BelieveTheSign

Question 12 (ABM) - A Biblical Perspective on William Branham's Lies: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Question 12 (ABM) - A Biblical Perspective on William Branham's Lies (view source)

Revision as of 23:05, 13 January 2019

6,744 bytes added ,  5 years ago
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Top of Page}}
{{Top of Page}}
{{ABM Q&A}}
{{ABM Q&A re Credibility}}


=Question 12 (ABM) - A Biblical Perspective on William Branham's Lies=
=Question 12 (ABM) - A Biblical Perspective on William Branham's Lies=
Line 8: Line 8:
I would like to present the biblical perspective on your view and would welcome your comments.
I would like to present the biblical perspective on your view and would welcome your comments.


==Does the Old Testament prohibit lying?==
===Does the Old Testament prohibit lying?===


:In looking at what the Old Testament says about lying, the following is from a paper entitled, "Lies by Prophets and Other Lies in the Hebrew Bible” by Yael Shemesh, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel:
:In looking at what the Old Testament says about lying, the following is from a paper entitled, "Lies by Prophets and Other Lies in the Hebrew Bible” by Yael Shemesh, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel:
Line 24: Line 24:
::The biblical narrator also takes a favorable view of fraud when the object is some religious goal in keeping with the general outlook of the Bible. An example is Jehu’s lying to the worshippers of Baal, which is aimed at killing all the prophets of Baal and eradicating his worship from the country (2 Kgs. 10:18–28). In one case we even find God twisting the truth in order to preserve amicable relations between Abraham and Sarah and to prevent Abraham’s feelings from being hurt. Upon overhearing the prediction that she was about to become pregnant, Sarah laughs, “Now that I am withered, am I to have enjoyment— with my husband so old?” (Gen. 18:12); God, however, quotes her in Abraham’s hearing as having said, “Shall I in truth bear a child, old as I am?” (Gen. 18:13), making no reference to Abraham’s inadequacy. This episode was used by the Sages of the Talmud as a proof-text showing that it is permitted to deviate from the strict line of truth in order to establish peace (BT Yeb. 65b; BT B.M. 87a).
::The biblical narrator also takes a favorable view of fraud when the object is some religious goal in keeping with the general outlook of the Bible. An example is Jehu’s lying to the worshippers of Baal, which is aimed at killing all the prophets of Baal and eradicating his worship from the country (2 Kgs. 10:18–28). In one case we even find God twisting the truth in order to preserve amicable relations between Abraham and Sarah and to prevent Abraham’s feelings from being hurt. Upon overhearing the prediction that she was about to become pregnant, Sarah laughs, “Now that I am withered, am I to have enjoyment— with my husband so old?” (Gen. 18:12); God, however, quotes her in Abraham’s hearing as having said, “Shall I in truth bear a child, old as I am?” (Gen. 18:13), making no reference to Abraham’s inadequacy. This episode was used by the Sages of the Talmud as a proof-text showing that it is permitted to deviate from the strict line of truth in order to establish peace (BT Yeb. 65b; BT B.M. 87a).


===What does the Old Testament teach about prophets lying?===
====What does the Old Testament teach about prophets lying?====


:Again, the following are some comments on the issue from a paper entitled, "Lies by Prophets and Other Lies in the Hebrew Bible” by Yael Shemesh, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel:
:Again, the following are some comments on the issue from a paper entitled, "Lies by Prophets and Other Lies in the Hebrew Bible” by Yael Shemesh, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel:
Line 48: Line 48:
There are other examples that we could refer to but, I think the examples above allow us to draw some conclusions.
There are other examples that we could refer to but, I think the examples above allow us to draw some conclusions.


===Conclusions===
====Conclusions====


:(1) In contrast to those theologians and philosophers who reject any kind of lying under any circumstances, from the perspective of the Jewish scholar quoted above, the Old Testament recognizes that certain situations justify and even require deceptive measures. This is true even regarding God’s prophets.  Nevertheless, the Bible avoids ascribing outright, undisguised falsehood to God or to the prophets (and on occasion is equally reticent in regard to other positive figures).
:(1) In contrast to those theologians and philosophers who reject any kind of lying under any circumstances, from the perspective of the Jewish scholar quoted above, the Old Testament recognizes that certain situations justify and even require deceptive measures. This is true even regarding God’s prophets.  Nevertheless, the Bible avoids ascribing outright, undisguised falsehood to God or to the prophets (and on occasion is equally reticent in regard to other positive figures).
Line 94: Line 94:
Those who practice lying in an effort to make God look better are to be CONDEMNED.  Thus William Branham’s conduct is that unbecoming of a man of God.   
Those who practice lying in an effort to make God look better are to be CONDEMNED.  Thus William Branham’s conduct is that unbecoming of a man of God.   


==Conclusion==
===Conclusion===
   
   
We have shown repeated examples of William Branham lying over the pulpit and we will provide more.  This repeated pattern of unbiblical behaviour must be addressed from a biblical perspective.  These were not mere exaggerations or embellishments.  They go far beyond that.  If a child were to tell the tales that William Branham did, they would simply be described as “lies”.
We have shown repeated examples of William Branham lying over the pulpit and we will provide more.  This repeated pattern of unbiblical behaviour must be addressed from a biblical perspective.  These were not mere exaggerations or embellishments.  They go far beyond that.  If a child were to tell the tales that William Branham did, they would simply be described as “lies”.
Line 106: Line 106:
BTS
BTS


=Response=
==Response==


BTS,
BTS,
Line 125: Line 125:


