Episode 42 – How to defend William Branham… poorly (Part 1)

Off The Shelf
Off The Shelf
Episode 42 - How to defend William Branham... poorly (Part 1)

In this episode, Rod  responds to a defense of William Branham that was presented by Wisper Gwena, pastor of Spoken Word Ministry church, Waltham Abbey (North London), UK.  Rod is joined by John Collins, author of the Seek The Truth website and grandson of Willard Collins, the former pastor of Branham Tabernacle in Jeffersonville, Indiana.  John is also the author of two books, “Stone Mountain to Dallas: The Untold Story of Roy Elonza Davis” and “Jim Jones – The Malachi 4 Elijah Prophecy”.

In this episode, Rod & John discuss the following:

  • Personal accusations made by Pastor Gwena.
  • Is there a difference between facts and the truth?
  • Is the research contained on the Seek The Truth and Believe The Sign websites error-free?

External Links:

Music – The Cold Hard Facts by The Del McCoury Band from The Cold Hard Facts (1996) – available from iTunes

51 Replies to “Episode 42 – How to defend William Branham… poorly (Part 1)”

  1. Message pastors do not care about the truthfulness of what they are preaching as shown by the careless comments of Wisper Gwena. They have not come from a background which values truthfulness.

    1. Hi God bless you all. It is true that some of the pastor’s in the message are compromising and don’t care about the souls they are misleading.
      Seems like it’s all about the meal ticket. And the devil has closed their eyes and the believers are just believing their pastors and don’t care to make sure in the Word.
      They are all having itching ears and when you try to bring them back to the Word they call it emotion or politics and you are jealous, all these funny stuff.
      Read Mat.15: 25-30

  2. Thanks Rod & John Collins. I felt for the people being fed with this kind of a sermon. You can hear the people agreeing to him before he even says what he has to say. It is like they are all programmed to agree regardless. What a cheap shot at trying to defend WMB.

  3. Thank God, he hid these things from the wise and prudent,,,,these are the small people that must condemn Paul when he wrote Abraham staggered not at the promise of God but yet in the Bible Abraham took his maid and also gave his wife one time to a king. The conclusion of this matter is that they left because they couldn’t cope up. Leave Branham and the people God ordained to follow this message.

    1. You speak from a position of inadequate knowledge. We are not small people. I was in the message for almost 40 years. I had no problems with “living the message”. My problem was NOT that I couldn’t “cope up.” We tried to prove the message to be correct after receiving a couple of honest questions regarding problems with William Branham. As we researched the message, we found there were significant discrepancies that led us to additional problems. In the end, the message proved to be false. If you have not looked that the issue, you are willingly ignorant. God will hold you to account for that.

      1. 40 years of pure ignorance , researchers are found at university, believers are in the message .so your 40 years are worthless, it was not revelation but researching. Jesus said to peter you are blessed because flesh and blood (researching)has not done it but my Father. And the father can only show it to sons because they are genes.jacob have i loved but Esau the PROFANE was rejected.

        1. You present no valid arguments. Why don’t you actually try to prove us wrong? But perhaps that is not possible, so you are stuck with making meaningless statements that are full of “message-speak.”

    2. You’re not that gullible, surely… and yet you defend what this pastor said? I am a process analyst by vocation. Conclusions about anything are reached by examination of data. Notice I said data not information. When this pastor speaks about the war in his homeland and the confusion on his official documents, this is an understandable problem given a war in his homeland. When Branham gives us three different birth dates and all three of the birth dates have a spiritual connection according to Branham, and then when we compare three that Branham HIMSELF provided as data to the official documents, we have several from which to choose. And the spiritual connections which Branham attempts to make for the inconsistent birthdates do not match reality. For instance, Branham claimed that Alexander Dowie died on one day, and Branham was born on the next. In a different sermon, Branham gave a different date and claimed that this was the exact date when Israel became a nation (which was six months off, by the way). And in another sermon Branham states his birth date which was provided by a spiritualist who said that his birth date aligned with celestial events pointing to Branham being God’s prophet. We now have three separate data points from Branham himself, a divergence which is different yet from the official documents. This isn’t a records problem. This was Branham giving three different data points in his sermons. So, which in the words of the pastor is true? Which of the three dates which Branham gave are true and which are not? And is there a reason why all of these dates are different from the official records? I understand analysis of data. And it is impossible to determine a fact let alone truth in Branham’s assertions concerning his birth date. In old testament times, Branham would have been stoned to death. So what about this pastor that would choose to obfuscate to his assembly? Why is it that he can defend divergent data points from a single source as the difference between “fact” and “truth”? Not only does he NOT know scripture, but he does NOT know Branham’s message, OR he chooses to obfuscate what Branham says to defend him against examination. Sad…

  4. Rod and John are clearly heathens who do not believe. What is even the point of these silly episodes??? For whose benefit are they?
    You just wonder really. It’s better that if one doesn’t agree with something, leave it alone and live your life the way you want to. What’s with all this tireless efforts of trying to discredit WMB and his message? What does anyone gain from doing that? Pathetic to say the least.

