seven churches." Now we couldn't make a mistake here on any account, as He interprets it for us. These seven stars are the messengers to the seven successive church ages. They are not called by name. They are just set forth as seven, one to each age

51

6. The Two-edged Sword. "And out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword." In Hebrews 4:12, "For the Word of God is quick, and powerful and sharper than any two- edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." Out of His mouth went the sharp two-edged sword which is the WORD OF GOD. Revelation 19:11-16, "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 7. His Face Like The Sun. "And His countenance was as the sun shineth in its strength." Matthew 17:1-13, "And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart. And was transfigured before them: and His face did shine as the sun, and His raiment was white as the light In Revelation 21:23, "And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof." This is the New Jerusalem. The Lamb will be in that city, and because of His presence, there will be no light needed. The sun won't rise and shine there, for He is the Sun and Light thereof, Himself. The nations that come into it will walk in His light. Aren't you happy that day is upon us? John saw that day coming He's the Lily of the Valley, the Bright and Morning Star. He's the fairest of ten thousand to my soul. Yes, that great day is ready to break and the Sun of Righteousness will arise with healing in His wings. (William M Branham).

This is just a single example; provided to you so that you may understand what Branham was doing with Larkins material. Begin by comparing what Larkin says under any one of the seven headings above and compare it with what Branham says under the same heading. You will end up noticing that Branham would read what Larkin had to say then would go ahead and copy it and subsequently add his thoughts in order to insert the doctrines that Larkin did not write about, such as denunciation of the trinity. This pattern of plagiarism is widespread in many parts of Branhams book. I encourage you to objectively investigate this for yourself. This is a big injustice to Larkin and the years of effort he put into writing his book. Factual errors If you have carried out the exercise recommended above, then you have already established that Larkins work was a major basis for Branhams work on the seven church ages. You also have noticed that Branham would add a lot of material onto Larkins work. That being said, it becomes interesting to ask ourselves whether what Branham added was historically correct. Therefore from this point onwards, we will be examining the parts of the book that Branham wrote himself, not the parts he plagiarized from Larkins work. Since Branham says that he studied works from unbiased historians when compiling his work, then what he presents should be historically accurate, even more so when he is receiving the material through direct revelation from God as he states. 52

Since this study was to be the most serious one I had ever undertaken up to this time, I sought God for many days for the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Then only did I read the Scriptures on the Church Ages and delve into the many church histories written by the most unbiased historians that I could find. (William Branham, An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages)

It is therefore very discouraging to find out that what Branham tells us in that book is a concoction of historically inaccurate accounts. Branham presents us with seven church ages their names obviously taken from the book of revelation. He then assigns periods of history to each of these church ages and then goes ahead to assign a messenger to each of these periods of history: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. EPHESIAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 53 to A.D. 170) - Messenger: Saint Paul SMYRNEAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 170 to A.D. 312) - Messenger: Saint Irenaeus PERGAMEAN CHURCH AGE (AD 312 to A.D. 606) - Messenger: Saint Martin THYATERIAN CHURCH AGE (A.D 606 to A.D. 1520) - Messenger: Saint Columba SARDISEAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 1520 to A.D. 1750) - Messenger: Martin Luther PHILADELPHIAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 1750 to A.D. 1906) - Messenger: John Wesley LAODICEAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 1906 - Rapture) - Messenger: William Branham

It is my intention to show you that we were furnished with pure fiction and falsifications by Branham through the accounts he gives us about these messengers. Again, Branham did not carry out sufficient research before he decided to assign these messengers to his splendid creation - the seven church ages. Firstly, he tells us things about these messengers that totally contradict the history he claimed to study; and secondly, several of these messengers sharply contradict the criteria he sets out for arriving at each messenger. I will then show you that Mr. Branham created the seven church ages, after which he looked for six messengers that he could fit into the ages so that he could set himself up as the seventh messenger. This was quite easy for some of the ages where we had a well known prominent Christian, such as Pauls and Martin Luthers age. But then it gets tough in some of the ages where a single prominent Christian is hard to identify and this is where we catch Mr. Branham fabricating material. Walk with me now and let us briefly discuss the messengers and in particular Irenaeus, Martin and Columba.

Irenaeus - Smyrnean Church Age (A.D. 170 to A.D. 312)

From chapter four of An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, under The Messenger, this is what Mr. Branham had to say about Irenaeus, the messenger he assigned to the second church age:
Using our God given rule of choosing the messenger for each age, we unhesitatingly declare that Irenaeus was exalted by the Lord to that position.

53

He was militant against any form of organization. Also, his life history, wherein he served the Lord, was one of much manifestation in the Holy Spirit; and the Word was taught with unusual clarity and conformity to its original precepts. He saw the danger of any kind of organized brotherhood among the elders, pastors, etc. He stood solidly for a unified, Spirit-filled, gift-manifesting local church. Thus with his strict adherence to the Word, his wonderful understanding of Scripture, and the attendance of the power of God upon that ministry, he is the right choice for the age. (William Branham)

Anyone who has read about early church history will inform you that the father of organization in the church was none other than Irenaeus himself. It is therefore astounding to say the least when Branham says that he was militant against any form of organization. Since the prophet says very little about the man Irenaeus, we should visit history and establish the real story behind this great theologian who the Catholics regard as one of their most important church fathers. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, the exact date of his birth is still debated, with some placing his birth between the years 115 and 125 and some between 130 and 142. Irenaeus was a hearer of Polycarp, who is thought to have been in turn a disciple of John the Evangelist. His most famous work is Adversus Haereses (Against Heresies) which is an attack on Gnosticism which was a strong threat against the Church at the time. However by reading through Against Heresies we gain a valuable understanding of his stand on many scriptural topics. During the persecution of Marcus Aurelius, Irenaeus was based at the church of Lyons as a priest. He was sent to Pope Eleutherius by the citys clergy with a letter concerning Montanism at the time they were facing imprisonment for the faith (Catholic Encyclopedia). Irenaeus, on returning to Gaul, succeeded Saint Pothinus as Bishop of Lyons, after Pothinus had been martyred. There is no agreed upon date of his death nor can we know for sure that he ended his life with martyrdom. Irenaeus was buried under the Church of St John in Lyons, and is recognized as a saint by the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church, among other churches. Going through Irenaeus book Against Heresies, it will become clear that he was one of the founders of organization in the church. This is because he founded the doctrine known as Apostolic Succession. Basically what Irenaeus taught is that the integrity of Gods word is maintained through a succession of Bishops in a church founded by an apostle. What Branham did not come across and probably would have chosen not to include Irenaeus had he seen it was the list of Bishops in the church of Rome that Irenaeus provides in his book which he says proved an unbroken succession from Peter and Paul down to his day. This was Irenaeus own extra-biblical invention. Irenaeus goes further and says that church tradition has pre-eminent authority and every church should follow the traditions of the Church of Rome (Against Heresies 3.3.2) Further, Irenaeus directly advocated for organization in the church by instructing other churches to follow the traditions of the Church of Rome established by Peter and Paul . As a result of the propagation of this doctrine by Irenaeus and others, the churches in the cities began exercising authority over smaller churches in the interiors. 54

Besides, did Branham even consider the very fact that Irenaeus served as a Priest and later as Bishop of Lyon before he declared that he was militant against any form of organization because its clear that not only did he climb up the ladder of organization up to the position of Bishop, but he also strongly advocated for organization in the church and stated that church traditions had pre eminent authority. What follows below is an excerpt from Chapter 3 of Irenaeus third book in the Against Heresies series.
CHAP. III.--A REFUTATION OF THE HERETICS, FROM THE FACT THAT, IN THE VARIOUS CHURCHES, A PERPETUAL SUCCESSION OF BISHOPS WAS KEPT UP. 1. It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these [heretics] rave about. For if the apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to "the perfect" apart and privily from the rest, they would have delivered them especially to those to whom they were also committing the Churches themselves. For they were desirous that these men should be very perfect and blameless in all things, whom also they were leaving behind as their successors, delivering up their own place of government to these men; which men, if they discharged their functions honestly, would be a great boon [to the Church], but if they should fall away, the direst calamity. 2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority,(3) that is, the faithful every- where, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere. 4. The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome despatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spake with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his angels. From this document, whosoever chooses to do so, may learn that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, was preached by the Churches, and

55

may also understand the apostolical tradition of the Church, since this Epistle is of older date than these men who are now propagating falsehood, and who conjure into existence another god beyond the Creator and the Maker of all existing things. To this Clement there succeeded Evaristus. Alexander followed Evaristus; then, sixth from the apostles, Sixtus was appointed; after him, Telephorus, who was gloriously martyred; then Hyginus; after him, Pius; then after him, Anicetus. Sorer having succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherius does now, in the twelfth place from the apostles, hold the inheritance of the episcopate. In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth.(Irenaeus) (words made bold by author)

By reading Irenaeus words above, its easy to see why he is a darling of the Catholics. Branham says that Irenaeus saw the danger of any kind of organized brotherhood among the elders, pastors, etc. He stood solidly for a unified, Spirit-filled, gift-manifesting local church, but here we see he declared that they do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings referring to churches that were not adherent to the traditions of the church of Rome. He declares the Church of Rome universally known and vests supreme authority upon that church. Further he provides an appointed succession of Bishops of the Church (Popes) that he says maintain the truth: Linus, Anacletus, Clement, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telephorus, Hyginus, Pius, Anicetus, Sorer and finally to the man of his day, Eleutherius. From chapter 4 of the third book:
CHAP. IV.--THE TRUTH IS TO BE FOUND NOWHERE ELSE BUT IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, THE SOLE DEPOSITORY OF APOSTOLICAL DOCTRINE. HERESIES ARE OF RECENT FORMATION, AND CANNOT TRACE THEIR ORIGIN UP TO THE APOSTLES. 1. Since therefore we have such proofs, it is not necessary to seek the truth among others which it is easy to obtain from the Church; since the apostles, like a rich man [depositing his money] in a bank, lodged in her hands most copiously all things pertaining to the truth: so that every man, whosoever will, can draw from her the water of life.(1) For she is the entrance to life; all others are thieves and robbers. On this account are we bound to avoid them, but to make choice of the thing pertaining to the Church with the utmost diligence, and to lay hold of the tradition of the truth. For how stands the case? Suppose there arise a dispute relative to some important question(2) among us, should we not have recourse to the most ancient Churches with which the apostles held constant intercourse, and learn from them what is certain and clear in regard to the present question? For how should it be if the apostles themselves had not left us writings? Would it not be necessary, [in that case,] to follow the course of the tradition which they handed down to those to whom they did commit the Churches? (Irenaeus)

Irenaeus laid one of the most important foundations upon which Catholicism was built; especially that one of Church hierarchy and succession. He was obsessed with Church authority and traditions. He fails 56

miserably to satisfy the criteria that Branham allegedly used to arrive at the messenger for each age most notably that one of turning the age back to the word. The only thing we can be left wondering is how Mr. Branham was carrying out his research since if there ever was a person that was pro-Church organization and was content in declaring the Churchs authority as pre eminent in equal measure with scripture, it would be Bishop Irenaeus of Lyons. I encourage the reader to go through Irenaeus books to gain further understanding.

Martin - Pergamean Church Age (A.D. 312 to A.D. 606)

Before we begin our discussion of Martin, we should remind ourselves of what Mr. Branham thinks about the Catholic Church.
Let me tell you a little personal experience. Switzerland, Germany, and the places where I've been, how does fortunetellers work, how does evil spirits travel? I want you to believe me as your pastor, 'cause you're the one I'm speaking to. Devils travel in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. They cut feathers and everything else and throw spells on each other through the name of Father, Son, Holy Ghost. Call it the three high names. The mother of it is Catholic churches. They go to these little statues, and kneel there, and cut a feather with scissors and turn it backwards, and throw spells on their neighbors and so forth, where they were burnt to death and everything else for it. In Switzerland I stood with my hands on the post like that where honest men and women died when they cut their tongues out, and burnt their eyes out and everything with hot rods, that prostitute Catholic church. Not only that, but the early Anglican churches too and your Protestant churches did the same thing. And they throwed those spells by the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. (BAPTISM.OF.THE.HOLY.SPIRIT_ JEFF.IN V-5 N-2 SUNDAY_ 58-0928M)

William Branham regards the Catholic Church as a prostitute church. We dont really need to delve into how serious an insult that is to a Catholic faithful I mean its as bad as it could get. That being said, its indeed ironical when Branham chooses a Catholic faithful for the post of messenger to the Pergamean Church Age. Martin was a lifelong Catholic faithful, unto his death. From chapter five of An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, William Branham introduces us to St. Martin:
Using our God-given rule for choosing the messenger to each age, that is, we choose the one whose ministry most closely approximates that of the first messenger, Paul, we unhesitatingly declare the Pergamean messenger to be Martin. But not only was he gifted by a great ministry, he himself was forever true to the Word of God. He fought organization. He withstood sin in high places.

No one on this earth ever possessed the power to rewrite history. Not even Mr. Branham. If he tells us something about St. Martin, we will take the liberty to cross check it against known facts. Martin was 57

initially a monk, who then became a priest and finally served as Bishop of the Roman church. He did not fight organization as Mr. Branham puts it; rather he was a full embracer of Roman Church organization. Martin was born around the year 316 in modern day Germany. He died around the year 397. Martin was baptized at the age of 18; when he was still in military service. After leaving the military, Martin became a disciple of Hilary of Poitiers. Hilary was a great proponent and defender of the Trinitarian doctrine, and Martin was an avid follower of Hilarys teachings. As for what Branham thinks of the Trinitarian doctrine, need we revisit the above quote where he asks, how does evil spirits travel? and then answers, I want you to believe me as your pastor, 'cause you're the one I'm speaking to. Devils travel in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Harry Peyton notes that the messenger Martin was a Catholic bishop and patron saint of France who founded the first Catholic monastery in Gaul and taught the Catholic Eucharist doctrine, baptism for regeneration and baptized in the name of the father, son and Holy Ghost. In following and teaching Catholicism, Martin taught contrary to the apostle Paul. Around the year 372, Martin was consecrated as Bishop of the church of Tours. He served his diocese faithfully until his death. He was one among hundreds of Bishops of the Roman Church of his time. Mr. Branham would have you think he was an appointed prophet of his age who turned the age back to the word but this would be far from what he really was a famous Bishop of the Roman Church, one among many.