Bro. Branham can be proven to have exaggerated at often, he acknowledged it. But his personal failings do not invalidate the message he brought or the good accomplished through his ministry.  
Bro. Branham can be proven to have exaggerated at often, he acknowledged it. But his personal failings do not invalidate the message he brought or the good accomplished through his ministry.  
Regards,
ABM
=Follow up question=
Dear ABM,
This is a follow-up question to Question 12 which deals with the issue of William Branham's lies.
You misquoted me when you stated,  "You conclude that there are no examples in the new testament of men having personal failings." 
That was not my conclusion.
I stated that there were no examples of apostles, prophets or Christian leaders lying in the New Testament after the coming of the Holy Spirit.  Peter was in error by not wanting to associate with Gentiles in the presence of Jews.  As the apostle to the Gentiles, Paul corrected him.  Barnabas wanted to bring Mark with them but Paul did not want to have someone accompanying them who had exhibited spiritual immaturity by abandoning them. Later when Mark matured, he became of use to Paul (2 Timothy 4:11), but at the time of the disagreement with Barnabas, Mark was not a leader in the church.  The fact that Paul and Barnabas had a disagreement does not indicate moral failing and certainly did not involve lying.  Peter also acknowledged Paul's leadership in 2 Peter 3:15.  In fact, he referred to Paul's letters as scripture.
Those in the message hold out William Branham to be the equivalent of Paul today.  In fact, many would state that he ranks even greater than Paul. 
Can you find any indication of one of the apostles lying even once?  Is there any record of the apostle Paul exaggerating to the point that William Branham did?
I appreciate that you do not consider William Branham's wild exaggerations to be lies.  But that is what they are.
He didn't lie to save someone's life.  He was practicing deception... over the pulpit.  He presented a false impression. He deliberately caused those in the audience to believe something that was not true.
To repeat myself, Paul CLEARLY addressed the type of falsehood that William Branham engaged in and rejected such behavior as ungodly:
:''Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?” Why not say—as some slanderously claim that we say — “Let us do evil that good may result”?  Their condemnation is just!  (Rom. 3:7-8, NIV)
There is a higher standard for those in Christian leadership, particularly when they are ministering.  Why did William Branham lie?  To make himself look better.  To justify his self-proclaimed status as a prophet.  This is not acceptable behavior based on the clear meaning of scripture.
Shalom,
BTS
==Response to follow up question==
BTS,
I offer my apologies for misstating you in Question 12, I clearly overstated your position. I agree with you, there are not examples of ministers of God lying in the new testament. I also agree with you: Paul clearly condemns it.
Allow me to restate my point differently. Lying is in the category of personal failures, just as any number of things are personal failures. And there are clearly personal failings in the life of New Testament Christians. Why would Paul feel it necessary to preach to people to tell them not lie, except it was occurring? Why would Paul feel it necessary to tell them to avoid fornication, except it was occurring? These things were occurring in the church among believers. Ananias and Sapphira are an example of believers who lied.
John speaks to this 1 John 5:16. There is a sin which can occur in the life of a believer which can be forgiven, and there are sins that can occur in the life of believers that will lead to death.
We do indeed disagree about the severity of Bro. Branham's embellishments. So I do not want to belabor the point. In my assessment his exaggerations are minor. I believe that the cases you put forward to prove his embellishments are more than minor are mistaken interpretations of his statements and events and have other correct or equally plausible interpretations that do no lead to your conclusions.
But even if they were not minor personal failings - that alone is not grounds to reject him as a false prophet. It would be enough for him to have to step down from the ministry. That is a far cry different than being a false prophet. The Old Testament if clear: failed prophecy is the grounds to reject a false prophet. The New Testament is clear, the grounds for rejecting someone as a false prophet is that they teach false doctrine contrary to the scripture.  Not their own personal failings. So you can chose your standard. I know we disagree on this point as well, but I do not see a way to reject him as a false prophet under either of those criteria. Paul plainly states in 1st Cor that if a man build wood, hay, or stubble, it will burn. But the gold and precious jewels will remain. To label Bro. Branham as a false prophet, we have to conclude that his entire ministry was inspired of Satan. There is far too much good that occurred through his ministry for me to be able to accept that it was all inspired of Satan.
I am not alone in this assessment. Bro. Branham is still highly regarded for his early ministry in charismatic circles. Robert Lairdon summarizes the predominant view of charismatic and Pentecostal Christianity towards Bro. Branham well in his book, "God's Generals".  There was and is a broad acceptance of his ministry during the years of the healing revival, and he is viewed as going off track at the end of his ministry. The good is accepted, the bad rejected. I disagree with Lairdon on various points, but his viewpoint is far more prevalent than your own and Lairdon's viewpoint is representative of the broader Charisimatic viewpoint. Mainline denominations completely reject Branham, but they also generally rejected the healing revival. But in Charistimatic Christianity it is a different story.
Your argument to reject Bro. Branham as false prophet is not merely an argument against the Branham movement. It is an argument against mainstream Charismatic Christianity. I hope you can see that. I do not consider myself to be part of the Charismatic movement, but I am well familiar with it and how they view these things. Bro. Branham is still highly regarded for his role in the healing revivals and very widely accepted as a prophet, and remains regularly cited in positive ways on TBN and by many prominent charistimatic ministers.
You state: "Why did William Branham lie?  To make himself look better.  To justify his self-proclaimed status as a prophet." I understand your rationale, but as we have went along so far, you have not yet produced a compelling lie. Everything so far is explained either a minor embellishment or exaggeration, Bro. Branham just being mistaken, or a misreading of his quotes.


Regards,
Regards,
Line 133: Line 188:
[[Category: Unfinished articles]]
[[Category: Unfinished articles]]
[[Category: Questions and Answers]]
[[Category: Questions and Answers]]
[[Category: Questions and Answers - Series 1]]
Retrieved from "http:///index.php?title=Special:MobileDiff/23442...23598"