Ephesus: Difference between revisions

(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)

Line 1:

[[Image:2000px-Seven churches of asia.svg.png|right|thumb|250px]]

'''Ephesus''' ( Greek: '''Έφεσος''' "permitted", relaxed, or aimed at") was one of the great cities of the Ionian Greeks in Asia Minor, located in Lydia where the Cayster river flows into the Aegean Sea (in modern day Turkey). It was founded by colonists principally from Athens. The ruins of Ephesus are a major tourist attraction, especially for people travelling to Turkey by cruise ship via the port of Kuşadası.

Line 28:

Line 29:

=Historical accuracy in the Church Age Book =

Part of my training as a CPA was as an auditor, following the trail of evidence wherever it led, regardless of my personal feelings or expectations. If I couldn't adequately explain something in a company's accounts, I couldn't ignore it. I had to report it. When I attempted to prove William Branham's teachings to be the truth, the discrepancies we found were devastating.

Let's examine what William Branham said about Ephesus

==1. The Statue of Diana and the "Iron Arms" (Chapter 3, Paragraph 9)==

Line 37:

Line 42:

* '''The Audit:''' There is absolutely no ancient, historical, or archaeological evidence that the statue of Diana of Ephesus had "two arms formed of simple bars of iron." In reality, this specific illustration was copied almost verbatim from a 1958 book entitled ''How Did It Happen!'' by a Pentecostal writer named Rachel C. Hazeltine. Hazeltine openly admitted her book was written "by deduction"—which is a polite way of saying she made up historical events to fit her theological ideas. '''William Branham presented this fictional story as a direct revelation from God. It was not. It was plagiarism.'''

~~'''~~2. The Factual Error of the "Saul to Paul" Name Change~~'''~~

==2. The Factual Error of the "Saul to Paul" Name Change ==

To support his doctrine that God always changes the names of His chosen messengers to fit their calling, Branham asserted in his sermon ''The First Seal'' (March 18, 1963), '''paragraph 123''':

''"Saul was a king one time in Israel, but Saul didn’t fit an apostle. It might be all right for a king, but not an apostle. So Jesus changed his name. From what? From Saul to Paul".''

<blockquote>''"Saul was a king one time in Israel, but Saul didn’t fit an apostle. It might be all right for a king, but not an apostle. So Jesus changed his name. From what? From Saul to Paul".''</blockquote>

* '''The Audit:''' This is a clear factual error and a profound scriptural misinterpretation. '''The Bible nowhere states that God or Jesus changed Saul’s name.''' Saul of Tarsus had both a Hebrew name (Saul) and a Roman name (Paul/Paulus) from birth. Luke introduces the name "Paul" in Acts 13:9 simply because the apostle was embarking on his mission to the Roman, Gentile world. The name did not change because Saul "didn't fit an apostle".

~~'''~~3. The Myth of the "Independent Paul" (Chapter 3, Paragraph 24)~~'''~~

==3. The Myth of the "Independent Paul" (Chapter 3, Paragraph 24) ==

In '''Chapter 3, paragraph 24''', Branham presents the Apostle Paul as an independent "lone wolf" who operated entirely outside the authority of any organized body, claiming that Paul's ministry trumped the other apostles and that the Council of Jerusalem had "no power or jurisdiction over him":

''"Notice that Paul was unorganized, but Spirit-led, as when God moved upon Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt. Jerusalem’s council never sent Paul out, nor did it have any power or jurisdiction over him".''

<blockquote>''"Notice that Paul was unorganized, but Spirit-led, as when God moved upon Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt. Jerusalem’s council never sent Paul out, nor did it have any power or jurisdiction over him".''</blockquote>

* '''The Audit:''' This is a false historical and biblical analogy. The New Testament clearly demonstrates that Paul operated in close, voluntary cooperation with the other apostles. In Galatians 2:1–2, Paul explicitly states that he went up to Jerusalem by revelation and '''submitted his gospel to those of reputation to ensure he was not running in vain.''' When the Judaizer controversy arose, Paul did not act independently; he participated in the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) and delivered their corporate decrees to the churches. Pitting Paul against the Council of Jerusalem is a classic straw man designed to demonize any form of structured, collaborative church order.

~~'''~~4. Redefining Paul's Opponents as a "Levitical Priesthood" (Chapter 3, Paragraphs 89–90)~~'''~~

==4. Redefining Paul's Opponents as a "Levitical Priesthood" (Chapter 3, Paragraphs 89–90) ==

In '''Chapter 3, paragraphs 89–90''', Branham claims that Paul's opponents (the "wolves" of Acts 20) were trying to establish a "Levitical priesthood" to set up a "holy priesthood standing between God and the people," which he terms "Nicolaitanism":

Line 63:

Line 67:

----'''A Forensic Conclusion'''

When ~~I was in the Message, I didn't see these things. I was too busy defending the system. But when you are forced to look at the~~ facts, you realize that '''the rules of logic and historical integrity are not an optional, academic game.''' They flow from the very rational, truthful nature of God Himself.

When we examined that facts, you realize that '''the rules of logic and historical integrity are not an optional, academic game.''' They flow from the very rational, truthful nature of God Himself.

When a minister tells you to completely bypass your mind, he isn't asking for deep faith. '''He is asking for blind submission.''' The Bible never tells us to shut off our understanding. It tells us to "prove all things; hold fast that which is good".

