List the Cultic doctrinal errors of Branhamism

[bbyrd009]

This video doesn't really address anything? Mr Baxter does frame the modern day church in diff terms than (I) have heard, somewhat "Evangelical v Charismatic," and respectively "short on Spirit v short on Word," which def resonated.

However, there is no mention of any specific doctrine, serpent seed, etc? It has gotten comical now, the difficulty in getting stated, in a simple paragraph, the opposition to serpent seed? I'll look a bit today, and just pretend I'm on a mission, but I can't help but feel I'm mostly wasting my time--reminiscent of my rapture discussions, frankly.

I'm curious Mr Branham's position on rapture now...I'll come back with the best de-bunk of serpent seed I can find, if no one else has it?

[Sabby]

Originally Posted by bbyrd009

This video doesn't really address anything? Mr Baxter does frame the modern day church in diff terms than (I) have heard, somewhat "Evangelical v Charismatic," and respectively "short on Spirit v short on Word," which def resonated.

However, there is no mention of any specific doctrine, serpent seed, etc? It has gotten comical now, the difficulty in getting stated, in a simple paragraph, the opposition to serpent seed? I'll look a bit today, and just pretend I'm on a mission, but I can't help but feel I'm mostly wasting my time--reminiscent of my rapture discussions, frankly.

I'm curious Mr Branham's position on rapture now...I'll come back with the best de-bunk of serpent seed I can find, if no one else has it?

When you can rebut my simple paragraphs one-at-a-time then maybe we can have a dialogue. The simple statements you seek are found in the simple paragraphs I've written. I am a simple person, so bear with me.

I guess I have to say plain and simple: unless you eisegesically read a Serpent Seed into the text it's not there (unless of course you believe
Branham was the second coming of John the Baptist).



BByrd, you're not being honest.

[Jared Hanley]

Originally Posted by bbyrd009

This video doesn't really address anything? Mr Baxter does frame the modern day church in diff terms than (I) have heard, somewhat "Evangelical v Charismatic," and respectively "short on Spirit v short on Word," which def resonated.

However, there is no mention of any specific doctrine, serpent seed, etc? It has gotten comical now, the difficulty in getting stated, in a simple paragraph, the opposition to serpent seed? I'll look a bit today, and just pretend I'm on a mission, but I can't help but feel I'm mostly wasting my time--reminiscent of my rapture discussions, frankly.

I'm curious Mr Branham's position on rapture now...I'll come back with the best de-bunk of serpent seed I can find, if no one else has it?

I think part of the reaction against the "serpent seed" doctrine is the unfairness of it. There have been Calvinist sects from time to time that held this doctrine though I can't think of any at the present moment. But, most Calvinists reject it because even if you believe in either singular or double predestination as Calvinists do, it would seem unfair that you wouldn't be saved because of your bloodline.

Also, I think you would have a hard time explaining how some families that are mostly comprised of reprobates have at least a couple of saved people in them and families that are mostly comprised of saved people have a couple of lost people.

I would however be interested in finding out whether or not people who believe in the serpent seed doctrine also believe in the "God gene". I think the "God gene" is similarly unfair. And I believe in double predestination. To me double predestination is fair whereas these other two views are not fair because in the double predestination view, no one deserves salvation but God chooses to save some and leave other in their state of rebellion (and in some mysterious way hardens the reprobates from my understanding of Romans 9). In this view, it is God's choice not some fluke of nature (even if God is providentially in control of that fluke of nature) that causes some to believe and others to persist in their unbelief.