Eternal Sonship: Difference between revisions

Eternal Sonship (view source)

Revision as of 23:36, 29 May 2013

914 bytes added , 11 years ago

no edit summary

Admin

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

11,153

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 An example of William Branham's [[Lazy Theology|lazy theology]] is his approach to the concept of the eternal sonship of Christ.
+=William Breanham's Position=
 He ridiculed the idea throughout his ministry as being a Catholic doctrine:
@@ Line 19: / Line 21: @@
 :''Give Him praise now, and bless His holy Name. We love Him. We praise Him. We adore Him, the matchless One, '''the Eternal One, the Son of the living God.'''<ref>SPIRIT.OF.TRUTH_  PHOENIX.AZ  FRIDAY_  63-0118 </ref>
-The problem with his rationale is that one can make the same argument
+=The Problem with his Reasoning=
+When a person uses non-Biblical reasoning in approaching an issue, they open themselves up to the very same argumentation.
+This would be illustrated as follows:
+==William Branham believe the Father was Eternal==
+:''Grant it, immortal and eternal Father God. <ref>THIRSTING.FOR.LIFE_  INDIANAPOLIS.IN  THURSDAY_  57-0613 </ref>
+:''We're so thankful for this, that You are a universal Father to all of us, an eternal Father. <ref>ABRAHAM_  LONG.BEACH.CA  SATURDAY_  61-0211</ref>
+:''God became, from God, to become me, to take my sin upon Him, that He might make me Him, amen, back to His great purpose of sons and daughters of God, for He is the Eternal Father. <ref>CHRIST.IS.THE.MYSTERY.OF.GOD.REVEALED_  JEFF.IN  V-3 N-7  SUNDAY_  63-0728 </ref>
+O Eternal Father, send the Gospel Light across this city, through this coming week of convention. <ref>ONE.IN.A.MILLION_  LA.CA  V-18 N-1  SATURDAY_  65-0424 </ref>
 <ref> </ref>