Portal:Controversies

William Branham, his message and the followers of his message are not without controversy.

The following is not an inclusive list and, if there is something that you feel should be dealt with on this page or information that will bring greater accuracy or clarity to this information, please contact us.

=Why Are These Controversies Showing Up Now?

There are a number of factors that have allowed research to be carried out now that was incredibly difficult only a few years ago. These include things such as:

1. word and phrase search functionality for the Bible on the internet (do a search for "in the name of"--- very informative, particularly the OT scriptures).
2. word and phrase search functionality for the message AND an affordable way for all households to access all of the message.
3. multiple researchers who have published articles/books/videos showing issues with the message (it's much harder to ignore or discredit a multitude of voices). This has caused other people to add to the research, increasing the amount of objective information on the message.
4. google (search engines used to be MUCH harder to us
5. email (instant communication)
6. unlimited long distance (remember the days of itemized telephone bills?)
7. Skype (some people are much easier to get to know when you see their faces than when you merely read their typed words.
8. the perspective of time - we can see the fruits of the Message movement over time.

External Controversies

The Hagin Prophecy

Did Kenneth Hagin and Anna Schrader predict William Branham’s death in 1964? This question is addressed in the article on the Hagin Prophecy.

Controversies Relating Directly to William Branham

Visions that were Unfulfilled, Incorrect or Changed Over Time

• The Municipal Bridge Vision
• The Vision of the Meetings in South Africa
• The Brown Bear
• The 1933 Prophecies
• The Marilyn Monroe vision
• The Tent Vision

The Returned Ministry Sect

And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him. (Dt 18:21–22)

He said here was the test of a prophet: if a prophet prophesied, and that what he said come to pass, then hear him. But if it don't come to pass, then God hasn't spoke. That's all. So don't--don't fear him. That's right. "If there be one among you who's spiritual or a prophet, I, the Lord God, will make myself known unto him in visions, speak to him in dreams. And if it comes to pass, then I--that's Me speaking." Sure, God ain't going to lie. You know He can't lie there's nothing in Him to lie. He's the Fountain of all purity, all truth, is God. So it can't be a lie come from God. He's perfect, pure. (The Signs of His Coming, April 7 1962)

There were a number of prophecies or visions which William Branham told that did not come to pass. How many false visions or prophecies is a prophet allowed? The answer according to scripture is "none". But how do followers of William Branham's message deal with the unfulfilled prophecies?

Cognitive dissonance will not allow a message believer to contemplate the possibility of unfulfilled visions, so most message followers use the technique of lowering the importance of the discordant facts by rationalizing the unfulfilled prophecies in such a way as to make them unimportant.

But some followers of William Branham's message admit that there are visions that were left unfulfilled at the time of his death. However, they are not prepared to admit that William Branham was not a true prophet. Their method of dealing with the unfulfilled visions is to hold to a doctrine that William Branham will return from the dead prior to the rapture to fulfill all of the visions that remain unfulfilled. Of course, there is no scriptural basis for this, but it does demonstrate the reality of cognitive dissonance in message believers. They are prepared to ignore the clear instructions in Deuteronomy 22:18 because of their firm belief that William Branham was a true prophet.

Doctrinal Controversies/Questions

Doctrinal issues directly relating to William Branham's teachings are detailed on our page - Doctrinal Issues

Controversies Relating to Followers of the Message

The Doctrine of Progressive Revelation

What is the doctrine of Progressive Revelation? Is it supportable from scripture?

The Credibility of Message Ministers

A number of message ministers have been plagued by scandal. Here is a message minister that is know for embellishing stories to the point where they are no longer true.

Sects within the Message

The followers of the message of William Branham are not a united group. There are varying interpretations which have formed into sub-sects or denominations within the message. These subgroups have little or nothing to do with anyone in other message subgroups. The underlying theme of most of these subgroups is very similar to that of the message itself - if you do not believe the "special revelation" that the specific subgroup holds, then you are not part of the "true bride" and you will not be part of the rapture. Those outside of a subgroup are viewed by the members of that subgroup as "foolish virgins" or "pentecostals", a derogatory term used by followers of the message.

• Returned Ministry - Believing that William Branham will return to fulfill those visions that remained unfulfilled at his death
• Josephism - Believing that Joseph Branham is a prophet carrying on the works of his father.
• Diety - Believing that William Branham was God in flesh.
• Jospeh Diety - Believing that William Branham is God in flesh.
• The Seven Thunders - followers of Joseph Coleman
• Vaylism - followers of Lee Vayle, although some of these have gone of on a separate tangent, such as the followers of Terry Sproule in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada (who originally were followers of Lee Vayle). Lee Vayle taught a number of controversial doctrines including the Parousia doctrine and the denial of the deity of Jesus Christ.

...the church has made the great mistake in making Jesus equal to God — which he is in a certain way — but he’s not God. He’s not Deity. I’m sorry, but he’s not, because God is not in him. No way. What God was in him is not Deity, same as what God is in you is not Deity, concerning Deity Himself, which is Sovereign God and Creator and Maintainer. (Lee Vayle, Godhead: Tape #1500/11-05-2000, Godhead Q&A #4: Tangibility of God)