New Branhamite Church

[whoami]

Originally Posted by sandie

Well, that puts a whole new light on the subject.
It's why I asked the question to the poster, how on earth could anyone stay with a church whose founder believed that.
Thanks for putting it into context.

It doesn't put a new light on it at all for me. I've known the context for many years and I still don't understand how anyone with a shred of respect for women can sit under his "messages". He may say that he respects good women and that they should be honored, but his definition of what constitutes a "good woman" is pretty demeaning in itself.

[sandie]

Originally Posted by whoami

It doesn't put a new light on it at all for me. I've known the context for many years and I still don't understand how anyone with a shred of respect for women can sit under his "messages". He may say that he respects good women and that they should be honored, but his definition of what constitutes a "good woman" is pretty demeaning in itself.

How so?
I hardly know anything about the man or his teachings, so you'll have to forgive me if I'm taking words at their face value.

[TGBTG]

Originally Posted by whoami

It doesn't put a new light on it at all for me. I've known the context for many years and I still don't understand how anyone with a shred of respect for women can sit under his "messages". He may say that he respects good women and that they should be honored, but his definition of what constitutes a "good woman" is pretty demeaning in itself.

Could you give us his definition of a "good woman", maybe a sermon? at least that will allow us all the opportunity to judge for ourselves.

[whoami]

Originally Posted by TGBTG

Could you give us his definition of a "good woman", maybe a sermon? at least that will allow the opportunity to judge for themselves.

He has many more sermons on what constitutes a "not good" woman, the kind he has to force himself not to feel like they aren't worth the bullet to kill them. Like the sermon Expectation, Feb. 7, 1961 when he says that if women dress in such a way that causes a man to look at them and lust for them, she's committed adultery herself unknowingly. Some men have fetishes for long skirts and uncut hair on women, so how is a woman to protect herself from this? Wearing a burqa?

In Recognizing Your Day and Its Message on July 26, 1964 he said that only an immoral spirit of the devil would cause women to cut their hair. I know a lot of UPC people would agree with this, but I don't. *shrug*

In Questions and Answers on August 23rd 1964 he said that he doesn't believe that children born out of wedlock can be taken up in the rapture. What about women who were raped, and the children born of that?

In Marriage and Divorce February 21, 1965 ... well let me just quote him.
In the beginning there's only one man and one woman, one male, one female. But when she crossed that line and brought this sin, now the world's to be repopulated again by sex; not by creation; by sex. See where the woman's at now? Now, but that's the way the world's populated today, through women. That's the reason Jesus had to come through the woman to bring it back to its original beginning again, without sex desire. He's virgin born. But, hallelujah. there will come a time where it won't be no more sex, but God shall call His children from the dust of the earth, back like they was in the original. Not through any woman, but through the molding of the clay and the cosmic lights and the petroleum; He'll create again like He did Adam at the first time.
This desire for a world with no sex strikes me as very odd and disturbing for a married man...

In that same sermon he said that it was a sin for Christian ministers to marry a widow because a widow has been touched by another man.

In Ressurection of Lazarus on July 29, 1951 he stated that men who are filled with God's spirit are diety. I don't know what his intention was with that but I know how some of his followers have interpreted it. I've seen teenage boys horribly verbally and physically abuse their mothers and the mothers just take it because "spirit filled men are a diety and it's not their place to tell them what to do".

I'm sure now if you're a "message" believer you'll come in and give all your reasons why these things (and the many others that I didn't bother to search out and quote) are not demeaning to women, in your opinion. That's fine. You're not going to change my mind and I probably won't change yours. But I don't have any desire to debate endlessly about it, so I probably won't respond now that I've laid out some of my reasons for my opinions on what his view of women was. Also, one of my Uncle's pastor's a "message" church and most of my homeschool group growing up was made up of Branhamite and Amish kids. I've had plenty of exposure to the William Branham's teachings and have attended my Uncle's message church plenty of times while growing up. I'm sure that not all message churches interpret his teachings the same way, but what I've seen has been disturbing, to put it mildly.

