was william branham the last prophet ?

Originally posted by seethetruth

Originally posted by truejew
He was a false prophet. He was not a Christian.

how did you come to the conclusion he was not Christian

He had teachings that are not Christian. He also labeled the Apostolic Church as a "cult". Some believe he was involved with the Freemasons and/or Wiccans.

Originally posted by adjensen

I don't know about TrueJew's reasons, but Branham was anti-Trinitarian, which is one of the defining characteristics of Christian faith, so saying he (and those that agree with him) was not a Christian is a reasonable statement.

The trinity is a defining characteristic of Pagananity, not Christiananity. He was correct to reject the trinity, but incorrect in his teaching that trinitarians can be saved without repenting of the heresy.

Originally posted by truejew
The trinity is a defining characteristic of Pagananity, not Christiananity. He was correct to reject the trinity, but incorrect in his teaching that trinitarians can be saved without repenting of the heresy.

So, what's the "Apostolic Church" that you claim he was defaming by labeling it a cult? It's not another "Church of God" Armstrong offshoot, is it?

Cause... yeah... lotta cult fodder in some of those guys.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by truejew
The trinity is a defining characteristic of Pagananity, not Christiananity. He was correct to reject the trinity, but incorrect in his teaching that trinitarians can be saved without repenting of the heresy.

So, what's the "Apostolic Church" that you claim he was defaming by labeling it a cult? It's not another "Church of God" Armstrong offshoot, is it?

Cause... yeah... lotta cult fodder in some of those guys.

edit on 4-10-2012 by adjensen because: (no reason given)

The Church that has the Apostles for its foundation.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by truejew
The trinity is a defining characteristic of Pagananity, not Christiananity. He was correct to reject the trinity, but incorrect in his teaching that trinitarians can be saved without repenting of the heresy.

So, what's the "Apostolic Church" that you claim he was defaming by labeling it a cult? It's not another "Church of God" Armstrong offshoot, is it?

Cause... yeah... lotta cult fodder in some of those guys.

The Church that has the Apostles for its foundation.

*Ding* *Ding* *Ding*

Church of God it is!

Never could figure out how people rationalize their church being "secret" for 1900 years or so. On the other hand, our next President might be the one who thinks the "true church" was founded by a con man in the 1800s.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by truejew
The trinity is a defining characteristic of Pagananity, not Christiananity. He was correct to reject the trinity, but incorrect in his teaching that trinitarians can be saved without repenting of the heresy.

So, what's the "Apostolic Church" that you claim he was defaming by labeling it a cult? It's not another "Church of God" Armstrong offshoot, is it?

Cause... yeah... lotta cult fodder in some of those guys.

The Church that has the Apostles for its foundation.

*Ding* *Ding* *Ding*

Church of God it is!

Never could figure out how people rationalize their church being "secret" for 1900 years or so. On the other hand, our next President might be the one who thinks the "true church" was founded by a con man in the 1800s.

The organizations/denominations titled "Church of God" do not have the Apostles for its foundation.

"19Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; 20And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;" (Ephesians 2:19-20 KJV)

reply to post by truejew


the thought had gone through my mind about him been illuminati/mason , do you have any links on this info

Originally posted by seethetruth
reply to post by truejew

 

the thought had gone through my mind about him been illuminati/mason , do you have any links on this info

Here is a link to a study on William Branham.

William M. Branham

"Question: "Brother Branham, is there anything wrong with belonging to a secret lodge, after we have become a Christian, such as the Masons?"

Answer: "No Sir! You can be a Christian wherever you are. I don't care where you are, you can still be a Christian." (Ibid Q 162, p 680)."

It has been alleged by many that Branham had been a Mason. Some believe he was mixed up possibly in Wicca or influenced somehow by it. He bragged about the Masons helping him when he was a boy and needed medical help. He never once spoke against this cult although he was quick to denounce the UPC and other Jesus name groups and independent churches as cults.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by seethetruth
reply to post by truejew

 

the thought had gone through my mind about him been illuminati/mason , do you have any links on this info

Here is a link to a study on William Branham.

William M. Branham

And here's some joker that says that Reckart is full of it. The Lies of Cohen Reckart...exposed. Googling "Pastor Reckart" or "Cohen Reckart" shows that he's not alone in his dislike for the tactics and claims of Reckart.

OP, don't ask me, though -- I think both sides are full of it. Anyone, anyone, who tells you that they have all the answers, and your only hope is to follow them, is trying to sell you something.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by seethetruth
reply to post by truejew

 

the thought had gone through my mind about him been illuminati/mason , do you have any links on this info

Here is a link to a study on William Branham.

William M. Branham

And here's some joker that says that Reckart is full of it. The Lies of Cohen Reckart...exposed. Googling "Pastor Reckart" or "Cohen Reckart" shows that he's not alone in his dislike for the tactics and claims of Reckart.

OP, don't ask me, though -- I think both sides are full of it. Anyone, anyone, who tells you that they have all the answers, and your only hope is to follow them, is trying to sell you something.

Pastor Reckart has been a friend of mine for several years. Most who dislike him, dislike him because he preaches against their false doctrines.