Columba - Thyaterian Church Age (A.D. 606 to A.D. 1520)

During our discussion of Columba, youll need to keep in mind Mr. Branhams opinions regarding the prostitute Catholic Church. Columba was a prominent leader within the harlot Church. William Branham chooses Columba as messenger in chapter six of his book:
Neither the Western or the Eastern groups had within them a man who could possibly be the messenger to this age when examined in the light of Scripture. However, there were two men in the British Isles, whose ministry in Word and deed could stand the test of truth. They were Saint Patrick and Saint Columba. It was to Saint Columba that the lot of being the messenger fell. About 60 years after the death of Saint Patrick, Columba was born in County Donegal, North Ireland, to the royal family of Fergus. He became a brilliant, consecrated scholar, committing to memory most of the Scripture. God called him in an audible voice to be a missionary. The pure Gospel that was preached by Columba and his fellow workers spread over the whole of Scotland, turning it to God. It also overflowed into Ireland and over Northern Europe. His means of spreading the Gospel was one wherein perhaps twelve men under a leader would go into a new area and literally build a Gospel - centered town. Amongst these twelve men would be carpenters, teachers, preachers, etc., all wonderfully versed in the Word and holy living. This little colony was enclosed by a wall. Soon this enclosure would be surrounded by students and their

58

families in their own homes, learning the Word and preparing to go out and serve the Lord as missionaries, leaders, and preachers. The men were free to marry though many did not, in order to serve God the better. Saint Columba was the founder of a great Bible school on the island of Hy (off the S.W. coast of Scotland).

Recorded history points us to Columba as an Irish Catholic monk who was born 7 December 521 and died 9 June 597. The church age Thyatira began in 606. This means that Columba was long dead even before his assigned age began. Royal blood flowed through his veins, being the great-great grandson of the fourth century Irish king Niall of the Nine Hostages. Columba attended the then famous monastic school at Clonard Abbey; he became a monk and was later ordained a priest. He founded several monasteries (what Mr. Branham calls Bible Schools), and the monks Mr. Branham says were free to marry though many did not, in order to serve God better, although we all know why monks do not marry. He later travelled to Iona, where he later died and was buried by his monks in an abbey he created. The Catholic Encyclopedia asserts that He was not only a great missionary saint who won a whole kingdom to Christ, but he was a statesman, a scholar, a poet, and the founder of numerous churches and monasteries. His name is dear to Scotsmen and Irishmen alike. And because of his great and noble work even non-Catholics hold his memory in veneration. Irenaeus built monasteries, attempted to convert entire tribes into Catholicism and spent decades, according to the Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia 99, organizing his ecclesiastical system in Scotland. Again we are forced to ask: how on earth was Mr. Branham carrying out his research? What we have is a prominent fourth century Catholic monk assigned as the messenger to the Thyaterian 'Church Age. I leave the judgment to you. These three messengers are not the only problematic ones, the reader is free to investigate the other messengers on Branhams church ages pyramid to see how problematic the church ages doctrine is they taught doctrines that totally contradicted Pauls teachings and agreed with the Roman Catholic Church. Why on earth would Branham choose Catholic bishops as messengers? Harry Peyton raises an extremely important question that fatally shatters Branhams splendid creation. I pose the same question here. Why would Branham choose Catholic Trinitarian Bishops [and Priests] to be his Church Age Messengers, when God had renowned oneness preachers and movements in these ages like: Marcellus of Ancyra, Photinus, and many Noetians, Sabellians, oneness Montanists, Triscilidaes, Priscillians who baptized in Jesus Name and preached the same gospel as Paul? Think about that one. Its nothing new: he most likely copied the idea, again! You might think Branhams creation of the seven church ages was original, but true to his character, he most likely stole the idea from the founder of Jehovahs Witnesses! Charles Taze Russell, the founder, started developing the Jehovahs Witnesses doctrines about four decades before William Branham was born, around the year 1870. You want to call it a total coincidence that Mr. Branham also happened to 59

turn the churches into ages, assign messengers and set himself up as the seventh messenger many decades later, thats totally up to you. Charles Taze Russell took the seven churches of Asia Minor mentioned in the book of Revelation, turned them into ages and assigned messengers who he said were sent to those ages, demonstrated below: Charles Taze Russells (1876) Seven Church Ages and Messengers 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. EPHESIAN CHURCH AGE (up to A.D. 73) - Messenger: Saint Paul SMYRNEAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 73 to A.D. 325) - Messenger: Saint John PERGAMEAN CHURCH AGE (AD 325 to A.D. 1160) - Messenger: Arius THYATERIAN CHURCH AGE (A.D 1160 to A.D. 1378) - Messenger: Peter Waldo SARDISEAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 1378 to A.D. 1518) - Messenger: John Wycliffe PHILADELPHIAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 1518 to A.D. 1874) - Messenger: Martin Luther LAODICEAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 1874 - 1918) - Messenger: Charles Taze Russell

Several decades later: William Branhams (1964) Seven Church Ages and Messengers 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. EPHESIAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 53 to A.D. 170) - Messenger: Saint Paul SMYRNEAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 170 to A.D. 312) - Messenger: Saint Irenaeus PERGAMEAN CHURCH AGE (AD 312 to A.D. 606) - Messenger: Saint Martin THYATERIAN CHURCH AGE (A.D 606 to A.D. 1520) - Messenger: Saint Columba SARDISEAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 1520 to A.D. 1750) - Messenger: Martin Luther PHILADELPHIAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 1750 to A.D. 1906) - Messenger: John Wesley LAODICEAN CHURCH AGE (A.D. 1906 - Rapture) - Messenger: William Branham

To the objective reader, William Branhams Message can now be seen for what it truly is: a problematic creation. It gets increasingly painful when you think about the millions of people who still think Branhams Message was directly downloaded from heaven.

60

Chapter 5: The Very Fallible Prophet

What is this modern Babylon that we're trying to build a machine to take us to the moon? You'll never make it. William Branham

61

When you get into a conversation about the message with Message Believers, they often resort to the statement that everything the prophet said was accurate, since it was directly obtained from God. For this reason, when they come across a clear discrepancy between what the Bible says and what Branham said, they will go with what the prophet said since they deem Branham as supreme interpreter of scripture for this age; in other words, he had power to override scripture and come up with a new interpretation since he gets his material directly from God. He exercises this power for instance when he interprets verses from Genesis into a totally new meaning: that Eve was involved in sexual intercourse with a snake. William Branham tells us that he used to receive his material directly from heaven:
Angel of God, You Who came into the room that night, and told me these things... I've tried to live true to it. (EXPERIENCES.3_ PHOENIX.AZ SUNDAY_ 47-1221) Now, you--you--you believe in God, don't you? Now, you have believed in God, you believe in me, that that Angel of God came down and told me that. (ANGEL.OF.GOD_ PHOENIX.AZ THURSDAY_ 48-0304) Now, that come through the "Reader's Digest." You see? And Mayo Brothers called me in on an interview for that. Said, "Reverend Branham, what did you do to the baby?" I said, "Nothing, I never touched it. I only told what God told me to tell it. The man obeyed it."(DEMONOLOGY.2.RELIGIOUS_ CONNERSVILLE.IN DE 41-78 TUESDAY_ 53-0609)

It is therefore not surprising that Believers will take what Branham had to say as the literal truth even when it is in direct contradiction with the Bible they claim to believe in after all, he was downloading the material directly from a heavenly server. This very belief is the cornerstone of Branhamism: that what the prophet preached was directly inspired of the Lord and he therefore should be taken at his word. For this very reason Believers read message books far more than they read the Bible itself. This is not a debate on whether doing this is right or wrong; it is a reminder that if you are a Message Believer, you hold everything he said to be the absolute truth. If something is not true, it only follows that it is false: there are no two ways about it. This chapter will definitely be very discouraging to the lifelong Believer who has never taken the initiative to investigate everything the prophet said, since what youre about to go through is a demonstration of pure falsehoods and statements totally lacking even tiny bits of truth. Normally when these things become apparent to the average Believer, the common reactions would be to invoke the beliefs that the canal mind in incapable of fully understanding spiritual matters, We will understand it by and by and you should not subject Gods matters to reasoning. Its important for the reader at this point not to forget the powers of cognitive dissonance that were discussed in the second chapter of this book, A Little Thought Into the Matter. But guess what, I kind of agree with you on the last one: If you tell me that the capital city of USA is Paris, need I invoke any hard reasoning to figure out that its not true? Some things the prophet said were outright falsehoods; you do not need any hard reasoning to figure out the lies. In multiple instances Branham tells the-capital-city-of-USA-is-Paris kind of lies and Believers totally swallow them. 62

Stop nitpicking? Cmon! If I am beginning to convince you, maybe I should give you a little foresight into what Message Believers will reply back after you start showing them the absurdities that the prophet used to tell people from the pulpit. Its their favorite word: nit-picking. In summary, they claim that non- and ex-Message Believers go through the sermons and when they find an error, they use it to attack the prophet. This, they say, is unfair since the prophet was human. One of them says: Give me 1100 plus messages of the critic and see if I can[t] catch a mis-quote here and there. No one is perfect, in fact Brother Branham's simple mistakes such as these simply show that he is human. How convenient. When Branhamite pastors for instance dont like something thats being done by folks, they also go through the message, pick a quote that says you shouldnt do so and then proclaim that the prophet said so, and that settles it. It is generally known - Message Believers take every spoken word as Gods voice except of course, when hes proven false. Again, how convenient. When Branham is caught in a lie, were quick to point out that he was human. When Branham is saying any other thing, were quick to point out that everything he said was given to him by the Holy Spirit. Well have to make a choice here because we cant have it both ways. Consider the following quote:
Here not long ago there was a man in a certain meeting just didn't believe in my teaching on the Bible. And he goes to a meeting, a certain fellow did, and not knowing that I'd know about it, 'cause he's no more than saying it, and I seen it in a vision in my hotel room. I don't see how some people can do that, and come up, and say these things, when you know you know better. See? So he said, "Now, Brother Branham is a prophet of the Lord," he said, "but don't listen to his teaching, because he's wrong." The same Holy Spirit that preached the service tonight, the same Holy Spirit preaches all these things is the same Holy Spirit that discerns the thoughts of the heart. Certainly. (QUEEN.OF.THE.SOUTH_ SHREVEPORT.LA SUNDAY_ 60-1127E)

The prophet says here that the Holy Spirit preached the service that night. Thats why Branhamite pastors use quotes such as this to enforce each and every instruction that Brother Branham gave to the church. And this is why we also will use quotes such as this to scrutinize everything the prophet said. And something else - when he repeats an absurdity many times over, the nit-picking argument bites the dust. Now remember all that when someone accuses you of nit-picking. After you read this chapter, it will fall on you whether to continue embracing a dishonest man as your prophet or to declare that you deserve better.
And you be sure to say just what the tape says. Don't say nothing else (See?), 'cause... I don't say that of my own. It's Him that says it. (GOD.IN.SIMPLICITY_ JEFF.IN SUNDAY_ 63-0317M)

With the above statement, Mr. Branham has given us the justification to scrutinize each and every word in the tapes. Carefully note that he says that it was God who was speaking through his mouth. Therefore if Branham tells a lie, we may safely conclude that God is a liar. If we are not willing to accept that God is

63

a liar, then were going to have to conclude that the liar is Branham. We cant have it both ways after this. Which way will you go? The world will end in 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. William Branham (LAODICEAN.CHURCH.AGE - CHURCH.AGE.BOOK CPT.9)

A common argument usually raised to justify this failed prophecy is that Branham, by saying I predict, I do not prophesy, meant that this was his personal opinion, not from God. This is easily debunked by the same quote above where he invokes God and says that his prediction had divine inspiration. Therefore Branhams statement that I do not prophesy, is useless in this context. William Branham predicted with divine inspiration that the world would end in 1977. In short he told us that God told him that the world would end in 1977. It didnt happen. So here we have two possibilities: It was indeed true that God told Branham that the world would end in 1977. Given that it didnt, God lied to us. The other possibility is that God did not tell Branham that the world would end in 1977. Branham lied to us. Why dont I leave you now so that you can make the choice? Remember its either one or the other. Well never make it to the moon The man who is Gods voice for the age, William Branham, declared that man would never make it to the moon:
What's the meaning of these sputniks in the skies? What's the matter? What is this modern Babylon that we're trying to build a machine to take us to the moon? You'll never make it. (HANDWRITING.ON.THE.WALL_ JEFF.IN SUNDAY_ 58-0309M) Oh, now they're all wanting to make a whole lot of these astronaut cans so they can get into it. And the--the atomic age comes, they're going to bust up the world; they just pull this and all go over on the moon, taking a trip to the moon, and have it all over with, and so they'll just make them another economy on the moon. They ain't going to get there. I don't believe, with all my heart, they'll ever get there. See? (COUNTDOWN_ JEFF.IN V-11 N-3 SUNDAY_ 62-0909M) And I tell you now, it's a program that'll take you a hundred billion, billion, million light years beyond the moon. That's right. And there if you go to the moon you couldn't set down because see, you'd jump right back up unless you had some magnet to hold you there. You couldn't stay overnight; you'd freeze to death. In the daytime you'd burn up. What you going to do when you get there? (BASIS.OF.FELLOWSHIP_ LONG.BEACH.CA TUESDAY_ 61-0214)

64

On 20th July 1969, several years after Branhams death, Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin landed on the moon. Man kept trying and eventually managed to a build a machine that took him to the moon, her name was Eagle and this was accomplished during NASAs Apollo 11 mission. In total, 24 American astronauts have travelled to the moon. Half of them have walked on its surface. Recall the quote presented earlier in which Branham says: And you be sure to say just what the tape says. Don't say nothing else (See?), 'cause... I don't say that of my own. It's Him that says it. Here we see the tape saying that well never make it to the moon. God told us that well never make it to the moon. But we did. Therefore God lied to us. If you do not agree with that, then start demanding better from Branham; declare today that youll not continue believing his lies. Los Angeles will sink into the ocean before Billy is old William Branham and his son Billy Paul were standing somewhere in downtown Los Angeles when the prophet told him:
Billy, I may not be here but you won't be an old man until sharks will swim right where we are standing"