[The Lemon]

Whoa! Two words...Whack Job! I have found that most men who obsess over issues concerning sex are closet freaks themselves. This is just way too much, you have to either be extremly vulnerable or just plain stupid to follow this kind of teaching.

[mfblume]

Branham's big mistake was thinking he could teach the Bible. I believe he was called to preach the gospel but not teach the Bible. He had astounding ministry in the gifts, and Paul explained such gifts do not validtae one's teachings. Unfortunately Branhamites differ. Gordon Lindsay warned him several times to stay away from teaching, but he "liked" to teach. So so so so sad.

[houston]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Branham's big mistake was thinking he could teach the Bible. I believe he was called to preach the gospel but not teach the Bible. He had astounding ministry in the gifts, and Paul explained such gifts do not validtae one's teachings. Unfortunately Branhamites differ. Gordon Lindsay warned him several times to stay away from teaching, but he "liked" to teach. So so so so sad.

I think MOST need to step away from teaching!

[sandie]

Originally Posted by whoami

He has many more sermons on what constitutes a "not good" woman, the kind he has to force himself not to feel like they aren't worth the bullet to kill them. Like the sermon Expectation, Feb. 7, 1961 when he says that if women dress in such a way that causes a man to look at them and lust for them, she's committed adultery herself unknowingly. Some men have fetishes for long skirts and uncut hair on women, so how is a woman to protect herself from this? Wearing a burqa?

In Recognizing Your Day and Its Message on July 26, 1964 he said that only an immoral spirit of the devil would cause women to cut their hair. I know a lot of UPC people would agree with this, but I don't. *shrug*

In Questions and Answers on August 23rd 1964 he said that he doesn't believe that children born out of wedlock can be taken up in the rapture. What about women who were raped, and the children born of that?

In Marriage and Divorce February 21, 1965 ... well let me just quote him.
In the beginning there's only one man and one woman, one male, one female. But when she crossed that line and brought this sin, now the world's to be repopulated again by sex; not by creation; by sex. See where the woman's at now? Now, but that's the way the world's populated today, through women. That's the reason Jesus had to come through the woman to bring it back to its original beginning again, without sex desire. He's virgin born. But, hallelujah. there will come a time where it won't be no more sex, but God shall call His children from the dust of the earth, back like they was in the original. Not through any woman, but through the molding of the clay and the cosmic lights and the petroleum; He'll create again like He did Adam at the first time.
This desire for a world with no sex strikes me as very odd and disturbing for a married man...

In that same sermon he said that it was a sin for Christian ministers to marry a widow because a widow has been touched by another man.

In Ressurection of Lazarus on July 29, 1951 he stated that men who are filled with God's spirit are diety. I don't know what his intention was with that but I know how some of his followers have interpreted it. I've seen teenage boys horribly verbally and physically abuse their mothers and the mothers just take it because "spirit filled men are a diety and it's not their place to tell them what to do".

I'm sure now if you're a "message" believer you'll come in and give all your reasons why none of these things (and the many others that I didn't bother to search out and quote) are not demeaning to women, in your opinion. That's fine. You're not going to change my mind and I probably won't change yours. But I don't have any desire to debate endlessly about it, so I probably won't respond now that I've laid out some of my reasons for my opinions on what his view of women was. Also, one of my Uncle's pastor's a "message" church and most of my homeschool group growing up was made up of Branhamite and Amish kids. I've had plenty of exposure to the William Branham's teachings and have attended my Uncle's message church plenty of times while growing up. I'm sure that not all message churches interpret his teachings the same way, but what I've seen has been disturbing, to put it mildly.

He lost me with that rubbish about babies being born out of wedlock.

Thank you for taking the time to respond.

[whoami]

Originally Posted by sandie

He lost me with that rubbish about babies being born out of wedlock.

Thank you for taking the time to respond.

You are welcome. I think he made some distinction between being saved, and being raptured, but he definitely said that babies born out of wedlock could not be raptured. Bleh...

[sandie]

Originally Posted by whoami

You are welcome. I think he made some distinction between being saved, and being raptured, but he definitely said that babies born out of wedlock could not be raptured. Bleh...

Bleh is right....
I'd ask what he thought those babies were going to do being left behind, but I don't even want to know!