91 replies to this topic

[Mountain]

(4) Bearing in mind your quotes that you gave, could you also explain to me what the prophet mearnt in this passage that was preached well after the M&D sermon:

47 One, by--by Hagar, which was his wife's maid; a lovely, pretty, Egyptian maid that Abraham had picked up down in Egypt for her, to be her... his wife's maid. And Sarah, thinking that God would not be able to keep all of His promise true, she told Abraham to take Hagar, her maid, and to marry her, (which, polygamy was legal in those days) and to bring the child; and that's the way God had it planned, that she was to have the child only through Hagar. But we find out that that wasn't so.
69 Notice Hagar, the stalk, which was the first beginning of the Seed springing up. Now, it didn't look anything like the Seed. It was the stalk, because she was a bondswoman, not in the promise at all; nothing to do with the Word, just a transporter of the Seed.
70 Notice Sarah, the tassel that had the pollen, that Jewish nation raised from her. From, come out of Sarah, brought Isaac; through Isaac, brought Jacob; Jacob brought the patriarchs; and through the patriarchs, brought forth a nation.
71 Mary, the virgin's faith, produced the true, spiritual Seed Word made flesh. See?
The three women, three women that this Seed was carried through. One of them was actually an adultery, under polygamy; the second was a freewoman; and the third one had no sex affair at all, but by faith she believed the Word of God. Hagar, Sarah, both Sarah and Hagar, was sex; but Mary was virgin, by the power of the promised Word of God. That's right.
65-0218 THE.SEED.IS.NOT.HEIR.WITH.THE.SHUCK_ JEFFERSONVILLE.IN V-6 N-4 THURSDAY_


Actually contrary to your assertions,this sermon was preached on the 18th before the 21st when marriage and divorce was preached. When its stated adultery there,it means there that Isaac was supposed to come thruogh the unadultwerated pure word that is through the promise given to Abraham and thatis through Sarah,hagar represented a slightly doubted promise,an adulteration of the pure promise hey-finito. furthermore,she was under polygamy hey,look at the punctuation there,the comma after the adultery my brother,there is no conjuction hey,even if we were to go with your argument,then whatn would you say of rachel,zilpha,bilha,leah,that came after Abraham,tha built Israel.

[Mountain]

this paragraph that you quoted also explains what i wrote in the thread above concerning the doubted promise

47 One, by--by Hagar, which was his wife's maid; a lovely, pretty, Egyptian maid that Abraham had picked up down in Egypt for her, to be her... his wife's maid. And Sarah, thinking that God would not be able to keep all of His promise true, she told Abraham to take Hagar, her maid, and to marry her, (which, polygamy was legal in those days) and to bring the child; and that's the way God had it planned, that she was to have the child only through Hagar. But we find out that that wasn't so.

[temba]

Before we go much further, I would like to lay down the following quote as one of my basic starting points. I will number the poignant parts so that I will be able to highlight them in my references. I will then answer or comment on your points afterwards. So please be patient, don’t quickly answer what I have to say until I say I am finished. Then you can comment or say what you need to say to the whole:

The Word of God continually goes on. I'm told that if we could pick up an instrument that could catch it, that a man's voice, my voice that I speak today, ten thousand years from now could still be picked up in the air. It's like dropping a pebble in the middle of a pond. And the teeny little waves after they fail to be seen by the eye, continue on till it hits the bank. And the air-wave of our voices continually travels around and around the world; therefore, then our voice, what we say will be our judgment. Our testimony will rise right against us. Our own voices will echo in our own ears at the judgment bar of God when His great instrument catches every voice that's been spoke--every word that's been muttered.

And now, there's only one way to stop that voice that's wrong; that's repent. God alone can stop it. If it doesn't, it goes on and meets up with you in the eternity. Therefore, God being perfect and His Voice eternal, His own Voice will have to catch up with it. (1) Therefore, He must be perfect in every decision. For when He once says something, it has to go all the way and come back to the judgment.

Now, if you'll be real understanding, or try to be, you'll see why I have took always the stand for the Word of God that I have; because all other things must perish; God is eternal, and His Word is eternal. Now, as you study, and I'll try to speak just as lengthily as I can so that you--you'll get the words; and I do that for the tapes also, that you must know that this Bible is God's Word.

Now, we know that we're coming to a judgment, that the Voice of God has going to catch up with us somewhere, because it was given to every mortal to hear. Ministers are responsible of taking it, and if this Voice of God has to catch up with every person, then we've... You've got to hear it either here or at the judgment bar. So if the church has the Voice of God, then you must hear the voice of the church as our Roman Catholic people tell us. And when they, in themselves, are so confused in difference in their doctrine (the Roman, the Greek and their different types), then there cannot be any place to have faith because which one is the church?

Is the Roman church right, or is the Greek church right, or is some of the other churches right? Is the Lutherans right? Baptists right? Methodists right? Presbyterians right? or who is right when there is so much difference in them? One is as far as the east from the west from one another, but to my opinion the Voice of God is the Judge. So the Voice of God, and if it's so perfect, it's got to come from some perfect resource, and if men bring it one way and another way with their difference of denominations, then there's--there's no way to set a faith surely in what they're saying.