You may confirm this by reading Acts of the Prophet by Pearry Green. Billy was born on September 13, 1935. As I write this, Billy is 75 years old - definitely in the over the hill category. Los Angeles may or may not sink (however absurd that notion is) into the ocean in the future, but what we do know for sure is that the above prophecy has failed. The Bible says that Eve had sex with the serpent Lets shift our discussion for a moment and talk about the forbidden fruit. Although the discussion on the serpent seed will also be mentioned in sections to come, I find it fitting that the fact that Branham said that Eve had sex with a snake should be included under The Very Fallible Prophet. The prophet tells us that the Bible was telling us in a hidden manner that Eve had sex with the snake. Lets consider it for a moment. The serpents seed doctrine is probably the most superior example that exposes Branham as an extremely bold liar. He tells us:
Ain't a woman a fruit tree? Aren't you the fruit of your mother? That was the fruit that was forbidden to be taken. What did he do? *The serpent+ He begin making love to Eve. And he lived with her as a husband. And she saw it was pleasant, so she went and told her husband; but she was already pregnant by Satan. And she brought forth her first son whose name was Cain, the son of Satan. "And I will put enmity between thy seed and the serpent's seed." What? The serpent's seed. She had a seed, and he had a seed. "And he shall bruise thy head, and you shall bruise his heel." A "bruise" there means "to make an atonement." And He said, "Who told you you was naked?" Then they begin to--in army fashion, passing the buck. Said, "Well, the woman You gave me done it. She was the one who persuaded me." And she

65

said, "The serpent give me an apple." All right, preacher, get next to yourself. She said, "The serpent beguiled me." Do you know what "beguile" means? Means "defiled." The...?... The devil never gave her an apple. "The serpent has beguiled me." (SERPENT'S.SEED_ JEFF.IN V-2 N-4 SUNDAY_ 58-0928E)

Lets break down Mr. Branhams assertions. He says that the Bible tells us symbolically that: 1. 2. 3. 4. The tree of knowledge of good and evil was the woman The fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil was sex When Eve was eating the fruit (sex), she lived with the serpent as a wife Eve had sex with the serpent; she became pregnant and bore Cain

Lets now turn our attention to what the Bible says about the forbidden fruit:
The LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the groundtrees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.. (Genesis 2:9) The woman said to the serpent, We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die. (Genesis 3:2) When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. (Genesis 3:6) After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life. (Genesis 3:24) Adam made love to 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. Later she gave birth to his brother Abel. (Genesis 4:1) NIV.

From the above verses we may break down the Bibles assertions: 1. The trees of life and knowledge of good and evil were grown off the ground 2. Both trees were grown in the middle of the garden 3. Their fruits were edible since Eve saw that the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil was good for food and she ate it. 4. When Eve was eating the fruit she was with her husband, as we see on 3:6. 5. A cherubim and a sword were placed to guard the way to the middle of the garden after they were thrown out. 6. 4:1 above makes it clear that Eve became pregnant by Adam and gave birth to Cain.

66

Now if Branhams assertions are correct - that the tree was the woman, the fruit was sex and that the snake impregnated Eve and she bore Cain, then the following statements should also be correct going by the Bibles assertion above: 1. 2. 3. 4. Eve was grown off the ground Eve was planted in the middle of the garden Sex is edible and good for food Adam watched as his wife had sex with the serpent after which he had sex with her (3:6 says she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her) 5. A cherubim and a sword were placed to guard the way to where Eve was planted (the middle of the garden) so that Adam and Eve may not gain access. The above statements are laughable, but they represent Branhams description of the state of affairs at the Garden of Eden. If the dose of satire has not yet convinced you, Harry A. Peyton observes the following: Eve could not have been the fruit of knowledge of good and evil as Branham claims since the tree of knowledge of good and evil was created and placed in the middle of the garden even before Eve was created. Also Eve could not have been the fruit of knowledge of good and evil as Branham claims, since: (Genesis 2:9) The LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground-trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Carefully note the words in bold. Eating the fruit could not have represented sex, since if it did, then this would imply that Adam was allowed to have sex with everyone except Eve (2:16-17): And the LORD God commanded the man, You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die. Also the tree and eating the fruit could not have represented a woman and sex, since if they did, then this would imply that Eve was allowed to have sex with all women except herself, making her a lesbian. The second chapter of Josephuss book gives an account of the children of Adam and Eve as was believed by the Hebrews since ancient times: Adam and Eve had two sons: the elder of them was named Cain; which name, when it is interpreted, signifies a possession: the younger was Abel, which signifies sorrow. They had also daughters.

The angel of the Lord appeared to me when Israel was declared a nation on May 6/7 1946 William Branham now goes beyond telling lies that are a bit technical to debunk to telling lies that are blatant and contradictory to widely known facts. Examine these four quotes:

67

The very day that Israel was declared a nation again for the first time for twenty-five hundred years, that same night the Angel of the Lord sent me out to pray for the sick, the very same time, May the 6th, 1946, the Lord Jesus did that. (MANIFESTATION.OF.THY.RESURRECTION_ LA.CA MONDAY_ 54-0809E) The very hour, by the Pan American chart, that Israel was declared a nation for the first time for two thousand years since they'd been scattered, not a people, it was that very same hour, exactly to the hour, that the Angel of the Lord met me up yonder and sent me to the--with the Gospel-the very same thing: May the 7th, 1946. (GABRIEL'S.INSTRUCT.TO.DANIEL_ JEFF.IN DA 1-44 SUNDAY_ 61-0730M) And a strange thing of that, that you might not know, the very day the Angel of the Lord called me out, May the 6th, 1947, and issued the gift to pray for the sick, was the very same day that Israel become a nation for the first time for twenty-five hundred years. Oh, I believe there's something in it. I just can't keep from believing that we're near the end of time. That's right. (GREAT.COMING.REVIVAL_ CHICAGO.IL SUNDAY_ 54-0718A) And last week, you know what taken place in Israel, the last sign. Israel became a nation in 1947 on the same night the Angel of the Lord visit me. When It came at me at twelve o'clock, it was noon when they signed the--that peace pact with the world and the League of Nations and so forth, overseas. (WHO.IS.THIS_ CLARKSVILLE.IN SUNDAY_ 59-1004M)

Israel declared its independence on 14th May 1948, and the day is celebrated as the national holiday Yom Ha'atzmaut. The human error rebuttal that may be offered against this lie is easily refuted by showing that he said this over several sermons, years apart. Like we noted in previous chapters, no one ever possessed the ability to rewrite history, not even Mr. Branham. He may have managed to convince people back then, but people in the information age have exceptional abilities to cross check every piece of information that comes their way. The lowest form of life is the frog When you present Message Believers with the huge scientific fallacies presented to us by the prophet, the obvious reply you get is that Branham had little education. Yet they trust the same man in all other instances in which he gives explanations for things science is yet to uncover, such as the Unidentified Flying Objects (if they exist at all) which Branham says are Angels (Last time I checked though, angelic beings described in the Bible never required flying vessels to travel.) If we cannot trust him to talk about things that science has established for sure, how can we trust him to explain the huge scientific topics he delves into during his sermons such as Biology and Astronomy? Branham was playing way out of his league but we would expect him to be accurate anyway, since he was getting his material directly from God. Sample these quotes, for instance:
Now, watch. What's the lowest form of life we have? Frog. What's the highest form of life? Human. Certainly. And what is the highest form? It just kept coming from the lowest on up, from a frog to this and to that, and to the bird, and to, oh, so forth, just higher forms of life, until it come to the highest form it could come, then it was made in the image of God. (WHY.ARE.WE.NOT.A.DENOMINATION?_ JEFF.IN V-11 N-7 SATURDAY_ 58-0927)

68

The highest... The lowest form of life that there is the frog. The highest form is the human being. God started at the bottom and made right up till He brought it plumb to His image. Brought it from the birds and the beasts and on up till He got to the image of God. (SERPENT'S.SEED_ JEFF.IN V-2 N-4 SUNDAY_ 58-0928E)

In actual fact, the frog, being an amphibian, belongs to one of the highest life forms. Indeed, the frog belongs to the same phylum as humans in the animal kingdom. The frog belongs to a higher life form than very many animals (80% of all animals) too many to list here; therefore I will just list the phyla in the animal kingdom that fall below the frogs phylum chordata: Phylum Echinodermata with members such as star fish, sea urchin, sea cucumber and the feather star; Phylum Mollusca with members such as slugs, snails, squids, mussels, clams and octopuses; Phylum Arthropoda - With nearly a million species (almost 80% of the animal kingdom); Phylum Annelida Segmented Worms; Phylum Nematoda Ascarids; Phylum Platyhelminthes Aschelminthes; Phylum Coelenterata Cridaria; Phylum Porifera Sponges; Phylum Protozoa microscopic creatures. We now know for a fact that the frog belongs to a higher life form than more than 80% of all animals on planet earth. If Mr. Branham was the voice of God in this age, does this mean that God does not know his own creation? I am inclined to believe that if God created the animals, then he does know that there are millions of species below the frog. And if God used to talk to Branham at the pulpit, he wouldve given him the correct material. So whos lying to us here God or Branham? Men have one less rib than women Branham continues his scientific blunders by telling us that since Eve was created from a rib that was taken out of Adam, women unto this day possess one more rib than women in their anatomy. I remember being a little Branhamite years ago when we would try and count our ribs and then ask the girls to go do the same for comparison after the Sunday School teacher told us that the prophet said that women possess one more rib than men. The teacher was referring to the following quote:
Did God make men and women, of Genesis 2:18-21? No. I--I... as--as you'll see here, 2:18-21 now, notice: And the LORD God said, It--It is not good that... man should be alone; I will make him an help mate for him. And out of the ground the LORD... formed every beast... and so forth. Now, God made Eve from Adam's side. The woman has one more rib today in the anatomy, the make-up than man does, because a rib was taken from Adam's body. Adam had already been made and was living, and was lonesome, and then God said, "It's not good that man should live alone." (QA.ON.GENESIS_ JEFF.IN COD WEDNESDAY_ 53-0729)

The very fallible prophet who said we should trust him on very complex matters couldnt use all his powers to know that both men and women have an equal number of ribs!

69

The earth is stationary The prophet of the age is now willing to go against things we can see and hear and tell us they dont exist. What Branham says below is indistinguishable from telling me that airplanes dont have to fly to get from New York to London they can do it while stationary.
And how do you know which way you're going? I believe the hour will come when they'll actually find out that the world don't even run. I believe that with all my heart. I don't believe--how much they scientifically prove it or anything more. They done a lot of scientific proving they had to take back. See? God said the world stopped... The sun... I mean the sun stopped instead of the world (See?), the sun. I actually don't believe the sun... I--I--I don't believe the sun does what they say it does. I know the moon travels, and I believe the--the sun runs also. See? But some of them say, "He looked at the ignorance of Joshua (See?)," and said "He stopped the..." said, "It was..." Well, he said, "He stopped the world." (QUESTIONS.AND.ANSWERS_ JEFF.IN COD THURSDAY_ 61-0112)

The earth rotates on its own axis and revolves around the sun on an elliptical orbit. Refuting the rotation of the earth is refuting the existence of night and day; and refuting the revolution of the earth amounts to a refutation of the existence of different seasons. Mr. Branham above says that the Bible refutes the earths movements. But we do know for sure that the earth moves so whos lying Branham or the Bible? My guess is that its Branham. Whats yours? Youre made up of light At this point I am beginning to wonder whether I should have named this chapter the Theater of the Absurd because Mr. Branham apparently used to tell us very bizarre and illogical things. Now it looks like were made up of light:
The Bible said, "Your whole body's full of light meters?" Did you know that? Your body's full of light. Science said, "Well, that's crazy." But they prove it. The x-ray don't use artificial light; it uses

70

your lights. The x-ray is the lights that's in--light meters that's in your own body. You're not made up... But you're made up of petroleum, and cosmic light, and atoms, and so forth. That's all you are, just put together. And you dwell in that, in that body of flesh. Someday, they'll be brought-broke up. (INTER.VEIL_ STURGIS.MI SATURDAY_ 56-0121) And we find out today that your body is made up of light meters. X-ray proves it; it takes your own light from your body to take the picture on the inside of you, so God's right after all. (FAITH.IN.ACTION_ CHICAGO.IL MONDAY_ 55-1003) Now, when we were made, if--when we were made. And they just found out, recently, that your body is full of light. X-ray proves that. The x-ray does not have any light of its own. It's your light that it uses. You're born with four rays. After a little while, say twenty, twenty-five, one ray goes out; and thirty-five, another; or forty, another one goes out; and finally when you get pass about sixty-five, you're living on your last ray. And every time you take a x-ray picture, you're tearing them rays down. That's the reason you don't have no more... and you stick these kids' feet in them machines, because it was just tearing the rays right out of their little bodies. And that's cosmic light that's in you, that you're made up, full of light cells. Now, that's cosmic light. (UNCERTAIN.SOUND_ JEFF.IN V-16 N-3 SUNDAY_ 60-1218)

Mr. Branham in the above quotes says that were made up of light; and that the X-ray machine uses our own light. Will anyone blame us if we call this an outright lie? First and foremost, were not made up of light. We can safely say that solids and liquids are not made up of light (do we really even have to offer a defense against this?) Scientists are still debating the particulate nature of light. Light travels at about 186,000 miles per second and maybe Branham should have considered this before he said he was made up of light yet he was stationary on the pulpit while saying so. Secondly, how on earth would an X-ray machine use your own light? This is just absurd. X-rays are a type of energy similar to normal light only that they have a shorter wavelength. This shorter wavelength enables them to penetrate some objects that normal light cannot. Its this property thats usually exploited to come up with an X-ray film: X-rays are first produced by bombarding a hard metallic surface with an electron beam. The rays are then directed towards your body. They penetrate the body tissue but are blocked (absorbed) by the bones, hence the bones appear on the negative film as the areas that were not struck by the X-rays. If we cannot trust Mr. Branham to talk to us about things that are known and obvious, why should we trust him to talk to us about any other thing?