    1. Clearly Heathens? Please be careful because “in the same way you judge others, you will be judged.”(Mat 7:2)

      There are several hundred thousand people in Africa who still follow William Branham and they need to be told that they are in error. We ask people to simply follow Jesus.

      I should add that your comments are referred to as an ad hominem argument, which is what people resort to when they have no real argument of substance.

      1. you quote the scripture about judgement and yet you are also judging. and u say and I quote “I should add that your comments are referred to as an ad hominem argument, which is what people resort to when they have no real argument of substance”, which is exactly what you are doing. Please if you dont believe don’t dissuade those who do and do not say they are in the wrong. You lived the message for “40yrs” and proved it wrong you say. let people walk their own path like u did.

        1. Judging what a person says is different from judging a person. An ad hominem attack is an attack on a person. When I look at what you say, I am commanded to compare it to scripture. These are the basics of spiritual growth and maturity. Do you not understand that?

          1. Just let us take our own path just like you did, please. We don’t need to be like you, we don’t need to leave the message just like you did.

          2. You are free to take your own path. The only point of our podcast and website is to point out the failed visions of William Branham, his multiple lies and his false doctrine. Just as Mormons and JW’s are free to follow their false prophet, you are free to follow yours. However, given what we know, we have a responsibility to tell people the truth about what we have learned. If you really wanted to do the message a favour, you would prove us wrong. But that’s not possible, is it? If it was, you would think someone would already have done it.

      2. Am releasing a book on Amazon next year.There is a chapter where i talk about Branham. My book is titled Misconceptions of Healing, Blessings and miracles in the Church. The Foreword to my book has been done by Roberts Liardon, Pastor, Author of God’s generals series. Check my website at www. tjnyirenda.com

    2. Luther nailed 95 thesis on the door of the Catholic Church. This is the reason why you and me are where we are today. Where do you think you would’ve if he had not done that? Another thing to consider is what did people in the Catholic Church say to him after he had done nailed his thesis to the door? Exactly what you are saying perhaps?

      1. Warren,

        I’m not sure you understand Luther’s 95 Theses. Do you know that it was a list of propositions for a public academic discussion? We asked Wisper Gwena to participate in a public discussion on our podcast but he refused. Given that he made these accusations in a public church service, there is nothing wrong with providing our comments in response in a public forum. While Luther was prepared to debate publicly, message ministers are decidedly unlike Martin Luther. They are afraid and fearful.

        You might be interested in a public discussion that we are undertaking on our website with an anonymous Branham minister. I think you will find it interesting – http://en.believethesign.com/index.php/Questions_and_Answers_with_a_Message_Minister

    3. People will know the truth and the truth will set them free. If Rod and John a rent shading truth please help us all and show us where they are wrong. I sure you must have some ideas or you wouldn’t be commenting.

  5. Rod Bergen, I am referring to your response to a comment by Hannah. You stated that she had no argument of Substance. I believe what she was trying to say is that you efforts to demean The Prophet of God are falling on the deaf ears of those whose heart is the good ground that the seed fell on according to the parable of the sower. Now you may be able to convince those whose hearts are like unto the wayside or the rock or the thorns on which the seed could not find root. Those who take your doctrine of Baalam where never in Brides section of the Lambs book of life. They may be in the section whose names will be blotted out. You can never deceive the true elect.
    Now back to your statement “Ad hominem argument”, all I will say is there is no argument in this matter. God does not need man to argue for him. God Almighty SHALL certainly speak on this matter. It may not be today or tomorrow, it may even be on the day of Judgement but HE shall certainly speak. If you are wrong, what then. If you are wrong you are certainly in danger of He’ll fire. It would have been better for you to quietly mind your own business if you had reservations about The Prophet Of God. That’s what Hannah was trying to tell you

    1. Your arguments have no substance either. You appear to say that Hannah’s approach is to plug her ears and repeat, “Peas and carrots, peas and carrots” until we go away. That is exactly why I stated her argument has no substance.

