Theology: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
*His teaching on [[Matthew 24:28]] | *His teaching on [[Matthew 24:28]] | ||
*His insistence that [[William Branham's Teachings on Water Baptism| water baptism had to be in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, yet there is no record in the New Testament of anyone every having been baptized that way]]. | *His insistence that [[William Branham's Teachings on Water Baptism| water baptism had to be in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, yet there is no record in the New Testament of anyone every having been baptized that way]]. | ||
*[[King Saul - The Peoples' Choice?]] | |||
=References= | =References= |
Revision as of 18:54, 20 July 2013
To followers of William Branham, "theology" is a bad word. What they fail to realize is that the word "theology" simply means - “The study of God” and is also used as a general term for the study of all the teachings of the Bible.[1] What followers of the message also fail to realize is that William Branham recognized that he had a theology and he knew that was what he was teaching. William Branham and TheologyWilliam Branham was fond of ridiculing "theology" and even making it Satanic:
William Branham knew that theology could be BiblicalBut he also seemed to realize that theology could be Biblical:
William Branham did realize that he had his own theology, and insisted that it was the only correct theology:
Lazy TheologyWilliam Branham's approach to theology could at times be considered "lazy" or perhaps "sloppy". He often did not provide any (or inadequate) scriptural backing for his theological positions and seemed to have little or no proper understanding of differing understandings of scripture. Some examples of his lazy theology are as follows:
References
|