71

The halo of light photograph bears out my teachings to be spot on

William Branham had strange ways of showing people that his message was true. Be it mystic clouds or uncanny lights, his main point was that the paranormal events surrounding his life established that his was a true message from God. Even setting aside the fact that the Bible the Message Believers claim to believe in says that evil and deceitful teachers with powers to perform miracles would walk the earth, the supernatural events Branham clings to are ridiculous to say the least and problematic at best. The halo of light photograph displayed above is the one single image I have laid my eyes on the most during my entire life. It hangs in almost all the Message Believers living rooms I visited as a child and as an adult. It is also displayed in most of the Message churches youll visit. Back when I was a Message Believer, I used to reference this photo as supernatural endorsement of Brother Branham and his message when introducing people to the message. We would not be asking too much of Believers if we requested them to consider abandoning the Message if this photo was relegated to the highly suspect category they virtually worship this photograph.
And that discussion down there with this Baptist minister who taken the opposite side, that Christ wasn't a Healer now. And then, the Lord came before thirty thousand people that night, and put it... He had His picture the Light that gives the discernment, that showed that it was true. And George J. Lacy, the head of the FBI, of finger print and documents took from California and came to the Shell building in there and examined the picture, and said, "Mr. Branham, I've been your critic, and I said it was psychology." But said, "The mechanical eye of this camera won't take psychology. The light struck the lens." And so, you have the picture now. And one of them's in Washington, D.C., in the religious Hall of Art, with a note under it, "The only supernatural being was ever photographed in the history of the world." And now, then if you're ever through there, stop in and see it. (SHOW.US.THE.FATHER_ TUCSON.AZ THURSDAY_ 63-0606)

In this and many other quotes, Mr. Branham claims that first and foremost, the photograph was examined not only by the FBI but by its chief, George Lacy. Secondly, that the photograph was flown that very same night it was taken to Washington D.C. (tape number 53-1129E) and that the photograph 72

was displayed in Washington D.C. Religious Hall of Art. He then says that the light on the photograph was subsequently declared the only supernatural entity ever photographed, therefore being the foremost proof for the existence of a supernatural world. Discuss this photograph with a Message Believer and they will never fail to point out to you that the photograph was examined by the FBI and proven supernatural, and that its now displayed in Washington D.C. Hall of Religious Art and is universally acclaimed as the only supernatural entity ever photographed. True to his character, William Branham made minced meat out of his audiences intelligence again in all the instances he talked about this photograph. First and foremost, there never existed a Religious Hall of Art in Washington D.C. then and there still is not such a hall today- go ahead and do your research. This was a blatant fabrication by Branham. In fact there isnt any notable special display in Washington D.C. which has the photograph- except of course, Message Believers churches and homes. The second deception was the one about George Lacy. There has never been an FBI chief named George Lacy. Or even George for that matter. George Lacy was a freelance examiner of questioned documents who used to work off Texas, and he only examined the photograph because Branhams lieutenant, Gordon Lindsay, hired and paid George a hefty sum of money for his services (tape number 50-0714) a clear case of a paid witness. And here comes the big one (drum roll please) George Lacy never declared that the light above Branhams head was of supernatural origin, and no notable objective authority has ever claimed that the photograph was the only supernatural being ever photographed. After Gordon Lindsay had the photograph examined, George Lacy came up with the following report:

73

74

After reading Lacys report, its easy to see that weve been lied to over the years. In which part of the report does Lacy declare the light supernatural? This was a blatant falsification by Branham and his lieutenants! Lacy confirms that there wasnt any retouching of the film or chemical reaction on the negative and also rules out a composite or double exposed negative. In short, Lacy confirmed that the light struck the negative -period. For an image to be impressed upon a negative, light has to strike the negative. When the capture button of a film camera is pressed, a negative image is formed on the film when its struck by light. In short, what Lacy concluded is that the photograph was a normal one. Message Believers will have you think that the halo of light photograph was special since it was proven that the light struck the negative. The truth of the matter is that this is the normal scenario images are impressed upon a negative by allowing light to strike it. This is the normal method of taking a photograph using a film camera. 75

Having established that George Lacy confirmed that the photograph was a normal one, we obviously come to the conclusion that the photograph simply captured a source of light within the Houston Coliseum. The photographed light could have been as a result of a myriad of things including an unexplainable (supernatural) source, although the evidence for this is almost nonexistent. If something cannot be explained, this does not necessarily imply that it is supernatural. It simply means that we do not have enough information about it. We simply do not know which source of light at the Houston Coliseum caused the halo appearance over his head. Youre healed It is irrefutably clear that Branham dazzled hundreds of thousands of people with his signs and wonders. Indeed, many people believe in the message because of the supernatural events surrounding the prophets entire life. Were not here to declare that all his miracles were fake, but when his success rate is shown to be way below a hundred per cent, we have no option but to put his miracles under the highly suspect category. If you go through books such as A Man Sent from God, A Prophet Visits South Africa and the Supernatural series, youll come across stories about amazing signs and wonders that the prophet performed. Questioning the veracity of each and every one of these wonders is not our business at this point. However, if Branham claims to derive his healing powers from Jesus Christ, we would expect him to have a similar success rate to him. When we go through the gospels to investigate Jesus Christs healing success rate, we find that it was one hundred per cent. Nowhere in the Bible do we find Jesus proclaiming healing upon a person - who shortly after, dies of the very same condition he was supposedly freed from. This cannot be said of Mr. Branham. It looks like weve been reading books about his signs and wonders but mostly those written by people who believed and wanted to believe in Branhams doctrines. What about the people who were left behind after the crusades? What about the people he allegedly healed? Did anyone go visiting after sometime to get their story and see how they were doing? What follows is a personal testimony from Alfred Pohl, who was Branhams assistant during a crusade at Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in Canada. To the objective reader, the following material might be the final blow to your belief in Mr. Branham. This is an interview Alfred Pohl had with the editor of O Timothy magazine, February 21, 1990:

O Timothy: Now, did many claim to be healed, or did it seem that many were healed in the meeting? Pohl: In the meetings? Ah, yes, there were those that claimed to be healed, and there were those people that thought they saw healings, or thought they saw miracles. But, when you were on the inside, you saw that some of those things that were supposed to be miracles, were not miracles at all. From the outside, you would think that something had really happened; but having been right close to Branham, and working right with him, I discovered that a lot of those supposed healings or miracles were really not miracles after all. O Timothy: Okay. As you took him through the dorm, he prayed for different individuals. What did he say 76

during those encounters with the individuals? Pohl: Well, one of the things he did was to take the hand of the person, and quite often I heard him say that the angel that gave him this gift told him that to identify certain diseases--and he would speak of cancer very much--there are vibrations that he felt on his hand that indicate that this person has cancer. So he would take the patients hand and hold it. He would say, Yes, the vibrations tell me that you have cancer. Then hed say something like this, Were going to pray for you, that the Lord will heal you. And he proceeded to do this. Then he went on, and when he was through praying, he would take that hand again or else he would hold the hand throughout the prayer, and he would say, The vibrations are gone. The cancer is dead. You are healed. And the person would rejoice, of course; so would I. I thoroughly believed in Branham, I thought he was Gods man and so forth, and we wanted to see people healed. So [supposedly] the cancer was dead, and we were happy about this. But then he had a little added statement there, and that was something like this, Now, just keep on trusting the Lord. Youre healed. Dont loose your faith in the Lord. Just keep your faith and trust the Lord, and youre healed. He said, Youre going to be sick for a while. Youre going to be quite sick for a few days. Quite often he referred to three days. Youre going to be very sick for three days. The people often asked, Well, what do you mean, Brother Branham? If Im healed, why should I be sick? He said, The cancer, the cancerous growth which is now dead inside your body has to be carried out by the blood stream. And its waste material; it has to be carried out; its poison material, and so youll be sick for quite awhile until that is carried away. But what happened then was this: that in the meantime the people wouldnt worry about it. Theyd say, Well, thats what Branham said would happen. Im healed. But this went on, till some of these people got sicker and sicker and died. So he had an out. By this time he was gone [from that place]. O Timothy: Right. So there were many that he proclaimed healed? Pohl: Yes, yes. Practically every one as I recall, standing beside these various bedsides--practically everyone was pronounced healed. But the tragedy is that so many of those died after Branham was gone. So there was something wrong. He also said, Dont let your faith fail. In other words he emphasized that point. Dont let your faith fail. And his out was this, Im sure, that when they died, well, Their faith failed. It wasnt his faith, it was their faith. In other words, it was the patients faith, which I dont see that in Scripture. When the Lord healed people, they were healed. And there wasnt such a thing as Youll be 77

sick for five days, or three days, and so, dont lose your faith. I dont see that in Scripture. O Timothy: There was a newspaper that tried to investigate the healings. Can you tell me something about that? What were they able to confirm as far as healings? Pohl: Yes, in Winnipeg. Branham came to Canada at that time and he preached at a number of Apostolic churches in Canada. The first church was the church of our moderator in Winnipeg, who brought him into Canada. And Mr. Branham had his campaign there. Then he came later on to Saskatoon. 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 werent 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? Youre hurting the reputation of our church, and you shouldnt do that to us. And the editor said words something to this effect, Well, pastor, if the healings are genuine, you dont 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 theyre genuine, why worry? If theyre 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, Thats what we found. He said to the pastor, Ill tell you what Ill do, if you can bring me one genuine case of a genuine healing, Ill give you the front page. And I was told right in that pastors home that they couldnt find one. O Timothy: Not one? Pohl: Not one. O Timothy: I understand there was a radio pastor whose wife supposedly was healed, and also a man with four students in the college. Could you tell me about those two? Pohl: 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, 78

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. Hed flown his wife in from near Regina, and he said, Were here. We want Branham to pray for my wife. Shes 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, Ill meet you at the south door, and well put her in a room, and Ill 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 shes still going to be sick, though shes healed; shes going to feel pretty bad. So, they flew back as soon as they could. They wouldnt stay around. We didnt have the facilities to take care of sick people there. There was just a dormitory, and so they went back as soon as they could. About 10 to 14 days later, in that time frame, I was sitting in the office in the Bible school. Branham was gone; the meetings were over. The door opened to the main building, and I could hear footsteps, then a knock on the office door. In came this gentleman. Of course I recognized him immediately, but I saw that his face was very downcast; he was really under pressure and a heavy burden. So I invited him to sit down, and I said, Brother, I said, whats on your heart? And he said, Brother Pohl, you were standing beside my wife when she was sick in one of the rooms in the dorm. Mr. Branham prayed for her, and he pronounced her healed. I said, Yes, I was right there. He said, Tell me, how is it that my wife who was healed ten days ago (somewhere in that time frame), is now in the grave? He said, Tell me, how that can be? Well, it really hit him hard, and it hit me hard too, because thats the first I heard that she had died. We hadnt heard that she had died. So here he was all broken up and he wanted an explanation. What could I tell him? I think thats one of the hardest questions Ive ever had to answer in my life. Why is she dead, if she was healed? And I was witness. He couldnt figure this out, a very fine Christian, and I felt for him. To this day I dont know what I said, but I know we wept together and we prayed together. I could have said this: Brother, your faith failed, or your wifes faith failed. What help would I have been to him? I mean, thats a terrible thing to do. I wouldnt dare say that to him, to anyone. He was broken. He had enough to burden him down at this stage without saying, Your faith failed you. That was the wrong thing to say, so I didnt say it. I could have said that, because thats the feeling behind a lot of these cases. The healer will say, well Your faith failed, and its not my fault. But, I dont see that that is the case in Scripture either--where peoples faith failed, and they lost their healing after God healed, or the Lord healed them, or the Apostles healed them. So, its ridiculous. 79

Anyway, he left then, and of course we prayed for him, and so on. But it really was a difficult blow to this man and his family. Then the other party was--I recall so well--was a pastor from Port Arthur, Ontario, which is now called Thunderbay, Ontario. (They combined two cities, Port Arthur and Port William.] This man was a Pentecostal pastor, had a radio broadcast and, I understand, quite a sizable church. He flew his wife in and the nurse to Saskatoon which was quite a trip--quite costly. And again I had the phone call from the airport and placed them in a room there eventually in the dorm. And when the meeting was over, and the prayer line was over in the church, I brought Branham into the dorm and he prayed for this lady as well. He prayed also for the nurse. The nurse was deaf. He prayed for her healing, and claimed that she was healed. He also claimed that the pastors wife was healed of cancer. Well, there was great rejoicing. Let me tell you, we rejoiced together, because I thoroughly believed in Branham all this time, I thought he was just ... just it. He was Gods man. We rejoiced together, and then Branham left. And the husband (the pastor) said to me, Now, Brother Pohl, he said, Ive spent thousands of dollars to try to get help for my wife, on doctors, and this and that and the other, medicines. He said, I really cant afford it, but here-- and he wrote out a sizable check. He said, I cant afford it, but Branham is worth it. He said, My wife is healed. He took Branham at his word. See, it wasnt anything else; he just believed Branham. And here was this sizable check. He said, Give it to Branham. Which I did, the next day. Later on, about three, four weeks later, I left for Ontario. I was missionary secretary of our denomination, and I visited some of our churches in Ontario. And in the process of visiting our churches, I came to Port Arthur, Port William. We had a church in Port William, and one of the first things I did when I got to Port William was to ask the pastors, What about pastor so and so in Port Arthur? I named him. I said, Hows his wife doing? I said, She was healed in the meetings in Saskatoon. And I saw a strange look that came over their faces as I asked that question. And I thought in my heart, Oh, no, not another one. Just like the family I was telling you about in Saskatoon, from Regina. And I said in my heart, No, not another one. And they said, Havent you heard, havent you heard? Shes dead. She passed away. Well that was another blow to me, because I began to realize that something was wrong with this kind of healing. This was counterfeit; something was drastically wrong. Of all people, here was a pastor who loved the Lord and served the Lord, and, you know, why did this happen? Did his faith fail? Did his wifes faith fail? He had a whole church behind him. But no, she passed away. I was told that the worst thing was that this man (the pastor) had a very good radio broadcast in the area. He went on the air as soon as he got home, and he announced that they had been to Saskatoon to the Branham meetings and had wonderful meetings there, and there were many healings, and amongst them his wife was gloriously healed in those meetings. Im sure that many people rejoiced, were happy to hear that. But, it wasnt very long after that, a few days later, he had to get on the same radio station and mention the fact that his wife had passed away. 80

And I was told this gave his radio program a severe blow and setback, because the world at large--I mean they think too, theyre not stupid--here one day she was gloriously healed, and a few days later shes dead. You know, this doesnt add up. We had more of those cases--these are just two exceptional ones--but there were others that passed away. I stood beside bed after bed, person after person who was pronounced healed and yet, where were they? They passed away. So there was something very wrong with this type of healing.