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{7 Church Ages}}
+{{7 Messengers}}
 [[Image:2000px-Seven churches of asia.svg.png|right|thumb|250px]]
 '''Ephesus''' ( Greek: '''Έφεσος''' "permitted", relaxed, or aimed at") was one of the great cities of the Ionian Greeks in Asia Minor, located in Lydia where the Cayster river flows into the Aegean Sea (in modern day Turkey).  It was founded by colonists principally from Athens. The ruins of Ephesus are a major tourist attraction, especially for people travelling to Turkey by cruise ship via the port of Kuşadası.
@@ Line 28: / Line 29: @@
 =Historical accuracy in the Church Age Book =
+Part of my training as a CPA was as an auditor, following the trail of evidence wherever it led, regardless of my personal feelings or expectations. If I couldn't adequately explain something in a company's accounts, I couldn't ignore it. I had to report it. When I attempted to prove William Branham's teachings to be the truth, the discrepancies we found were devastating.
+Let's examine what William Branham said about Ephesus
 ==1. The Statue of Diana and the "Iron Arms" (Chapter 3, Paragraph 9)==
@@ Line 37: / Line 42: @@
 * '''The Audit:''' There is absolutely no ancient, historical, or archaeological evidence that the statue of Diana of Ephesus had "two arms formed of simple bars of iron." In reality, this specific illustration was copied almost verbatim from a 1958 book entitled ''How Did It Happen!'' by a Pentecostal writer named Rachel C. Hazeltine. Hazeltine openly admitted her book was written "by deduction"—which is a polite way of saying she made up historical events to fit her theological ideas. '''William Branham presented this fictional story as a direct revelation from God. It was not. It was plagiarism.'''
-'''2. The Factual Error of the "Saul to Paul" Name Change'''
+==2. The Factual Error of the "Saul to Paul" Name Change ==
 To support his doctrine that God always changes the names of His chosen messengers to fit their calling, Branham asserted in his sermon ''The First Seal'' (March 18, 1963), '''paragraph 123''':
-''"Saul was a king one time in Israel, but Saul didn’t fit an apostle. It might be all right for a king, but not an apostle. So Jesus changed his name. From what? From Saul to Paul".''
+<blockquote>''"Saul was a king one time in Israel, but Saul didn’t fit an apostle. It might be all right for a king, but not an apostle. So Jesus changed his name. From what? From Saul to Paul".''</blockquote>
 * '''The Audit:''' This is a clear factual error and a profound scriptural misinterpretation. '''The Bible nowhere states that God or Jesus changed Saul’s name.''' Saul of Tarsus had both a Hebrew name (Saul) and a Roman name (Paul/Paulus) from birth. Luke introduces the name "Paul" in Acts 13:9 simply because the apostle was embarking on his mission to the Roman, Gentile world. The name did not change because Saul "didn't fit an apostle".
-'''3. The Myth of the "Independent Paul" (Chapter 3, Paragraph 24)'''
+==3. The Myth of the "Independent Paul" (Chapter 3, Paragraph 24) ==
 In '''Chapter 3, paragraph 24''', Branham presents the Apostle Paul as an independent "lone wolf" who operated entirely outside the authority of any organized body, claiming that Paul's ministry trumped the other apostles and that the Council of Jerusalem had "no power or jurisdiction over him":
-''"Notice that Paul was unorganized, but Spirit-led, as when God moved upon Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt. Jerusalem’s council never sent Paul out, nor did it have any power or jurisdiction over him".''
+<blockquote>''"Notice that Paul was unorganized, but Spirit-led, as when God moved upon Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt. Jerusalem’s council never sent Paul out, nor did it have any power or jurisdiction over him".''</blockquote>
 * '''The Audit:''' This is a false historical and biblical analogy. The New Testament clearly demonstrates that Paul operated in close, voluntary cooperation with the other apostles. In Galatians 2:1–2, Paul explicitly states that he went up to Jerusalem by revelation and '''submitted his gospel to those of reputation to ensure he was not running in vain.''' When the Judaizer controversy arose, Paul did not act independently; he participated in the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) and delivered their corporate decrees to the churches. Pitting Paul against the Council of Jerusalem is a classic straw man designed to demonize any form of structured, collaborative church order.
-'''4. Redefining Paul's Opponents as a "Levitical Priesthood" (Chapter 3, Paragraphs 89–90)'''
+==4. Redefining Paul's Opponents as a "Levitical Priesthood" (Chapter 3, Paragraphs 89–90) ==
 In '''Chapter 3, paragraphs 89–90''', Branham claims that Paul's opponents (the "wolves" of Acts 20) were trying to establish a "Levitical priesthood" to set up a "holy priesthood standing between God and the people," which he terms "Nicolaitanism":
@@ Line 63: / Line 67: @@
 ----'''A Forensic Conclusion'''
-When I was in the Message, I didn't see these things. I was too busy defending the system. But when you are forced to look at the facts, you realize that '''the rules of logic and historical integrity are not an optional, academic game.''' They flow from the very rational, truthful nature of God Himself.
+When we examined that facts, you realize that '''the rules of logic and historical integrity are not an optional, academic game.''' They flow from the very rational, truthful nature of God Himself.
 When a minister tells you to completely bypass your mind, he isn't asking for deep faith. '''He is asking for blind submission.''' The Bible never tells us to shut off our understanding. It tells us to "prove all things; hold fast that which is good".