Whatever your opinion of Pastor Reckart is, his quotes from William Branham are correct. Let's keep this discussion on info, not attacks on people.

Originally posted by truejew
Pastor Reckart has been a friend of mine for several years. Most who dislike him, dislike him because he preaches against their false doctrines.

Whatever your opinion of Pastor Reckart is, his quotes from William Branham are correct.

I don't really have an opinion of him, apart from reading some of the claims he makes on his page justifying why he is right, and everyone else is wrong, seeing a number of obvious errors and dismissing it.

As I wrote earlier in the thread, I think that Branham is equally wrong, so both Reckart and his detractors can make salient claims about the other all day long.

reply to post by adjensen


This thread is not on Pastor Reckart, it is on William Branham. If you have proof that Pastor Reckart's quote of William Branham is incorrect, post proof.

reply to post by truejew


who is Pastor Reckart ? is he another one like branham

Originally posted by seethetruth
reply to post by truejew

 

who is Pastor Reckart ? is he another one like branham

No. He is the Apostolic Pastor who wrote the study on William Branham that I posted a link to. He is nothing like William Branham and is a friend of mine. He is not afraid to preach against sin and because of that he is very disliked by those who love sin.

reply to post by truejew


going off subject a little hear but what are your thoughts on the mark of the beast , do you think its about keeping the sabbath ,, or a chip to go in the hand

Originally posted by seethetruth
reply to post by truejew

 

going off subject a little hear but what are your thoughts on the mark of the beast , do you think its about keeping the sabbath ,, or a chip to go in the hand

What it is is still unknown to us at this time, but it is 100% that it has nothing to do with the sabbath. It could be the chip or the hex star or something we have not heard of yet.

Originally posted by seethetruth
reply to post by truejew

 

who is Pastor Reckart ? is he another one like branham

Yes, he's pretty much the same thing -- yet another claimant to be the "true church" and if you don't believe everything that he tells you to, you're going to hell. Even something like being baptized "in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit" (like Jesus said to do, see Matthew 28:19), rather than being baptized "in the name of Jesus", dooms you.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by seethetruth
reply to post by truejew

 

who is Pastor Reckart ? is he another one like branham

Yes, he's pretty much the same thing -- yet another claimant to be the "true church" and if you don't believe everything that he tells you to, you're going to hell. Even something like being baptized "in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit" (like Jesus said to do, see Matthew 28:19), rather than being baptized "in the name of Jesus", dooms you.

No. He is not. Stop being a false witness. We are the true Church. We preach the doctrine of the Apostles'.

Jesus never said anything about baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son,and of the Holy Spirit. There is much evidence, even from trinitarian sources, to back this up. To even further back this up, the Apostles only baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by truejew
No. He is not. Stop being a false witness. We are the true Church. We preach the doctrine of the Apostles'.

You don't have clue one what the "Apostle's doctrine" was. You rely on texts that were vetted by the Catholic church, while claiming that such didn't exist until Nicaea, which is utter nonsense.

You dispute the words of Christ, claiming that this vague statement of Peter is preferable.

You are part of an anti-Christian cult.

Jesus never said anything about baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son,and of the Holy Spirit.

It's right there, in Matthew. Why do you deny the words of Christ? What arrogance do you carry to state what Jesus did, or did not, say?

I also doubt that the Apostles would be promoting phony doctoral degrees from an unaccredited institution, upon payment of $1,300. (See here) As you say, it's off topic for this thread, but if you'd like me to continue ripping apart your cult and its claims, kindly start a thread that promotes it and I'll visit you there.

Originally posted by adjensen

You don't have clue one what the "Apostle's doctrine" was.

Yes, I do.

Originally posted by adjensen

You rely on texts that were vetted by the Catholic church, while claiming that such didn't exist until Nicaea, which is utter nonsense.

????????

Originally posted by adjensen

You dispute the words of Christ, claiming that this vague statement of Peter is preferable.

I do not. Here are the real words of Christ from the Hebrew Book of Matthew...

Matthew 28:18 Jesus drew near to them and said to them: To me has been given all power in heaven and earth.
19 Go
20 and (teach) them to carry out all the things which I have commanded you forever.

Originally posted by adjensen

You are part of an anti-Christian cult.

Do you have proof? Or are you a false witness?

Originally posted by adjensen

It's right there, in Matthew. Why do you deny the words of Christ?

Christ did not say those words. As I said, there is lot's of evidence to support this, even from trinitarian sources.

Originally posted by adjensen

What arrogance do you carry to state what Jesus did, or did not, say?

No arrogance.

Originally posted by adjensen

I also doubt that the Apostles would be promoting phony doctoral degrees from an unaccredited institution, upon payment of $1,300.

Apostolic Theological Bible College is a real Bible College, preparing men to become ministers. All you are doing is being a false witness.

Originally posted by adjensen

As you say, it's off topic for this thread, but if you'd like me to continue ripping apart your cult and its claims, kindly start a thread that promotes it and I'll visit you there.

You have to start before you can continue.