These stories are heart breaking. And its sickening to know that some of these people used to pass on huge sums of money to Mr. Branham as a sign of gratitude. To read further about this, please consult Why I Left the Tongues Movement by Alfred H. Pohl. An excerpt:
I had to ask myself several questions: If these people were really healed, why did they die? Did their faith fail? Why then did so many fail in their faith and lose their healing? How did this line up with healings recorded in Scripture? Did people healed by Christ and the apostles lose their healing? Were they subject to relapse too if their faith failed? Or, could it be that these Branham healings were counterfeit and not genuine after all, much as we had believed him to be genuine? And, worst of all, was it possible that we had been victims of deception?

That was just the tip of the iceberg It would be extremely negligent for me to imply that the above list even comes close to representing the entire body of logical fallacies that were offered to us by William Branham. The truth is that those were just the ones that are perhaps most widely known and believed. The truth of the matter is that almost all of Branhams sermons contain absurdities that are irreconcilable with any form of reality. I began going through some message books and before I could even read a considerable portion of his recorded sermons, I had already accumulated the list presented below! Remember the tape numbers indicated in brackets mean that you can find that nonsense in that sermon. Newspapers reported that its been discovered that the world is square (65-0822M) Women perpetrate or participate in 98% of all US cities crimes (65-0221M) The USA has more divorce cases than the rest of the world (54-0509) A woman walks naked but a female dog doesnt (65-0221M) US government statistics show that 80% of babies born to smoking mothers die before theyre 18 months old (50-0813E) You cannot depend on science (56-0420) You can inject embryo cells from an unborn fetus into a human being, and the cells will grow into the respective organs (CHURCH.AGE.BOOK CPT.3) Anything that doesnt move is dead (60-0804) Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) are angels (65-0815) Five stars are going to fall together (62-0124) FBI files prove that motion pictures started Americas decline (56-0426) 81

Joseph Branham will be a prophet (60-0522E) If youre born out of wedlock, youll not make it for the rapture (64-0823E) Billy Graham is special because his name ends with ham like Abraham (64-0415) Woman was designed by Satan (65-0221M) Epilepsy is the medical term for a devil (50-0820E) The woman is the lowest of all animals on earth (65-0221M) Animals acquire the color of the soil they eat from (54-0103E) People will be picked up by UFOs when going up for the rapture (65-0822M) During the creation, plants grew from seeds from another civilization (63-0321) Satan is everywhere (59-1219) Satan set up his headquarters in Paris (54-0509) Satan moved his headquarters to Hollywood (54-0509) An unborn baby is not alive (64-0830M) The Bible said that Roosevelt would impose a three or four term dictatorship (54-0509) In South Africa during a meeting, a woman quickly gave birth with no help, spanked the baby, started nursing him and continued listening to the sermon (58-0617) Once someone gains an objective outlook towards Branham and his message, not one absurdity passes their eyes unnoticed. This, however, is not the case with Message Believers. People continuing to believe every word no matter how absurd it might be is a phenomenon that falls outside rational thought and behavior. But what is clear for all to see is that William Branham was very far from being supreme conveyor of accurate heavenly messages. If you believe in an infallible God, how can you believe that he can tell us such nonsense as is quoted above?

82

Chapter 6: The dark side of the Message

My best friend is in this cult and I truly think she is miserable but she cant say anything because of her controlling husband. Sad. blogger

83

The cruelest variety of misogyny After I decided to do some further reading on the Message after I was no longer involved with it, I read more message books than I had ever read before. This was because I wanted to form an unbiased conclusion on the veracity of Branhams self declared supremacy as Gods only messenger for our age. I had never read the message book Marriage and Divorce in its entirety before; I had only read portions of it and listened to the rest expounded upon from the pulpit. Once I read the message book, it became the first time in my life that my eyes welled up after going through a book. I have read of how women have been mistreated and hated upon in the past, but never had I come across the level of verbal hatred towards women that I found in that book. I acknowledge that I promised a logical and not an emotional refutation, but I have to tell you after I read that offensive literature, I said a silent prayer and expressed my appreciation that I was no longer a Message Believer. The person I love the most in this world happens to be a woman. Thats my mother - shes my hero. Weve been through mountains and valleys with her; weve shared sunshine and roses together and the thorns as well. Even when I decided to quit the message, her love for me and my company was not affected one bit; were still as close as mother and son can be. Hows that for a parenting lesson to all the Message Believers out there who almost disown their children for abandoning the faith. My sister then happens to be one of the most adorable, upright women to ever walk the earth. I love her with all my heart. This is why I couldnt stand the garbage that Branham spoke against women in that sermon, Marriage and Divorce, that was supposedly revealed to him by God as the last day messenger. This message book served as my final confirmation that I had done the right thing by walking away from the Message. Women have been historically oppressed in horrendous ways. And in many parts of the world including where I came from, they still are mistreated just because they fell on the wrong side of the chromosome combination. Whether youre talking about the Muslim world where they still have to cover themselves up fully save for the eyes, in Africa where they endure horrifyingly painful female genital mutilation, carry out most of the homestead chores and endure atrocious domestic violence, in India where they have honor killings of women who disgraced their families by falling in love outside their caste or in the USA where suffrage was granted fairly recently the Message is no exception when it comes to verbally abusing and physically mistreating women. William Branham says that women are inferior because Eve was deceived in the Garden of Eden, while Adam wasnt. What a weight of claptrap that because one woman erred very many ages ago, all women should henceforth be treated as garbage. Irenaeus, Branhams chosen messenger for the Smyrnean church age, opened my eyes to the fact that actually, in the Garden of Eden story, the woman demonstrated greater will, strength and stringency to God-given instructions than Adam did. He says:
And if thou sayest that it [the serpent] attacked her as being the weaker of the two, [I reply that], on the contrary, she was the stronger, since she appears to have been the helper of the man in the transgression of the commandment. For she did by herself alone resist the serpent, and it was after holding out for a while and making opposition that she ate of the tree, being circumvented by craft; whereas Adam, making no fight whatever, nor refusal, partook of the fruit

84

handed to him by the woman, which is an indication of the utmost imbecility and effeminacy of mind. And the woman indeed, having been vanquished in the contest by a demon, is deserving of pardon; but Adam shall deserve none, for he was worsted by a woman,--he who, in his own person, had received the command from God. (FRAGMENTS FROM THE LOST WRITINGS OF IRENAEUS, XVI)

Therefore the argument that woman should be treated badly because she blundered at the Garden of Eden fails to make sense. There are numerous other biblical verses that chauvinists use to support their appalling opinions about women and we would tackle each and every one of them if our scope allowed us to. But this section deals with Mr. Branhams opinions about women so well painfully restrict ourselves to this topic. Lets go back to the beginning: Mr. Branham seems to know something the Bible doesnt about where ladies came from.
And Satan is really working on her today (in these last days), because he is her designer. I could prove that now, to go right back at the beginning. Who started to work on her, Adam or Satan? God or Satan? See? That's her designer. It's her chief weapon to throw men to her filth. You may question me about Satan being her designer, but that's the truth. Satan designed her. He still does it. (MARRIAGE.AND.DIVORCE_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-13 SUNDAY_ 65-0221M)

The Bible, the holy text that Message Believers claim to believe in, clearly says: Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. Here we have a clear contradiction between the Bible and what Mr. Branham teaches. When you bring this verse to the attention of the Message Believer, you can be sure theyll point you to the fact that designing is different from making. In short, theyll imply that God contracted the devil to design the woman and then used that blueprint when making the woman, even though this is not mentioned anywhere in the Bible they claim to base their beliefs on. Some neutral Christians would consider this proposition of collaboration between the devil and God in the making of the woman to be extremely blasphemous, but of course according to many Message Believers, Mr. Branham possessed powers to add to what the scriptures said. William Branham also has an opinion about the mental aptitude of women. He basically says that they are the most deceivable beings on earth. (Even among animals as we shall see shortly).
There cannot be nothing else; there's nothing made to be that way. Also there is nothing that could be so easily deceived as a woman. Now, the fall proves this statement to be true, the fall in the beginning. (MARRIAGE.AND.DIVORCE_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-13 SUNDAY_ 65-0221M)

Really? Theres nothing that is as easily deceivable as a woman? I beg to come against this statement in the strongest terms possible. Women are not idiots. Women have now taken advantage of the equal opportunities being increasingly offered to them by society to do amazing things. We now have women in the highest areas of life: presidents, Nobel laureates, astronauts, nuclear scientists, Supreme Court judges any particular field has female top performers. This goes to show that women are not any less 85

intelligent than men. We can put this question into an experimentation procedure. If anyone thinks that women are the easiest thing to deceive, let them try to successfully deceive a female police officer, or a female magistrate and then well visit them in jail to make conclusions on the deceivability of women. According to this prophet, a woman is the filthiest among all female animals ever created, because all other female animals are original creatures but she isnt. In short, Branham is of the opinion that our grandmothers, mothers, sisters, daughters and wives/girlfriends belong to the filthiest group of animals on earth they are women, after all. He says that women are more immoral than dogs. Dogs will attack and inflict deadly injuries on people, eat human corpses and mate with every other dog but they allegedly still possess higher morals than women. He further says that women can stoop lower than a hog (a pig), dog or any other animal:
Notice, there's nothing designed to stoop so low or be filthy but a woman. A dog can't do it; a hog can't do it; a bird can't do it; no animal is immoral, nor it can be, for it is not designed so it can be. A female hog can't be immoral; a female dog can't be immoral; a female bird can't be immoral. A woman is the only thing can do it. There is no hog, no dog, or no other animal designed like her or can stoop as low as she can stoop. Now, that is true. With regards to my sisters, I just want you to watch. No animal can be immoral. You call the dog a slut (the female dog). You call the male--hog a sow, but her morals is a million miles beyond many a Hollywood stars. That's how low she's designed to stoop. She can't... Just think of this now: there's nothing in the world made in God's creation that can be immoral, stoop that low. (MARRIAGE.AND.DIVORCE_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-13 SUNDAY_ 65-0221M)

Branham further says that unlike any other animal, women are designed for filth and unclean living. This, he says is because women will have sex for pleasure and will have it any time, but animals mate only for procreation. William Branham portrays women as thick, filthy and as being creatures that are always ready for sex.
She is designed alone for filth and unclean living. A dog can't; no other female can. It's just the woman that can. A dog or any other animals: once a year, and that for her babies, not for sexual pleasure, but for her babies. The old sow hog, the old slut dog: once a year, one moment; that's for her babies. But a woman is designed for any time she desires. (I've got some stuff crossed out here now; you can imagine the rest.) A dog can't; woman can. (I hope that the Holy Spirit reveals to you the rest of this I crossed out here.) (MARRIAGE.AND.DIVORCE_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-13 SUNDAY_ 650221M)

The seventh messenger also has something to say about immoral women. Although the last time I checked Christians are told not to be judgmental, and that no sin is greater than the other in the eyes of God, Branham says that a woman who lacks morals is a human garbage can:
An immoral woman is the lowest thing that can be thought of in the earth. Excuse this, young ladies. She's nothing but a human garbage can, a "sex exposal." That's all she is. A immoral woman is a human sexual garbage can, a pollution where filthy, dirty, ornery, lowdown filth is

86

disposed by her. Why's she made this way for? For deception. Every sin that ever was on the earth was caused by a woman. (MARRIAGE.AND.DIVORCE_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-13 SUNDAY_ 65-0221M)

In the animal kingdom, we have a huge variety of organisms. There are deadly parasites, snails, slugs, snakes and monkeys just to name a few. But among all these, the woman is the lowest of them all. She falls at the bottom of the pack at least according to Mr. Branham.
All right. When in God's sight, the Word, she is the lowest of all animals that God put on the earth... Watch. (MARRIAGE.AND.DIVORCE_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-13 SUNDAY_ 65-0221M)

It is bizarre to say the least for Branham to paint such a terrible picture of women in comparison to their male counterparts, and sadly, animals. First of all we unfortunately need to remind ourselves here that women are human beings. William Branham will have you believe that a woman is lower than an animal, but that only demonstrates serious mental issues on the part of the speaker. Secondly, men desire sex in equal, and some would argue a higher measure, than women. I dont know why that fact doesnt make men lower than animals. It was God who designed some animals to exhibit increased sexual activity during some seasons its also that very same God who designed the woman to be responsive to certain sexual gestures directed to her by her male counterpart without checking the calendar. Were different from animals thats just the way were created. If Branham had an issue with the fact that women dont adhere to mating seasons like dogs, he should have raised that issue with God, who made the woman as she is he shouldnt have taken it out with our beloved sisters. Ironically, one may argue that men have historically demonstrated a greater ability to engage in horrendous atrocities compared to their female counterparts. If we were to come up with a list of the most evil people in history, obvious candidates would include the likes of Idi Amin Dada, Pol Pot, King Leopold II of Belgium, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin and so forth. The first woman to make it to the list would appear way down - at the bottom of the pack. In real fact, its the women who have been victims of cruel treatment from their male counterparts. Comparing women to animals and calling them filthy, immoral and lower than dogs is disgraceful and despicable. William Branham suffered from a strong hatred towards women. He says that his struggle with hatred towards women began in his youth:
But I can remember when my father's still up there running, I had to be out there with water and stuff, see young ladies that wasn't over seventeen, eighteen years old, up there with men my age now, drunk. And they'd have to sober them up and give them black coffee to get home to cook their husband's supper. Oh, something like that, I said, "I..." This was my remark then, "They're not worth a good clean bullet to kill them with it." That's right. And I hated women. That's right. And I just have to watch every move now, to keep from still thinking the same thing. (LIFE.STORY_ LA.CA FOOTPRINTS.BOOK SUNDAY_ 59-0419A)