      And you obviously don’t understand what an ad hominem argument is.

      I have considered very carefully my arguments on this matter. But what if you are wrong? You haven’t even taken the time to consider the evidence that we have. i am not asking you to believe me, I am simply asking you to examine the evidence and see if it is true. If you refuse, you are willingly ignorant of the truth.

    2. Hello True Believer.
      If your faith is true it is worth defending it against the material Rod and John are producing. If you notice on the bible Jesus answers peoples questions of faith. So indeed did Paul in his letters. Perhaps you could find it in your heart to be like Jesus and answer Rod and John and show them where they are wrong. It would be fantastic if you could do as our Lord when he was fighting the devil and say ‘it is written’. Note Jesus actually answered the devil with scripture and didn’t just say ‘you’re a bad devil with no revelation’. Jesus corrected the error with truth.
      Please use your years studying the message to prove your point. The Message world is waiting for its David to come onto the field of battle and prove Rod wrong. Are you another Saul hanging about tents in a holy huddle
      afraid to do battle. Afraid that your training won’t be sufficient?

  6. Rod Bergen & Jon Collins modern day dathan & korah, leading the people away from the prophet of their day back to Egypt.
    Remember Spirits don’t die.
    Too late fellas…. The true seed will not be influenced by your cheap gimmicks.

    1. Cheap gimmicks? Again, nothing of substance. You engage in ad hominem attacks and provide no reasons for why we are wrong.

  7. It’s amazing that a preacher is free to say John Collins is possessed by an evil spirit but we are not free to mention inconsistencies in the message…? Sounds very unfair to me!

  8. It is interesting that message believers who would prefer that Off the Shelf would go away are commenting on this page. One can only hope that they listened to the materials before commenting. But my guess is that they did not.

    1. At least some message believers are curious enough to listen to these podcasts. They might criticize them but what they are hearing will leave question marks in their minds.

  9. What other better message did you find, for the promise of Elijah is real? I would rather hold on to this as there’s no better. Please leave us to live our own 40 years in the message uninterrupted

  10. What other better message did you find, as the promise of Elijah quite real? I would rather hold on to this as there’s no better. Please leave us to live our own 40 years in the message uninterrupted

        1. You obviously didn’t look at the link that I provided above as it would answer your question. Malachi 3 & 4 have been fulfilled. There is no need for a Gentile prophet.

          1. Malachi 4 v 5&6 was partly full filled by John the Baptist but he didn’t fulfill the part of turning the hearts of the children to their fathers. According to you isn’t there supposed to be a seventh messenger to fulfill Rev 10:7?

          2. You think WMB was the fulfillment of Rev 10:7? Then let me ask you a question.

            Revelation 10:7 states that:

            …in the days of the trumpet call to be sounded by the seventh angel, the mystery of God would be fulfilled, just as he announced to his servants the prophets.

            It is clear that the sixth trumpeting angel sounds in Revelation 9:13 and the seventh trumpeting angel (the one spoken of in Revelation 10:7) does not actually sound his trumpet until Revelation 11:15:

            Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever.”

            The sounding of the seventh trumpet takes place AFTER the two witnesses of Revelation 11:1-12 have been resurrected and leave the earth.

            So how could WMB be the angel of Rev 10:7????

          3. You avoided the first question on Malachi 4v5&6 of turning the hearts of the children to their fathers which was not fulfilled by John the Baptist

          4. The issue is dealt with in the web article on The Fulfillment of Malachi 4:5 which you obviously did not read. The article provides 9 different explanations for why WMB’s explanation of the fulfillment of Malachi 4:5-6 is incorrect. Here is one of them:

            William Branham stated that John the Baptist fulfilled Malachi 3 but did not fulfill Malachi 4.

            However, Jesus told his disciples, referring to John, that “if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah, who is to come.” (Matt 11:14)

            The problem is that there is only one reference to Elijah in Malachi, and that is in Malachi 4. So how could William Branham’s interpretation that John did not fulfill Malachi 4 be correct if Jesus specifically referred to John the Baptist as Elijah, a direct reference to Malachi 4?

          5. The angel prophecied to Zacharias, before the birth of John the Baptist, that he would “go before [the Lord] in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.” (Luke 1:17).

