Theology - Revision history

Admin: /* =William Branham's system of theology */

2017-11-01T14:38:03Z

=William Branham's system of theology

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:38, 1 November 2017
Line 24:		Line 24:
	:''How would God let me tell something wrong, and stand up with my very message. These things are only to indicate a Divine a vindication that '''my theology is right'''. That's exactly right. The Word of the Lord came to the prophets. <ref>BE.NOT.AFRAID CHAUTAUQUA.OH 60-0609 </ref>		:''How would God let me tell something wrong, and stand up with my very message. These things are only to indicate a Divine a vindication that '''my theology is right'''. That's exactly right. The Word of the Lord came to the prophets. <ref>BE.NOT.AFRAID CHAUTAUQUA.OH 60-0609 </ref>

	==William Branham's system of theology=		=William Branham's system of theology=

	William Branham's theological system is an example of the "if-you’re-a-hammer-everything’sa-nail" syndrome. His approach to Biblical texts is to find and quote only those that support his theological beliefs—his status as a prophet, serpent seed, Larkin's dispensationalism, the message dress code, etc. This may or may not be appropriate based on the text(s) under consideration.		William Branham's theological system is an example of the "if-you’re-a-hammer-everything’sa-nail" syndrome. His approach to Biblical texts is to find and quote only those that support his theological beliefs—his status as a prophet, serpent seed, Larkin's dispensationalism, the message dress code, etc. This may or may not be appropriate based on the text(s) under consideration.

Admin: /* William Branham's view of theology */

2017-11-01T14:37:51Z

William Branham's view of theology

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:37, 1 November 2017
Line 23:		Line 23:

	:''How would God let me tell something wrong, and stand up with my very message. These things are only to indicate a Divine a vindication that '''my theology is right'''. That's exactly right. The Word of the Lord came to the prophets. <ref>BE.NOT.AFRAID CHAUTAUQUA.OH 60-0609 </ref>		:''How would God let me tell something wrong, and stand up with my very message. These things are only to indicate a Divine a vindication that '''my theology is right'''. That's exactly right. The Word of the Lord came to the prophets. <ref>BE.NOT.AFRAID CHAUTAUQUA.OH 60-0609 </ref>

			==William Branham's system of theology=

			William Branham's theological system is an example of the "if-you’re-a-hammer-everything’sa-nail" syndrome. His approach to Biblical texts is to find and quote only those that support his theological beliefs—his status as a prophet, serpent seed, Larkin's dispensationalism, the message dress code, etc. This may or may not be appropriate based on the text(s) under consideration.

			What is the Bible in the message context? It is a depository for proof-texts. A proof-text is a biblical statement or citation that (purportedly) does not require a context in order to be coherent and meaningful. Its function has nothing to do with the overarching biblical story in which it is embedded or in the specific genre in which it is found. Also, the function of a proof-text is assigned by an extra-biblical structure: the system of doctrine. The Bible exists primarily to support the message.<ref>Michael R. Emlet, Crosstalk: Where Life & Scripture Meet (Greensboro, NC: New Growth Press, 2009).</ref>

			A text without a context is a pretext for a proof text. In other words, the failure to consider the context of a passage may become a pretext for perverting a text into a proof text. This is common in William Branham;s theology. He takes a passage, ignores everything that is said around it and makes his whole case out of that.<ref>D. A. Carson, “Kingdom of Heaven: Jesus, Christian, Law,” in D. A. Carson Sermon Library (Bellingham, WA: Faithlife, 2016), Mt 5:17–48.</ref>

	=Examples of William Branham's theology (message theology)=		=Examples of William Branham's theology (message theology)=

Admin: /* Examples of William Branham's theology (message theology) */

2017-10-29T14:25:24Z

Examples of William Branham's theology (message theology)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:25, 29 October 2017
Line 135:		Line 135:
	{\|style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; text-align:left;"		{\|style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; text-align:left;"
	\|-		\|-
	\|\|'''[[Eternal Sonship]]'''. An example of William Branham's lazy theology is his approach to the concept of the eternal sonship of Christ. Why lazy? Because he believed that God was the eternal Father...~~and~~ to ~~have~~ a Father you have to have a Son.		\|\|'''[[Eternal Sonship]]'''. An example of William Branham's lazy theology is his approach to the concept of the eternal sonship of Christ. Why lazy? Because he believed that God was the eternal Father ...but to be a Father, don't you have to have a Son?
	\|-		\|-
	\|}		\|}

Admin at 14:23, 29 October 2017

2017-10-29T14:23:22Z

@@ Line 180: / Line 180: @@
 |-
 |}
 {{Bottom of Page}}

Admin at 21:52, 23 August 2015

2015-08-23T21:52:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:52, 23 August 2015
Line 181:		Line 181:
	\|}		\|}

			{{Bottom of Page}}
			[[Category:Doctrines]]
	~~=References=~~		[[Category:Critical analysis of William Branham‏‎]]
			[[Category:The Message]]
	~~<References/>~~