It is now clear that he never dealt successfully with his hatred towards women, and this caused him to lead millions of people who call themselves Message Believers to consider women inferior beings. Lets now turn our attention to Branhams opinions about the role of women in society. Its important to note 87

right from the start that Branham was of the opinion that women should stay at home. They shouldnt go out to pursue careers and take jobs. To put it like he did, they should be behind the stove cooking. In other words, if a woman has a singing talent, she shouldnt go out and pursue a music career. If a woman can sprint like Usain Bolt, she shouldnt pursue an athletics career. Women should also avoid careers like law and medicine which require long hours of input from the individual. They should also avoid working at all especially since we have men out there without jobs - whose employment they might be precluding.
They've took our women and stripped them, out yonder in the offices, and the driving taxicabs, and up-and-down the street. where they ought to be at home behind the stove cooking, and fixing the dinners. (INVASION.OF.THE.USA_ JEFF.IN V-26 N-1 SUNDAY_ 54-0509) Now, I'm not much of this modernistic taste of women working. When I seen these women with these uniforms on riding around in this city on motorcycles as police, it's a disgrace to the--any city that'd let a woman do that as many men that's without work. It shows the modern thinking of our city; it shows the degrading. We don't have to have them women out there like that. They ain't got no business out there like that. When God gave a man a wife, He gave him the best thing He could give him outside of salvation; but when one goes to trying to take a man's place, then she's about the worse thing that he could get ahold of. (CHOOSING.OF.A.BRIDE_ LA.CA V-2 N-28 THURSDAY_ 65-0429E)

From the above quotes, the prophet says that the primary role of women is to be behind the stove cooking. In short, they should stay at home and serve their husbands. He also says that women shouldnt work - period. Therefore in summary, women are simply to be kept home by men as baby machines and house servants. Mr. Branham goes a step further in declaring the womans inferiority by saying that women do not contribute a seed of reproduction. He says that they only provide a medium for incubating the baby until its born (tape number 63-0323). This is despite the fact that we know that conception takes place through the fusion of a male sperm and a female ovum. Its a 50-50 contribution. I acknowledge this to be a fact because I took the color of my mother and not that of my father; and I took my dads nose and not my mothers! Because the woman is inferior, when she smokes a cigarette she apparently commits a greater evil than when a man smokes one. He says that smoking is the lowest immoralist thing that any woman ever done - what about other gruesome acts perpetrated by women? He goes one step further and declares that a cigarette smoking mother is the greatest fifth columnist America's got (tape number 50-0813E) what about smoking fathers? He further says that 80% of children born to these smoking mothers die before they are eighteen months old (tape number 50-0813E). Hows that statement for fabricated statistics. After they have found the love of their life, gotten married and are preparing to live happily ever after, wives may be put away on very flimsy grounds. William Branham said that husbands may put away their wives for cutting their hair (tape number 56-0805) and keeping their previous sexual encounters secret 88

(tape number 59-0628E). Good riddance to a prophet who thinks that I should put away my wife if she thinks shell look prettier if she has short hair. Speaking of looking pretty, Branham said that when he saw a woman with makeup on, she looked liked someone with leprosy or pellagra (tape number 621122). Although not all men are fans of makeup, thats some pretty rough speech especially because its coming from the pulpit. The prophet is also of the opinion that allowing women to vote is an evil thing (tape number 60-1113). Message Believers will take great offence if you call their religion a cult or a sect. They say they are different from the Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovahs Witnesses and the like. I remember one morning a Christian radio station was holding a discussion about the criteria for identifying a cult when someone called in and talked about a new cult he had heard about, the Message of the Hour. In response, a Message Believer called in and aggressively defended the Message, saying that they do not satisfy the common characteristics of a typical cult. I was proud of this gallant soldier for defending the truth I believed in against accusations of cultism. Now I am not sure anymore. After carrying out necessary investigations, its now clear that Branhamism is definitely a fully fledged Christian cult. The labeling and mistreatment of women confirms that Branhamism is indeed a cult. How can people continue to religiously follow a man who says that women are the thickest of all animals, the filthiest of all females, designed for unclean living, should be behind the stove, human garbage cans for not fulfilling their moral obligations, the lowest of all animals, creatures who have sex any time they want and who should serve as house laborers and be kicked out if they cut their hair or reveal previously secret sexual relations to their husbands? How can this baloney come from God? Mistreating women is a typical cult tendency. And Branhamism is no exception. Characteristically, women in the message wear skirts that almost sweep the floor, are not allowed wear earrings, makeup, pants or jewelry and they are not supposed to work. Branham made them believe that doing these things will cause them to end up in hell. Women are to stay silent and submissive to their husbands and are supposed to believe that they are inferior to their male counterparts, since its what the message teaches. During different times in history, it was believed that Black People, Jews, Women different kinds of people were inferior to the rest. We all now know that this was sheer hogwash. I believe that one day, itll not matter whether youre a man or a woman; human beings will treat each other fairly and equally, irrespective of gender. That day in the future, people will not allow any religious teacher to call women filthy, lowest of all animals, sex desiring and designed for unclean living, because human beings will embrace the fact that were all equal. Wouldnt you say, Hasten the day, oh creator of the universe? OTHER ASPECTS OF THE CULT A logical fallacy refers to a notion that exceeds the limits of reality. In short, whatever is proposed by such a notion cannot exist. What William Branham proposes about the descendants of Cain is a fine example of a logical fallacy. The prophet preached that all descendants of the serpent, and therefore Cain, are predestined for hell, while the sons of God are descended from Adam and are predestined for 89

heaven (CHURCH.AGE.BOOK CPT.3). He additionally says that the children of Cain have brought about modern education, infrastructure, technologies, weapons and architecture; they are religious and like their ancestor, the devil. They are headed for the lake of fire. The serpent seed doctrine carries heavy implications. If you are descended from Cain, you cannot be saved and will definitely end up in hell. This idea carries a painful pile of problems. First and foremost, it is worth remembering that Branhams parents were not Christians and they believed in fortune telling. Some thinkers suggest that this background could have played a role in the occultist tone of some of his controversial teachings. If Branhams parents never came to believe in the Message of their day and instead continued holding on to their strange superstitious beliefs, this means, according to the teachings of Christianity, that they were destined for hell and may be contacted there today, implying that they descended from the serpent. Given that they gave birth to Branham, this would imply that Branham is also descended from the serpent, and is predestined for hell. This is the fundamental problem with the serpent seed doctrine the idea that our family tree dictates whether or not well go to heaven. In one single family tree, it is possible to find Message Believers, Other Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Agnostics and Atheists who all share the same blood. Suggesting that all Christians who will make it to heaven will be descendants of one person as opposed to the other is a logical fallacy. And looking someone into the face and telling them that they will go to hell because of their genealogy constitutes a huge dose of hate speech. Next in the line of the cultic aspects of the Message is the topic of race relations. Racist innuendos occur many times in the Branhams message books some are rather offensive such as when he termed Africans as poor dark heathens; and some are simply false generalizations such as when he said that Africans are big burly, heavy fat-like people. However the cultic tendency we wish to focus on is his prohibition of interracial marriages. Branham claimed to derive his instructions from the Bible; so where did he get his idea that interracial marriages are impermissible?
Now, I don't believe in mixing marriages. I believe that a white man should not marry a colored girl, or a colored girl marry a white man, or a yellow marry a colored, or a white, or a... I believe the brown, black, white, and races of people are like a flower garden of God, and I do not believe they should be crossed up. I believe that's the way God made them, and I believe that's the way they should remain. What... It fools me that I seen some real pretty colored girl, intelligent, nice looking kid, just as pretty as any woman you'd want to see... What does she want to marry a white man and have mulatto children? What would an intelligent colored girl want with such a thing as that? Is because that something... that communist... And how would a--a fine a-a-a colored man want to marry a white woman and have mulatto children? (QUESTIONS.AND.ANSWERS_ JEFF.IN COD SUNDAY_ 64-0830E)

This statement points us to an ill version of race relations fronted by Mr. Branham. All races are equal; and a person may marry from any race theyd wish to its one of the biggest victories the contemporary world can boast of and the Bible that Message Believers claim to believe in does not prohibit interracial marriages. This prohibition was Branhams own extra-biblical invention. I believe that 90

every person who is a parent to a biracial child loves their son or daughter despite the color of their skin. Therefore its hard to understand why Branham asks why anyone would want such a thing as that, referring to people wanting to marry outside their race and having biracial children. There are people in this world who do not identify themselves with any one single race, such as a child born to a biracial father and a biracial mother. Several decades ahead, given how international boundaries are virtually collapsing the world will have a huge population of mixed race individuals and the idea that all people (including the mixed race individuals) should only marry from their own race will simply cease to make any sense such as in the case of the offspring of two interracial parents. In going against interracial marriage, Branham shared the podium with people and groups wed rather not mention. Another major hallmark of cultic groups is religious isolationism. All cults isolate themselves from other people with varying levels with some being astonishingly extreme such as the Waco nutcakes. Message Believers consider the Devil as the head of all other Christians in the world. The precise terms used for Christians who are not Message Believers are people bearing the mark of the beast. Message Believers are not to be overly entangled with non Message Believers, the justification for the tendency being the Biblical instruction that Christians should not yoke themselves with non believers. They believe that it is not enough to believe in Jesus Christ in order to make it for the rapture; you need to believe in Branhams message. As a consequence, Message Believers do not marry outside their faith. Typically, a Message Believer is not allowed to marry even any other kind of Christian. Many message churches punish this serious crime by excommunication. This tendency is shared by many other kinds of cults. Next in line when it comes to characteristics of cults are the dogmas of ridiculous extra-biblical rules and regulations. For instance, Mormon Christians are not allowed to drink coffee and tea or wear some kinds of clothes; prescription drugs, dating before you are sixteen, many movies and eating meat are highly discouraged. Jehovahs Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists also appear high up the list in the ranking of cults with the highest number of things youre not supposed to do. The thing to note about such ridiculous rules is that they were instituted mostly by the founders of the cults and are not derived from the Bible those people claim to believe in. A common creed in all such cults is that their leader was in direct communication with God and therefore those were instructions from God; this being despite the fact that the Bible they claim to believe in says that even angels do not possess the power to add to the scriptures; a crime for which punishment is hells tribulations. Branhamism is not an exception either. William Branham, and subsequently his followers, came up with a huge list of things were not supposed to do. In general, there are quite a number of things Message followers are not supposed to do. Different churches will differ in their adherence to these rules, but generally, Message Believers are supposed to adhere to a long list of ridiculous rules. Remember the problem with most of these rules is that they are extra-biblical inventions: Dont own a television Dont celebrate the pagan holiday, Christmas 91

Dont join politics Dont wear pants if youre a woman Dont work if youre a woman Dont wear lipstick, nail color or any other body paints Dont wear makeup Dont wear jewelry Dont wear skirts unless they almost sweep the floor Dont drink alcoholic beverages Dont dance Dont marry any other another man if youre a previously engaged woman Dont marry any other man if youre a divorced woman Dont marry a non-believer Dont sue another Message Believer Dont wear shorts both men and women Dont listen to rock music Dont swim with persons of the opposite sex Dont hold any position of responsibility in church if youre a woman Dont become a pastor if your wife was not a virgin when you got married Dont watch Hollywood movies Dont marry outside your race Dont hug people of the opposite sex before marriage Dont cut your hair if youre a woman Dont have long hair if youre a man Dont listen to any non-gospel music Dont attend churches of other Christian denominations Cults will also come with their handsome share of social problems. They create a myriad of problems in social circles such as the family. I am actively engaged in a forum of former Message Believers, and a lot of people in that forum can relate to stories of strains in family ties brought about by belief in the Message, including numerous broken or dysfunctional marriages. Out there in the world, people will tell you stories of parents who disowned their sons and daughters because they came out as being gay. In the Message, similar things happen for some who reject the message and decide they want nothing to do with it. Cult members alienate themselves from other friends and family members who are not members of their faith. Typically, when it comes to choosing friends, children growing up in the Message are restricted to (you guessed right) the Message. In family and social gatherings, some Message Believers will begin to talk ill of people such as women who wear trousers and makeup - despite the fact that many people in that gathering might not be Christian very disconcerting if youve been a witness to such a scenario.

92

Message Believers will also often avoid doing many normal and even noble things because they might fall into sin. The women dont join the military or the police force because they will be required to wear pants. Many of the women also do not enjoy swimming since the necessary costumes would be sinful to wear; these sisters, are theyre commonly called in the message, will be advised to avoid careers such as medicine that will require long hours of absence from home, where theyre supposed to be. They will also avoid careers in sports, such as tennis and volleyball because their religion precludes them from putting on the required clothing. The men are no exception either they can forget a career in many kinds of sports such as football (soccer if youre American) because theyre not supposed to wear shorts. Church leadership is typically dictatorial and coercive. They move beyond providing spiritual guidance and leadership to enacting rules to govern each and every aspect of their members lives. Each message church will have its own set of rules in addition to the list provided above. For example, every sin that happens to have become public through gossip has to be repented publicly by being paraded before the congregation, with or without your willingness. A Message church is a total North Korea. All kinds of world news are received with a twisted outlook. Minor seismic disturbances or tremors within the state of California are declared to be proof that the rapture is at hand despite the fact that this area has had these disturbances since time immemorial because the region is near a boundary between two tectonic plates. Should the Big One come any time soon resulting in the sinking of California, this will become a Message Believers world theyll use this as a corroboration of the truth of the message, despite the fact that Branham is not the originator of the concept of the sinking of California. The concept is based on the fact that different parts of the state are on two different plates that may move in different directions. Considerably large movements, however, happen over millions of years. The idea that the state will go under the ocean when this earthquake takes place is indeed strange. Other genres of news do not escape the perverting scrutiny of the Message either. News of conflicts in the Middle East especially those involving Israel are received with a characteristic assertion that the prophet indeed said that the area would know no peace and it makes them happy that the prophets words have been confirmed to be true despite the fact that thousands of people continue to die from these conflicts. When the holocaust is discussed on the tube, theyll happily tell you that the prophet said that the murder of millions of Jews was totally Gods plan to gather them up and theyre totally oblivious of the fact that it was a cruel, inhumane slaughter. Also, the nation of Israel can never do any wrong. Even if they engage in deadly illegal war tactics and oppress a clearly budding Palestinian nation, theyre right in doing so. The prophet trained them to think like that. The best thing about the victory of breaking free from a cult is that first breath of fresh air. Once youve been totally liberated, you get the bird out of prison feeling. Its hard to forget the first time youll put on that short guiltlessly and kick the football as hard as you can. Its hard to forget that first soft rock jam youll listen to and like without thinking that youre going to hell for it. Its hard to forget the first time youll look at your Christian friend who is not a Message Believer and feel truly connected. Its indeed a 93

breath of fresh air when you look at women differently and respect them even if theyre wearing pants. I could go on and on; but when you experience this feeling youll definitely get the point!