            The first, second, and fourth parts of this verse are very clear. The third part says, “the disobedient to the wisdom of the just.” Since it is usually children who are disobedient, and usually parents who have wisdom, this part of the verse should be interpreted to read “to turn the hearts of the children to the fathers.” In this case, the fathers refer to the patriarchs, while the children are interpreted as disobedient people of Israel. The patriarchs are the fathers, the great ancestors of the present sinners. From their vantage-point in the next world, they looked at their descendants and were displeased. But John would bring about such a change that the fathers would come to look with favour on Israel. Similarly, John would change the disobedient so that they accepted the wisdom of the just (as in Prov. 4). The result would be a people prepared for the Lord.[3] It is not the disobedience of children to parents that is meant, but that of the Jews to God.

            As a result, there is no half-scripture left for Elijah to fulfill.

    1. WMB said, “Pentecost is like her denominational vulture sister, setting now in large “counsel seats of the ungodly,” certainly, listening to her worldly, politic heads feeding her on vulture food of dead rabbits, of something that passed by fifty years ago. (65-0218 – The Seed Is Not Heir With The Shuck)

      How long ago did WMB die? 52 years ago. The message is vulture food by WMB’s own definition.

    1. Thank you Kiana for demonstrating exactly why the message is a cult and why I spend the time producing this podcast.

    2. Amen!!! Hallelujah 👏👏✋🙏Thank u Lord Jesus for sending us WMB .. The message of the hour… Today this scripture is for filled!!

  11. The best way is if you don’t believe the message of bro WMB, then just leave it and go your way and those that believe the message will stand by it to the end regardless of what.

    1. Regardless of whether it is the truth or not? Sorry, but we can’t go there. Our research inevitably leads to the conclusion that WMB was not a prophet, he had failed visions, he lied… a lot, and his teachings disagreed with scripture. If you can prove our research wrong, then we will change our website immediately. Here is a simple challenge that you can start out with.

      Please prove us wrong!!

  12. Who is funding this and is there no way you guys can direct people to God without discrediting Brenham. There are people who may end up worse of because if the confusion surrounding all this. I think it could be better just focusing on Christ and not attach Brenham. How do you see it brethren

    1. Eddie,

      We are funding this. No one else. It is a labour of love. 2 Peter 2:1=2 tells us:

      But false prophets also arose among the people. In the same way, false teachers will come among you. They will introduce destructive opinions and deny the master who bought them, bringing quick destruction on themselves. 2 Many will follow them in their unrestrained immorality, and because of these false teachers the way of truth will be slandered.

      WMB was a false teacher. There are hundreds of thousands of people still following him, notwithstanding that his visions failed, his prophecies changed over time, and he lied over the pulpit many times.

      Paul warns us in Col 2:18–19:

      Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you. Such a person also goes into great detail about what they have seen; they are puffed up with idle notions by their unspiritual mind.  They have lost connection with the head, from whom the whole body, supported and held together by its ligaments and sinews, grows as God causes it to grow.

      We have a responsiblity to tell people what his true. They need to follow Christ and not WMB.

      Paul also told us in Gal. 1:7–8:

      …certain people are confusing you and they want to change the gospel of Christ. 8 However, even if we ourselves or a heavenly angel should ever preach anything different from what we preached to you, they should be under a curse.

      The Bible requires us to stand for the truth and against false teachers. Hundreds of people have left the message and are now simply following Christ. Would you still have them in the deception that is the message?

    1. I suspect you are asking me a “loaded question.” However, I will assume that you are not and will proceed with answering your question. Martyn Lloyd-Jones defines “intellectual pride” as “a condition of mind and soul which the Bible calls being ‘puffed-up.’ Paul says in 1 Corinthians 8:1—‘Knowledge puffeth up.’ All kinds of knowledge tend to puff us up. But biblical knowledge, in particular, tends to do so. A man becomes proud of his knowledge and of his understanding; he becomes an authority; and, in turn, of course, he despises others.”

      We are prepared to change anything on our website if someone can prove us wrong. Please don’t confuse the fact that we are sure of our position (because no one has come forward with any concrete challenge) with intellectual pride. if you can provide me with any concrete examples of where our evidence is not factual, we will change it. Personally, I am well aware that some of the things that I believe may be wrong, but I am constantly trying to prove things by scripture and to discuss biblical issues with others more knowledgable than myself.

      You might be very interested in our ongoing conversation with an anonymous Branham minister which has been posted on our website. This conversation is ongoing. I think you will see that we are capable of having a reasonable and honest conversation with those that we do not disagree with. He is somewhat unusual in that he agrees that many of our concerns with William Branham are valid, although he would see them as being exaggerations, while we would describe them as lies.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *