11,141
edits
William Branham and Shorts: Difference between revisions
→William Branham wore shorts!
No edit summary |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Top of Page}} | {{Top of Page}} | ||
William Branham believed that it was wrong for both men and women to wear shorts. While it may be argued from a biblical perspective that a woman wearing shorts is immodest (see 1 Timothy 2:9), is there any biblical support for condemning men who wear shorts? | William Branham believed that it was wrong for both men and women to wear shorts. While it may be argued from a biblical perspective that a woman wearing shorts is immodest (see 1 Timothy 2:9), is there any biblical support for condemning men who wear shorts? | ||
=William Branham wore shorts!= | =William Branham wore shorts!= | ||
[[Image:What Happens in South Africa STAYS in South Africa.png|250px|right|thumb|William Branham in shorts in South Africa.]] | |||
Why did William Branham preach against men wearing shorts, when he wore shorts while hunting in Africa? | Why did William Branham preach against men wearing shorts, when he wore shorts while hunting in Africa? | ||
| Line 13: | Line 11: | ||
:plural -sies [Middle English ypocrisie, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin hypocrisis, from Greek hypokrisis act of playing a participle on the stage, hypocrisy, from hypokrinesthai to answer, act on the stage, from hypo- + krinein to decide—more at CERTAIN] 13th century | :plural -sies [Middle English ypocrisie, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin hypocrisis, from Greek hypokrisis act of playing a participle on the stage, hypocrisy, from hypokrinesthai to answer, act on the stage, from hypo- + krinein to decide—more at CERTAIN] 13th century | ||
::1: a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not especially: the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion<ref>Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. (Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003).</ref> | ::1: a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not especially: the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion<ref>Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. (Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003).</ref> | ||
This picture comes to us courtesy of a slide show given by Rebekah Branham Smith who stated that her dad took the picture for a joke because "the natives talked him into putting on the shorts which he would not otherwise have done." | |||
The problem is that, obviously, William Branham's daughter has to defend him for breaking his own standards. Do we have any proof that he did this against his will? | |||
[[Image:WMB daughter in pants.jpg|250px|thumb|right|William Branham's daughter in pants]] | |||
Did someone put pants on his daughter against his will? | |||
We have had some people excuse this photo by saying that the picture clearly wasn't taken for public consumption, but only for his own family to see. Our response is, "of course it wasn't for public consumption. Who said it was? What if we had a picture of William Branham doing something else he criticized openly, like wearing a dress? Would it be OK to criticize that kind of hypocrisy? He said that a man wearing shorts was like a man wearing a woman's underneath clothes." | |||
The issue is that William Branham screamed condemnation for men who wore shorts but then wore them himself. He ridiculed others for wearing them but then allowed someone to "talk him into it". | |||
=Are shorts an item of women's clothing?= | =Are shorts an item of women's clothing?= | ||
William Branham stated that shorts were "the woman's underneath clothes" but don't men were shorts for underwear as well? Or is it that William Branham didn't wear any underwear? | |||
=Was the attire of men in battle or in strenuous activity similar to shorts?= | =Was the attire of men in battle or in strenuous activity similar to shorts?= | ||