Red Herring Arguments: Difference between revisions

Red Herring Arguments (view source)

Revision as of 17:43, 17 April 2013

4,941 bytes added , 11 years ago

no edit summary

Admin

Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, nuke, Suppressors, Administrators

11,153

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{| style="width:800px"
+|
+<div style="border-bottom:2px #B87333 solid; text-align:left; padding:1px; margin:1px;"><font color='#800000' size='+1'>'''The Credibility of Message Ministers (Part 2) - The Red Herring'''.</font>  </div>
+<mediaplayer width='800' height='500'>http://youtu.be/WjjTMBNDU2M</mediaplayer>
 There is no question that some of William Branham's prophecies failed.  That is, they were never fulfilled.
@@ Line 165: / Line 173: @@
 So to VoGR, Ed Byskal, Vin Dayal and others who are using these red herring arguments to overcome their own [[Cognitive Dissonance]], please go back and address the issues we raise with each of the failed prophecies.  We want this website to reflect only one thing - the truth.
+=Video Script=
+Would you recognize a red herring if you saw one?
+In a discussion, a red herring is an issue that is introduced to deliberately mislead or distract a person from the actual concern that is being discussed.
+In our Humble Pie article, we raised a number of serious questions that go to the heart of whether William Branham was a prophet.
+We initially raised our questions with anyone that would listen… and even some that didn’t want to.
+However, at no time did we ever get a serious response to the many questions that we were asking.
+Since we posted the Humble Pie article, we have had almost 50,000 people from 179 different countries visit our website.  We have repeatedly asked for anyone to prove the conclusions of our research wrong or to correct any incorrect information that we have posted.
+However, we have had only one serious response to our request, the results of which can be found on a website called “Searching for Vindication”.  These people actually faced the issue, and have published their research material and findings.  We recommend that you look at this site.
+What has surprised us most is that the most common response to our questions from message ministers has been to focus on completely irrelevant topics to divert attention away from the real issues.
+Instead of producing answers, these ministers have been producing Red Herrings.
+Let’s start with Voice of God Recordings,
+If you read the 2012 Catch the Vision newsletter, volume 2 – you were told that, since skeptics can bring “reasonable” arguments against the Bible, believers should not be surprised when skeptics bring what sound like “reasonable” arguments against the message.
+You were asked whether it would have been reasonable to believe that Jesus was a “false prophet, wine bibber, law breaker, and Sabbath violator” who was “justly” convicted and sentenced to death by the federal government...  Or would it have been more reasonable to believe the testimony of a group of former prostitutes, illiterate fishermen, and tax collectors?
+The problem with all of these questions, and similar issues raised by a host of message ministers, is this:
+:'''They have absolutely nothing to do with the questions that we raised.'''
+We have asked questions about failed prophecies, prophecies that have changed over time, and stories that William Branham told that hold no bearing to reality.
+These are issues that ministers have been aware of for years - but chose to hide from their congregations.
+Sure, we know that William Branham as a man was not perfect.  But that also has nothing to do with the difficulties we have raised regarding failed prophecies.
+We have been mocked for having the nerve to raise these questions.  One minister compared us to the Three Stooges, attempting to make our questions look foolish.  But they aren’t foolish questions.
+In fact, the apostle Paul commended the people of Berea for searching the scriptures to determine whether what he said was true.
+We also have diligently searched the scriptures and want to know, in the light of all of the warnings in the Old and New Testaments about false prophets, how can William Branham be considered a true prophet if even one of his prophecies failed to come to pass?
+One minister ridiculed us because we raised the issue of William Branham plagiarizing from the works of other men.
+But in the light of Jeremiah 23:30, this is a serious issue.
+:''So I, the Lord, affirm that I am opposed to those prophets who steal messages from one another that they claim are from me.'' Jeremiah 23:30 (NET)
+While William Branham didn’t use the phrase “red herring”, he did use the same concept.  He called it “barking up the wrong tree”, which means that when you go hunting with a lying dog, you will come home empty-handed every time.
+Our advice to you is this – if you see a red herring, or think your pastor is barking up the wrong tree, just go and ask him for a direct answer to the specific question that you have.  If he cares about you, he will answer your question.  However, you will probably be asked to be quiet or leave the church, which is what happened to me.
+To be perfectly honest, there are actually good answers for all of the questions raised by ministers relating to problems with the Bible.  However, we have not seen any good answers to the questions we have asked about William Branham’s prophecies and his message.
+Why are they avoiding these issues?  Is a red herring the best they can do?  Are you really paying them to bark up the wrong tree?
 =References=