Jump to content

What were the Seven Visions?: Difference between revisions

What were the Seven Visions? (view source)

Revision as of 15:48, 3 June 2019

18 bytes added ,  5 years ago
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 9: Line 9:
#Copies of those records, made subsequently, for newspaper articles and wider dissemination.
#Copies of those records, made subsequently, for newspaper articles and wider dissemination.
#The recorded sermons in which he spoke of the visions.
#The recorded sermons in which he spoke of the visions.
#William Branhamís book entitled An Exposition of the Seven Church Agesí (the Church Age Book).
#William Branham's book entitled 'An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages' (the Church Age Book).


===The original written record===
===The original written record===
Line 23: Line 23:
If the visions were real then the fact that all of these documents, yellow pages, prophecy book and Bible, do not exist today or, at least, have not been published, is unbelievable.  
If the visions were real then the fact that all of these documents, yellow pages, prophecy book and Bible, do not exist today or, at least, have not been published, is unbelievable.  
   
   
It is not as though this was a small matter - seven visions, seven prophecies which would prefigure the coming of the Lord in the Rapture and the end of the church ages.  One would have thought that recording, copying and publicizing these climactic claims would have been the order of the day.  One would assume that the content of the visions would be documented and available for review in a wide variety of formats but no! There are assertions of, but no evidence of, any attempt to secure the content of these visions.
It is not as though this was a small matter - seven visions, seven prophecies which would prefigure the coming of the Lord in the Rapture and the end of the church ages.  One would have thought that recording, copying and publicizing these climactic claims would have been the order of the day.  One would assume that the content of the visions would be documented and available for review in a wide variety of formats ñ but no! There are assertions of, but no evidence of, any attempt to secure the content of these visions.
    
    
Following William Branhamís death, none of these records were produced by the family or executors.
Following William Branham's death, none of these records were produced by the family or executors.


This means that the primary record of the content of the visions is missing and that secondary records need to be found to attempt a reconstruction.
This means that the primary record of the content of the visions is missing and that secondary records need to be found to attempt a reconstruction.
Line 72: Line 72:
This one example can be multiplied for other visions.  The sermons do not provide a reliable list or a reliable description of the visions because they are inconsistent and contradictory.  If you assume that one account is correct then you are always in the position of having to explain another account and so on.
This one example can be multiplied for other visions.  The sermons do not provide a reliable list or a reliable description of the visions because they are inconsistent and contradictory.  If you assume that one account is correct then you are always in the position of having to explain another account and so on.


The arguments presented in the Critique section will also demonstrate the impossibility of confidently constructing a list of the visions and their content from the sermons.
The arguments presented in the ëCritiqueí section will also demonstrate the impossibility of confidently constructing a list of the visions and their content from the sermons.


===An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages by William Branham's book===
===An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages ñ William Branham's book===
This is the last possible source of a description of the visions.  Fortunately, it suffers from none of the drawbacks and uncertainties of the other four sources.
This is the last possible source of a description of the visions.  Fortunately, it suffers from none of the drawbacks and uncertainties of the other four sources.


The book was written by William Branham with assistance from a friend and co-worker, Lee Vayle, to summarise fifteen messages he preached in December 1960 which addressed the Seven Church Ages and other topics in the book of Revelation.  These sermons have been published as a series entitled ëThe Revelation of Jesus Christ.
The book was written by William Branham with assistance from a friend and co-worker, Lee Vayle, to summarise fifteen messages he preached in December 1960 which addressed the Seven Church Ages and other topics in the book of Revelation.  These sermons have been published as a series entitled ëThe Revelation of Jesus Christí.
   
   
The list in this book (in the chapter The Laodicean Church Ageí) should be an accurate record of the 1933 visions because the original written records of those visions would have been available to ensure that the list was correct.  Further, they are unambiguously and succinctly stated and ordered and there are seven (and only seven) unique visions.  It would be obvious, therefore, from this work, what the visions were, how many there were and their order and timing.
The list in this book (in the chapter ëThe Laodicean Church Ageí) should be an accurate record of the 1933 visions because the original written records of those visions would have been available to ensure that the list was correct.  Further, they are unambiguously and succinctly stated and ordered and there are seven (and only seven) unique visions.  It would be obvious, therefore, from this work, what the visions were, how many there were and their order and timing.