	{{~~Portal Navigation~~}}
	\|-
	\|}

Admin at 02:22, 19 August 2015

2015-08-19T02:22:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:22, 19 August 2015
Line 4:		Line 4:
	To followers of William Branham, "theology" is a bad word. What they fail to realize is that the word "theology" simply means - “The study of God” and is also used as a general term for the study of all the teachings of the Bible.<ref>Systematic Theology: Revised Edition, ed. Stanley M. Horton, 652 (Springfield, MO: Logion Press, 2007).</ref> They also fail to realize that William Branham recognized that he had a theology and he knew it was his own theology that he was teaching.		To followers of William Branham, "theology" is a bad word. What they fail to realize is that the word "theology" simply means - “The study of God” and is also used as a general term for the study of all the teachings of the Bible.<ref>Systematic Theology: Revised Edition, ed. Stanley M. Horton, 652 (Springfield, MO: Logion Press, 2007).</ref> They also fail to realize that William Branham recognized that he had a theology and he knew it was his own theology that he was teaching.

	This article contains links to articles on various doctrines taught by William Branham. Click on the bolded ~~blue heading~~ to read the full article.		This article contains links to articles on various doctrines taught by William Branham. Click on the bolded part of the descriptions to read the full article.

	=William Branham's view of theology=		=William Branham's view of theology=

Admin at 02:11, 19 August 2015

2015-08-19T02:11:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:11, 19 August 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Top of Page}}		{{Top of Page}}
			{{Theology}}
	__NOTOC__		__NOTOC__
	~~This article contains links to articles on various doctrines taught by~~ William Branham. ~~Click on~~ the ~~picture or description name~~ for the ~~full article~~.		To followers of William Branham, "theology" is a bad word. What they fail to realize is that the word "theology" simply means - “The study of God” and is also used as a general term for the study of all the teachings of the Bible.<ref>Systematic Theology: Revised Edition, ed. Stanley M. Horton, 652 (Springfield, MO: Logion Press, 2007).</ref> They also fail to realize that William Branham recognized that he had a theology and he knew it was his own theology that he was teaching.

	~~Topics (click~~ to ~~select) - you are currently in the article that is in bold:~~		This article contains links to articles on various doctrines taught by William Branham. Click on the bolded blue heading to read the full article.
	*[[Doctrines\|His Major Doctrines]]
	*[[Elijah\|Did William Branham have the spirit of Elijah?]]
	*[[Non-Biblical Doctrines\|Doctrines that William Branham taught ~~that are not in the Bible]]~~
	*[[Theology\|William Branham's Theology]]
	*[[Minor Doctrines\|Other minor doctrines of William Branham]]

	~~To followers of~~ William Branham~~, "theology" is a bad word~~. ~~What they fail~~ to ~~realize is that~~ the word "theology" simply means - “The study of God” and is also used as a general term for the study of all the teachings of the Bible.<ref>Systematic Theology: Revised Edition, ed. Stanley M. Horton, 652 (Springfield, MO: Logion Press, 2007).</ref> They also fail to realize that William Branham recognized that he had a theology and he knew it was his own theology that he was teaching.

	=William Branham's view of theology=		=William Branham's view of theology=

Admin at 02:07, 19 August 2015

2015-08-19T02:07:41Z

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 To followers of William Branham, "theology" is a bad word.  What they fail to realize is that the word "theology" simply means - “The study of God” and is also used as a general term for the study of all the teachings of the Bible.<ref>Systematic Theology: Revised Edition, ed. Stanley M. Horton, 652 (Springfield, MO: Logion Press, 2007).</ref>  They also fail to realize that William Branham recognized that he had a theology and he knew it was his own theology that he was teaching.
-{|style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; text-align:left;"
+=William Branham's view of theology=
-|-
-|<div style="border-bottom:1px #B87333 solid; text-align:center; font-size:140%; padding:1px; margin:1px;">'''William Branham's Theology (Message Theology)'''</div>
+William Branham was fond of ridiculing "theology" and even making it Satanic:
-|-
-|}
+:''Oh, oh, certainly they know all the Greek words, and they know the--their education. God isn't known by theology or education. God's knowed by faith. Knowledge takes a man away from God; faith brings him to God. That's what separated him from God in the garden of Eden. He went to the tree of knowledge.''   <ref>ISRAEL.AND.THE.CHURCH.2_  JEFF.IN  IC 35-64  THURSDAY_  53-0326 </ref>
 {|style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; text-align:left;"
@@ Line 173: / Line 187: @@
 |}
 =References=

Admin at 00:16, 10 July 2015

2015-07-10T00:16:58Z

@@ Line 160: / Line 160: @@
 |-
 |}
 =William Branham's view of theology=

Admin at 00:13, 10 July 2015

2015-07-10T00:13:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:13, 10 July 2015
Line 149:		Line 149:
	\|}		\|}

			{\|style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; text-align:left;"
			\|-
			\|\|'''[[Matt Dillon]]''' Did William Branham have difficulty separating fiction from reality?
			\|-
			\|}

			{\|style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; text-align:left;"
			\|-
			\|<div style="border-bottom:1px #B87333 solid; text-align:center; font-size:140%; padding:1px; margin:1px;"></div>
			\|-
			\|}
	=William Branham's view of theology=		=William Branham's view of theology=