94

Chapter 7: Closing Arguments

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me - English idiom

95

The question has been asked over and over again: why do people believe the Message? Even setting aside the fact that some of us were conditioned since birth to believe it, why do most of us continue to cling to it into adulthood? Whats the coercive factor behind the extraordinary following the Message enjoys despite the numerous contradictions and additions to the Bible the prophet taught? The answer to this question is simple and open for all to see: its because of the supernatural events surrounding the prophets entire life. If William Branham was an ordinary preacher with no powers to do anything extraordinary, he wouldve have been dismissed a long time ago by the small number of people who wouldve heard him preach because he most likely wouldnt even have been heard of beyond his locality. Its incontestable that Branhams supernatural events are the single most compelling factor for people to believe his message. Message introduction cards will almost always have the photograph of the cloud and the pillar of fire photo. As a matter of fact, message introductions will have a statement similar to God promised to send us a prophet in these last days. That prophet is William Branham, and the Lord confirmed this to us: when he was baptizing in the Ohio River when he appeared on Mt. Sunset vindicated his prophet by a pillar of fire discerned the hearts of people Indeed without the supernatural aspects of Branhams life, Message Believers have no case to present to people theyre trying to convert. This is a sorry state of affairs as we shall see shortly. This is indeed the very same way many cults in existence today take in their daily breath of life: by invoking the supernatural abilities of their founders. And mind you many of these founders have dazzled hundreds of thousands of people with their extraordinary powers, just like William Branham. Message Believers tend to have a false perception that William Branham is the true prophet because he had a great faith healing ministry that attracted hundreds of thousands of people and a lot supernaturalism surrounding his life. If we followed this line of thinking, a lot of people can be validly declared true prophets. William Branham never came close to possessing exclusivity when it comes to faith healing abilities. Smith Wigglesworth was a British evangelist who began his healing ministry in the early 1900s. He dazzled hundreds of thousands just like William Branham. He used to lay his hands on people and there were many reports of people who had been healed through his prayers. He anointed people with oil and also passed out healing handkerchiefs like William Branham, one of which was sent to King George V. He had an amazing international ministry, travelling to many countries in North America, Europe, Africa, Oceania and Asia. Wigglesworth claimed to raise several people from the dead. Many people, including other evangelists, came forward and testified that they had witnessed God performing extraordinary miracles through Wigglesworth. Oral Roberts is the next candidate for the faith healing discussion. His healing ministry amazed millions all over the world. He travelled to almost all continents in this world and gathered huge crowds and many claimed to have received miraculous healings as a result of Oral Roberts meetings. He claimed his life was surrounded by supernatural events, including visions of Jesus telling him to build centers and things. He said that Jesus appeared to him in person in 1983 and instructed him to find a cure for cancer. Its safe to say William Branhams miracle ministry comes nowhere close to the success Roberts 96

ministry achieved. Roberts is credited for founding the prosperity gospel God wants us to be rich, in a nutshell. Lets not leave the faith healing podium without mentioning Aimee McPherson, founder of the Foursquare Church. Although she did not make faith healing the central focus of her ministry, many people claimed physical healing. Aimee vigorously pursued the idea of a bigger role of women in the church and was therefore obviously famous with Christian women in America. Around 1925 she began her famous tent revivals, and her preaching reached millions through the media. Some other prominent Christian leaders are not credited with faith healing but they derive their influence from the supernatural events they say surrounded their lives. Joseph Smith, the founder of the Christian cult known as Mormonism, told us that he had extra ordinary events in his life. He said that he had his first vision in 1820 when God told him that all churches are false. He claimed that he had supernatural powers to locate treasure. He was visited one night by an angel named Moroni who gave him the golden plates among other artifacts, and describes many other paranormal events surrounding his life. Smith was taken at his word by some people and as a result, millions of people across the world are now affiliated to Mormonism. Ellen Whites ministry founded the Seventh Day Adventists movement. Supernatural events were reported around Ellens life since 1844. She saw visions, one in which she saw the Advent people rising higher and entering the New Jerusalem. She also saw other visions, such as the new earth and the bridegroom visions. These supernatural events provided Adventists with proof that what they believed in was indeed true and that they indeed were headed for heaven. These narrations are meant to help you realize one important thing - that Miracles, especially faith healing miracles, are NOT exclusive to Branhams ministry. There are many other people who have had successful faith healing campaigns before millions of people across the world just like William Branham. There are also many people who have had incredibly mystic abilities, but they werent even Christians. The authors of the Bible anticipated this scenario. To guard against such people coming against the doctrines the authors laid down, they told their audience that there would walk evil people on earth with powers to perform miracles and that there would be people in hell who performed miracles in Jesus name during their time on earth (Mathew 7:22-23). Please take a moment, let that sink in. This was very prudent of them, given that people with amazing supernatural abilities exist across many religions. The supernatural stories surrounding Branhams life played different roles in his ministry. We have the numerous stories told in books such as the Supernatural series where it is told of how he had mystic abilities even in normal life situations, but many people (including many Message Believers) have not heard of most of these stories. Then we have those that Branham himself relied on in convincing people that he was a true prophet of God. He talked about them from the pulpit in many instances, and people strongly hold these supernatural events as evidence of Gods endorsement of Branhams teachings. These are the events wed like to address.

97

William Branham says that when he was born, a halo of light hovered over him. As a child, he would hear a strange voice over and over. The voice told him not to drink or smoke since a special job was awaiting him once he became of age. He says that one day, when he was baptizing the seventeenth person in the Ohio River, a voice spoke from the heavens and said that his message would forerun the second coming of Jesus Christ. He claims that he made seven special prophecies that were all to come true, such as the one about Hitlers death. He claimed many other supernatural things, such as being visited by angels and numerous visions. These are indeed the events that convince people to believe that William Branham was a true prophet of God. These same kinds of events convince Mormons that Joseph Smith is a true prophet of God. These same varieties of events convince Seventh Day Adventists that Ellen White was Gods true messenger. And the list continues. A Message Believer will claim that Branham is an exception because the supernatural events surrounding the founders of the other religious groups cannot be proven to have truly happened. Its important to note that similarly, no one can truly confirm to us that most of the things Branham talks about truly happened. Surprisingly, the events Branham relies on the most are the hardest to verify. No one testified to us as having seen the pillar of fire when Branham was born. No one else heard the voices that haunted Branham during his childhood. We dont have any reports or witnesses who heard the voice talking to Branham at the Ohio River and telling him that his Message would forerun Jesus second coming. We take Branhams word for it we believe these stories just because he told them. Just like the Mormons take Joseph Smiths word, Adventists take Ellens word and Muslims take Muhammads word about the supernatural events surrounding their lives, Message Believers take many of Branhams stories that he relies on to be factual despite the lack of evidence or witnesses to confirm them. Some of these supernatural events and entities have been proven false or at best questionable, such as the sunset cloud, the Texas pillar of fire photograph and his healings which saw people ending up dead after theyd been supposedly healed. As for the famous seven prophecies, do you realize that he told us about them after those very things contained in the prophecies had already happened, claiming that he said back in 1933 that they would happen? Again were supposed to take his word for it and believe that in 1933, he actually prophesied that those things would happen, despite the lack of records or witnesses to the alleged prophecies. A good proportion of the supernatural aspects Branham relied on from the pulpit fall under two categories: false or unverifiable. Those that are false include stories such as the cloud on Mt. Sunset and the cases of miraculous healings that did not succeed, leaving the sick people dead even after being supposedly healed. Those that are unverifiable include stories such as the pillar of fire shortly after his birth and the voice that spoke from heaven during the Ohio River baptism telling him that his message would forerun the second coming of Christ. Yet these very events that are either unverifiable or false form the very basis upon which many people believe that William Branham was the true prophet of God! This, indeed, is a sorry state of affairs. The supernatural events surrounding Branhams life are not proof that his message is true. If anything, those supernatural events that have been proven false, such as the Sunset cloud, confirm that he was indeed one of the greatest deceivers to ever walk the earth. 98

Ridiculous argumentation by adherents of the Message Despite the irrefutable evidence that clearly exposes Branhams deceptions, Believers who have come across such evidence continue to believe that the message is true. Lets explore this strange phenomenon. Through a process we may call rationalization; we may fall back to a convenient explanation whenever anything we believe in has been proven false. Some thinkers refer to this process as ad hoc reasoning, which essentially involves the generation of an alternative explanation. This regrettable technique involves employing another procedure we may call spontaneous creation in order to validate the assertion that has been proven false. This is one of the most frequently used methods by Message apologists. Demonstrating this course of action is not difficult. To show that any statement can be rationalized as truth, well use a statement that is not true for the purposes of this discussion. Lets say for instance (for the purposes of this discussion) that Branham said that [the Biblical] Cain served two terms as president of the United States. A former Believer, after doing the necessary investigations, comes forward and refutes this statement. He then presents his argument before his or her former pastor. The pastor, after prayerfully searching for an answer (and verifying that Cain was not president of the USA), responds to this refutation by saying that Branham meant that one of the presidents of the USA would be possessed by the spirit of Cain, and therefore the statement is true. The initial false statement has been rationalized by spontaneously creating another idea that was not in the original statement, that an actual president would be possessed by the spirit of Cain. This preposterous procedure of rationalization is used to excuse the myriad of deceptions evident throughout Branhams sermons which Message Believers believe to be Gods voice, including strange allegations of the world being square, successfully injecting animal embryo cells into the human blood stream, woman being designed by Satan and so forth. This is the first method to look out for. When an individual, with the aim of protecting a false doctrine, spontaneously creates a new explanation that was clearly not included in the original statement, your initial reaction needs to be a rejection of that creation. A good example of this wanting method is demonstrated by Rebecca Branham, who after noting the irreconcilable aspects of the Sunset cloud story, changed the story in her Only Believe magazine to imply that Branham didnt say he was on the hunting trip when the cloud appeared. She instead said that Branham saw a vision that he would go on the hunting trip several days later despite the numerous quotes in which Branham says that the cloud appeared during his hunting trip. Another barren argumentation method commonly used by Message proponents is circular reasoning, also called circulus in demonstrando. Basically, the use of such a method may be demonstrated in such an argument as this one: Everything Branham said is true. Since everything he said is the truth, this means he was a true messenger of God. Since God cannot tell lies, everything Branham said is true. This may be a little confusing to grasp, but finding out whether youre a victim of such thinking is not difficult. If you believe that Branhams message is true because he said so, then youre definitely using this method to convince yourself on a daily basis that the Message is true.

99

Message Believers accept as true Branhams assertion that the Sunset cloud was Jesus because Branham said so. They say Branhams assertion that the strange light in the Houston Coliseum photograph was the Israelite pillar of fire is true because Branham said so. Branham, according to them, was the seventh messenger - because he said so. This situation is anything but novel. As we have seen earlier, Mormons believe Joseph Smith to be the true messenger because he said so, and Jehovahs Witnesses believe Charles was the true messenger because he said so. This kind of thinking may seem very dull, but its one of the most powerful forces that drive belief in false doctrines. When confronted with the evidence that proves that Branham was an incredibly crafty deceiver, a Message sister, contributing to a message discussion, responded as follows:
God bless you my brother, I have read the *material+ you posted and yes it has a lot. But there is one thing that makes this message the truth. And makes being a Christian sound insane. Its never about proof but always about believing.