A book is quite different from a conversation or a sermon as regards the weight of its propositions and arguments.  It has been authored over time and there is ample opportunity to make sure that basic information is correct.  If one assumes that the original records of the visions were available in the 1960s (and why would they not be!) then it would have been a simple task to ensure that they were correctly transcribed into the text of the book.
A book is quite different from a conversation or a sermon as regards the weight of its propositions and arguments.  It has been authored over time and there is ample opportunity to make sure that basic information is correct.  If one assumes that the original records of the visions were available in the 1960s (and why would they not be!) then it would have been a simple task to ensure that they were correctly transcribed into the text of the book.


William Branham was the author of this book.  It contains his name alone as the author.  He noted in the sermon ëI have heard but now I seeí (27th Nov 1965) that Gordon Lindsay was doing a great job, printing, printing my book now - The Seven Church Agesí.
William Branham was the author of this book.  It contains his name alone as the author.  He noted in the sermon ëI have heard but now I seeí (27th Nov 1965) that Gordon Lindsay was ëdoing a great job, printing, printing my book now - The Seven Church Agesí.


William Branham is therefore responsible for its content and for the accuracy of its list of the Seven Visions.  It is interesting to note that the web sites that are the main supporters of the William Branham ministry such as The Voice of God Recordings at branham.org all quote the Church Age Book version of the visions as if they constituted the original list.  In fact, their choice of the book as the source of the vision descriptions demonstrates the difficulty of proposing another list made up from the sermons.  Any such list would have immediately been called into question.
William Branham is therefore responsible for its content and for the accuracy of its list of the Seven Visions.  It is interesting to note that the web sites that are the main supporters of the William Branham ministry such as The Voice of God Recordings at branham.org all quote the Church Age Book version of the visions as if they constituted the original list.  In fact, their choice of the book as the source of the vision descriptions demonstrates the difficulty of proposing another list made up from the sermons.  Any such list would have immediately been called into question.
Line 89: Line 89:
The visions documented in the Church Age Book ought therefore to be definitive.  This list was authored by William Branham and if it is not correct then there is little basis for deciding what the visions actually were.  In fact, considering the time that elapsed from the original sermons in December 1960 to when the book was published, after 1966, there could be no excuse for a failure to ensure that the visions were documented as originally recorded.  Therefore, there is no room, today, to say that in some way these particular vision statements are inaccurate or incomplete.
The visions documented in the Church Age Book ought therefore to be definitive.  This list was authored by William Branham and if it is not correct then there is little basis for deciding what the visions actually were.  In fact, considering the time that elapsed from the original sermons in December 1960 to when the book was published, after 1966, there could be no excuse for a failure to ensure that the visions were documented as originally recorded.  Therefore, there is no room, today, to say that in some way these particular vision statements are inaccurate or incomplete.


This also means that any new or any changed detail suggested in sermons post-1933 would have to be viewed as additional to the originals, with the obvious question ñ how could there be additions to the visions unless there were additional visions!
This also means that any new or any changed detail suggested in sermons post 1933 would have to be viewed as additional to the originals, with the obvious question ñ how could there be additions to the visions unless there were additional visions!


Note also, that if you prefer another list, say the one in the Laodicean Church Age sermon itself or that in ëThe Seventieth Week of Daniel, then further lists of variations to those lists could be highlighted and would need to be explained in the same way that departures from the Church Age Book list need to be explained.
Note also, that if you prefer another list ñ say the one in the ëLaodicean Church Ageí sermon itself or that in ëThe Seventieth Week of Danielí then further lists of variations to those lists could be highlighted and would need to be explained in the same way that departures from the Church Age Book list need to be explained.


This is the point; if there was an original list then it was unique and definitive and not able to be changed.  Whatever list you might derive from the sermons as representing the original, you have to settle on something and then you have to accept the variations in other sermons and attempt an explanation.  You cannot avoid the inconsistencies that arise whichever list you choose.
This is the point; if there was an original list then it was unique and definitive and not able to be changed.  Whatever list you might derive from the sermons as representing the original, you have to settle on something and then you have to accept the variations in other sermons and attempt an explanation.  You cannot avoid the inconsistencies that arise whichever list you choose.
Retrieved from "http:///index.php?title=Special:MobileDiff/23875"