The bold faith displayed by this sister will make a Message Believer shout a good number of amens. But there is something fundamentally wrong with this argument, in that it can be used to protect each and every false doctrine on earth. It also tends to suggest that something is true just because people believe in it by faith. Out of such an unfortunate scenario, a Mormon lady, when presented with proof that her beliefs are false, may successfully invoke the never about proof but always about believing argument and successfully send you off, and shell be left still clinging to her ridiculous beliefs. An Adventist will similarly tell you that going to church on Sunday is wrong similarly invoking the belief argument since we dont have any Biblical support for such an assertion. This shows that believing in something by faith does not imply that its true. Mormons believe Smith was a true prophet by faith. Adventists believe Ellen was the true messenger by faith. And despite the numerous evidence to the contrary, Message adherents believe that Branham was the true messenger of course by faith. The other commonly used form of irresponsible argumentation used by Message apologists is the use of force, also known as argumentum ad baculum. Theyll tell you something like this for instance: my dear brother you are blaspheming the Holy Spirit by speaking against Branham. Remember this sin cannot be forgiven, in this world or the next therefore do not speak against the true Message of the Hour, or may God forgive you for what youre doing. Do you not fear what God can do? The message is true. This corrupt form of argumentation has the effect of instilling fear in the opposing party. Another use of this method may be demonstrated as follows: a man tried to disprove the prophet just like you. The prophet says that he was smitten with cancer and tuberculosis .This shows that Branham was a true prophet. This scheme is utilized by members of many other cults, and the Muslims too. Another cunning use of force is the act of appealing to your emotions. A person who had never walked before was healed by the prophet. He raised a young boy from the dead. He spoke against racism. He advocated for morality especially for women. He never got rich from his ministry. He was a righteous man who was from the Lord indeed. The important thing to remember about the use of this method is that the statements made do not address the evidence that proves the opposing party right. Argument from ignorance is also commonly used in protecting Branhamism. Also called argumentum ad ignorantiam, the user of such a method implies that something is true just because it cannot be proven 100

otherwise. In their article Common objections against William Branham, Brian Gan Arts imply that Branham was right in saying that Capernaum sank into the sea, saying that this is so because it cannot be proven or disproved. The danger relating to the use of this method is that no one can prove or disprove numerous other notions, such as a statement that there appeared green skies in Capernaum twice every week. The absence of evidence to the contrary does not establish an idea to be a fact; or a certainty. There are still loads of other unfortunate argumentation techniques used by Message Believers to offer rebuttals against compelling evidence against the truth of the Message. For instance, theyll repeat over and over again that Branham was the true messenger of God. This is known as an argument of repetition or argumentum ad nauseam, and here we need to remember examples such as the fact that despite the number of times we tell kids that Santa Claus exists, the truth of his existence remains unaltered. Message adherents may also use an irresponsible method, Argumentum ad numerum to try and convince you. Theyll basically tell you that the Message must be true given the millions of people across the world who have accepted it as true. Similarly, you may point them to the fact that more than a billion people believe that Islam is the true religion. You similarly must be careful of apologists who shift the burden of proof. Theyll basically tell you that you cant prove, for instance, that a pillar of fire never appeared over little Branham during his birth. Likewise, you cant prove that a three eyed dragon that shoots fire off its ass doesnt exist somewhere between our galaxy and the next. But its highly unlikely, based on available evidence. The burden of proof always rests on the proposer of such an idea. Another unhelpful method used by Message adherents may be called the universal reply, where, after their argument hits the rock, they tell you that you just need to read the Message to gain full understanding. Similarly, Mormons will tell you to read the Book of Mormons to gain further understanding. Finally, be wary of people who draw irrelevant conclusions, which have the characteristic of being totally unrelated to the topic of discussion. Such sidetracked debaters, in a discussion trying to establish whether Branham blatantly lied about various things, will tell you that the prophet allowed his son to continue serving in his ministry even though he was a smoker. This shows that he was a good man. There are many other techniques you need to watch out for, but the thing to remember is to only consider evidence and arguments that are relevant and directly linked to the topic. The danger behind these ludicrous argumentation techniques is that even the most ridiculous of notions can be declared valid after going through such procedures. Such methods must be recognized and rejected as early as possible to avoid falling victim of people who will believe anything to be true despite available concrete evidence and proof to the contrary. Enquiring from the wrong authorities After reading this book, youll at least have many questions youll need answered. This happens whenever a Message Believer comes across proof that that the Message is false. Unfortunately, instead of doing further reading from objective sources after coming across such problems, many Believers will appeal to the wrong authorities for explanations. Its important to avoid seeking explanations from people who can never tell you that your findings correctly refute the message, whether or not they do. 101

Its definitely something to do with conflict of interests. Its a scenario similar to asking Prince Charles whether or not Britain should be made a republic. To demonstrate this, one of such authorities from which people seek answers from is the very Voice of God Recordings. People write to the ministry with questions about the truth of Branhamism. Even if members of that ministry came to establish that the Message is false, why on earth would they want to destroy the company theyve built for several decades and the livelihoods it supports by telling you what they found out? Members of the Branham family are doing well financially today because of their fathers ministry. Even if they knew that the Message is false, why would they want to destroy the family cash till by telling you the truth? All major Message ministries are not the best places to find objective opinions about the message. Think about it for a moment: if the Message is false, it would be in their best interest to keep people believing. When some people come across evidence that clearly puts doubt on the truth of the Message, they feel compelled to refer the evidence to their pastor or other seniors in the church. Why would your pastor destroy his ministry, make himself look like a fool for preaching the Message for so long, and above all destroy his livelihood by telling you that your evidence is correct? Its in his best interest to convince you that your evidence is dubious, whether or not it is compelling. Some of the pastors of message churches, notably many of the churches in capital cities across the world, are doing very well financially and socially because of the Message. Keep that in mind next time you feel that you should refer your serious questions about the truth of the Message to one of these pastors. If youre a young person, youre likely to refer the evidence to your parents. Its unlikely theyll admit that they introduced you to a false religion and made you follow it for all those years, and theyll most likely get into the rationalizations discussed above. But the most ridiculous of these enquiries is the practice of consulting Message Books to test your evidence. Such circular procedures will lead us nowhere. Be careful also of consulting yourself; remember you subconsciously assume many things to be true just because Branham said them. Years after leaving the message, I still find myself holding onto perceptions that I acquired during my time in the Message. Objectivity is crucial when it comes to testing evidence and verifying availed proof. All the parties discussed so far are not good sources of objective information. I am not saying that you shouldnt listen to their side of the story that would amount to poor research but dont rely on them as the authority on this topic. The best way to substantiate your evidence is to carry out extensive research from good sources of information. After you read this book, please get down to business; carry out investigations; find corroborating information from credible sources. Thats just about it The purpose of this book has been to demonstrate that the major pillars of our adherence to Branhamism are false. The supernatural evidence that God supposedly gave us to vindicate his prophet has been shown to be dubious, and even if he had some successes in this area, weve seen that many other people did too. Secondly, Branham has been caught in numerous huge lies. Thirdly, his sermons are full of logical fallacies that hardly represent the voice of an almighty God. And most importantly, 102

weve seen that we believe many things to be true not because they are, but because Branham said they are. To the objective reader, these four things have been proven beyond reasonable doubt, and it would make no sense to continue believing in the message if theyre true. Branham fooled you once when you first believed in the Message. Dont let him fool you again by going back to the Message even after learning the truth about him. Now if I successfully convinced you, what you do now that you know the truth is totally up to you. Whether you share this or privately acknowledge it as the truth is also up to you. It will also mean different things to different people. A convinced woman will definitely be happy to know that God will not send her to hell because of wearing pants, makeup or jewelry. Shell be happy to know God doesnt think shes filthy, lowest of all animals and created to be mans slave. Shell definitely have entered a new era in her life. If youve been in the Message for a long time and I happened to convince you, dont be erratic about your discovery. Be gracious in how you deal with what youve found out. Some people, after finding out that the Message is a false religion, go about talking badly about the Message and its adherents even before their friends in the Message. Before they realize it, theyve lost their friends in the Message, who happened to constitute 99% of their total number of friends. Theyll then consider their discovery of the truth an unfortunate occurrence in their lives. This doesnt mean you shouldnt share what youve discovered just do it softly with due regard to other peoples sensitivities. The greatest victory that comes with leaving the Message is acceptance of other people. Youll look at non Believers in a new way. Youll never deem women inferior. Youll never think women in pants are despicable and headed for hell just for not wearing a skirt. Youll never think that some nations have a right to oppress others. Youll accept non Believers as part of Gods perfect spectrum of different varieties of human beings. I believe that if we eradicate Branhamism from the face of the earth, humanity will have moved a step closer towards peaceful coexistence.

103

A LIST OF UTILIZED RESOURCES MESSAGE BOOKS

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. ABSOLUTE.A_ HOUSTON.TX MONDAY_ 63-0304 ANGEL.OF.GOD_ PHOENIX.AZ THURSDAY_ 48-0304 BASIS.OF.FELLOWSHIP_ LONG.BEACH.CA TUESDAY_ 61-0214 BREACH.THE_ JEFF.IN SUNDAY_ 63-0317E CHOOSING.OF.A.BRIDE_ LA.CA V-2 N-28 THURSDAY_ 65-0429E CHRIST.IS.THE.MYSTERY_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-7 SUNDAY_ 63-0728 COUNTDOWN_ JEFF.IN V-11 N-3 SUNDAY_ 62-0909M DEMONOLOGY.2.RELIGIOUS_ CONNERSVILLE.IN DE 41-78 TUESDAY_ 53-0609 EASTER.SEAL_ PHOENIX.AZ V-2 N-6 SATURDAY_ 65-0410 EXPERIENCES.3_ PHOENIX.AZ SUNDAY_ 47-1221 FAITH.IN.ACTION_ CHICAGO.IL MONDAY_ 55-1003 FIFTH.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN FRIDAY_ 63-0322 FIRST.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN MONDAY_ 63-0318 FOURTH.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN THURSDAY_ 63-0321 GABRIEL'S.INSTRUCT.TO.DANIEL_ JEFF.IN DA 1-44 SUNDAY_ 61-0730M GOD.IN.SIMPLICITY_ JEFF.IN SUNDAY_ 63-0317M GREAT.COMING.REVIVAL_ CHICAGO.IL SUNDAY_ 54-0718A HANDWRITING.ON.THE.WALL_ JEFF.IN SUNDAY_ 58-0309M INTER.VEIL_ STURGIS.MI SATURDAY_ 56-0121 INVASION.OF.THE.USA_ JEFF.IN V-26 N-1 SUNDAY_ 54-0509 LAODICEAN.CHURCH.AGE - CHURCH.AGE.BOOK CPT.9 LIFE.STORY_ LA.CA FOOTPRINTS.BOOK SUNDAY_ 59-0419A LORD.JUST.ONCE.MORE_ HOT.SPRINGS.AR V-20 N-10 FRIDAY_ 63-0628A LORD.JUST.ONCE.MORE_ HOT.SPRINGS.AR V-20 N-10 FRIDAY_ 63-0628A MANIFESTATION.OF.THY.RESURRECTION_ LA.CA MONDAY_ 54-0809E MARRIAGE.AND.DIVORCE_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-13 SUNDAY_ 65-0221M PERSEVERANT_ CHICAGO.IL V-21 N-4 FRIDAY_ 63-0802 QA.ON.GENESIS_ JEFF.IN COD WEDNESDAY_ 53-0729 QUEEN.OF.THE.SOUTH_ SHREVEPORT.LA SUNDAY_ 60-1127E QUESTIONS.AND.ANSWERS_ JEFF.IN COD SUNDAY_ 64-0830E RAPTURE.THE_ YUMA.AZ V-5 N-14 SATURDAY_ 65-1204 RECOGNIZING.YOUR.DAY_ JEFF.IN V-5 N-1 SUNDAY_ 64-0726M RISING.OF.THE.SUN_ JEFF.IN V-3 N-12 SUNDAY_ 65-0418M SECOND.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN TUESDAY_ 63-0319 SERPENT'S.SEED_ JEFF.IN V-2 N-4 SUNDAY_ 58-0928E SEVENTH.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN SUNDAY_ 63-0324E SHALOM_ PHOENIX.AZ V-22 N-1 SUNDAY_ 64-0119 SHOW.US.THE.FATHER_ TUCSON.AZ THURSDAY_ 63-0606 SIXTH.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN SATURDAY_ 63-0323 SPIRITUAL.FOOD.IN.DUE.SEASON_ JEFF.IN V-8 N-7 SUNDAY_ 65-0718E STANDING.IN.THE.GAP_ JEFF.IN V-6 N-7 SUNDAY_ 63-0623M THIRD.SEAL.THE_ JEFF.IN WEDNESDAY_ 63-0320

104

43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49.

THIRSTING.FOR.LIFE_ CHICAGO.IL SUNDAY_ 57-0630 TRYING.TO.DO.GOD.A.SERVICE_ SHP.LA V-7 N-2 SATURDAY_ 65-1127B UNCERTAIN.SOUND_ JEFF.IN V-16 N-3 SUNDAY_ 60-1218 WHAT.IS.THE.ATTRACTION?_ JEFF.IN V-8 N-8 SUNDAY_ 65-0725E WHO.IS.THIS_ CLARKSVILLE.IN SUNDAY_ 59-1004M WHY.ARE.WE.NOT.A.DENOMINATION?_ JEFF.IN V-11 N-7 SATURDAY_ 58-0927 WORKS.IS.FAITH.EXPRESSED_ SHREVEPORT.LA V-7 N-1 FRIDAY_ 65-1126

OTHER BOOKS 50. Bishop Irenaeus of Lyons, Adversus Haereses. 51. Bishop Irenaeus of Lyons, Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus XVI. 52. Branham, W. M. (1965) An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, Voice of God Recordings. 53. Green, P. Acts of the Prophet, Tucson Tabernacle. 54. Jorgensen, O (2002) Supernatural: The life of William Branham, Book 5: The Teacher and his Rejection, Tucson Tabernacle. 55. Larkin, C. (1919), The Book of Revelation, Erwin W. Moyer. 56. Lindsay, G. William Branham: A Man Sent From God, WBEA. 57. Long, J (2005) Biblical Nonsense: A review of the Bible for doubting Christians, iUniverse, Inc. 58. Peyton, H.A. (1996) William Branham: His Life, Teachings and Demonic Spirit Guide, Doctrines of Christ. 59. Pohl, A.H. Why I left the Tongues Movement. 60. Stadsklev, J., William Branham: A Prophet Visits South Africa. 61. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton Company, New York, NY.

OTHER RESOURCES 62. Branham, R.S. (1992) Only Believe: On the Road to Sunset, Voice of God Recordings. magazine 63. Gan, B. (1997) Common Objections against William Branham, Brian Gan Arts. online 64. Holy Bible (New International Version) Genesis 1 & 2. 65. Holy Bible (Revised Standard Version) Mathew 7.

105

66. Jacobsen, K. (2009) A Refutation of William Marion Branham. online 67. Kennah. J. William Branham and His Message. online 68. Lacy, G.J. (1950) Report and Opinion Re: Questioned Negative. professional examination report 69. LIFE, May 17, 1963. magazine 70. McDonald, J.E. (1963) Status of Investigation of the Northern Arizona Stratospheric Cloud of February 28, 1963, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, University of Arizona, Tucson. academic paper 71. McDonald, J.E. (1963) Stratospheric Cloud over Northern Arizona, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, University of Arizona, Tucson. academic paper 72. O Timothy, February 21, 1990. magazine 73. SCIENCE, April 19, 1963. magazine 74. US Government (2010) Vandenberg AFB Launch History. online 75. Other online locations were used to confirm simple facts such as dates, names and locations.

106