I hope that's clear (See?), because... (2) And if one says it's this a-way...One says you must join this church: "This church only has salvation." That's the Catholic version. The Lutheran come around and say they are the way. Here comes along the Methodists with something else, the Baptists with something else, the Pentecost with something else; and there seems to be such a gathering of confusion. But then when you take this written Word to our brethren, many of them says, "Well, them days isn't now." Another one says, "It's just a history." The other one says, "It's a book of poems." The other says, "The church has a right to change it." Then where do we stand? Where is there a resting place for faith?

When God, being eternal... I believe if we are to be judged (and always have)... (3) That if we're to be judged by anything, it'll be by the Word of God that's given the commission; then if we're to be judged by that Word, then God would be a unjust God to put such a confusion on earth, and the poor human mind so baffled, it doesn't know what to do; and one will join this one and then join that one. The poor fellow trying to think he's trying to find a right place, he will listen to this denomination, then he will listen to another denomination, and this one seems to be better than that one; he will go and first thing, he's back to the first one again. He just doesn't know what to do. But if God is going to judge the world by something, it'll be by His Word. I believe that.

And now, my brethren--now when I say that, I'm meaning not only this little group here this morning, but I'm meaning where these tapes will be sent around the world--I wish you would bear with me awhile and think of that, that there's got to be some place come for a judgment. Then some of them says, "The King James Version" or the certain other version, and now they're making a Standard Version or something.

I believe if God be the sovereign God, as He is, the eternal One, He has to see to it; it's up to Him. If I want to go to heaven to His place, it's up to Him to furnish me a place where I'll know what to do--somewhere that you can lay your hand and say, "This is it." Do you agree with that? There's got... It's up to Him. He'd be unjust.

If I said, "Lord, I was a Lutheran," and the other one said, "Well, I was a Catholic," well, there's your two protesting one another. Now, what's the poor man going to do? Or what if the Catholic church is right? Then all Lutherans are lost. Why if the Lutherans are right, all Catholics are lost. See, you've got to have somewhere that faith can take its resting place. And to me--I don't know how you feel about it, but to me (4) the Bible is the infallible Word of God. And I believe that God has watched over His Word that there's not one punctuation out of place.

My daughter back there, Rebekah, was saying, "Daddy, in school we proved that the--that there are millions and millions of years this world is old; then isn't that contradictory to the Bible?" "No, sir," I said, "it isn't." "Well," said, "if the--the different study of rocks and formations and stalactites and stalagmites and so forth prove that dripping of millions of years, and God said He made the heavens and earth in one twenty-four hours, doesn't that misprove... disprove the Bible?" I said, "No." If you'll notice God telling Moses about the Bible, He said, "In the beginning God created the heavens and earth (period)." How long it took, that's none of our business. Then He goes ahead and begins to bring in His time of putting seed in the earth. But in the beginning, might have been hundreds of billions of trillions of years, eons of time, but God created the heavens and the earth, period. That settles that. That's the first one. See, He makes no mistakes. Paul, the great preacher said... told Timothy to "study to prove yourself, rightly dividing the Word of God." Study It open-heartedly, and that's what I try to do.

Now, with my faith in the Word like that, then I cannot take some private interpretation, for the Bible states that (5) the Bible is of no private interpretation. Now, the Spirit just revealed that. I knowed the Scripture, but right now I don't know just exactly where it's in the Scripture; but you who are putting it down, you'll find it; I think it's in Peter that the Bible is of no private interpretation. Therefore, if an inspired writer said... And if that's wrong, then how much other parts of it is wrong? It's either all right or all wrong. You can't make it nothing else. So you... Well, about the church, you say, "Well, then the church..." No, if you go to the church, then which church is right? Which church is right? See you have to come back again to something that faith has to rest on; and to mine, it's on the Word of God, believing that this Bible is God's program for the people: always has been.

Jesus said the Scriptures must be fulfilled. That is, that all that's written in the Scriptures... Now bear this in mind, 'cause you who are getting the tape now; at the end of these tapes you'll find I come back to that again, that all that's in the Scriptures must be fulfilled. Now, let me--let that soak just a minute, class. See? (6) All that's in the Scriptures has got to be fulfilled. Then if God said anything, there you are; It's got to be fulfilled. Or if it isn't, that's not the Word of God. Then if it is--that isn't the Word of God, then where are we at? Let's get something that looks like God or anything we want to do: as the Bible said, "Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die." See?

Now, if that is not the Word of God, then we're all lost; and if it is the Word of God, God is absolutely honor-bound. The God of--Who is the fountain of all honor, Who is the beginning of all honor, Who is the source of all honor, Who's the source of all Truth, has got to stand by what He said. And if this isn't God's Word, then who is God? Where is God? or is there a God?

"Oh," you say, "Brother Branham, I feel it." Oh, the--the heathen can tell you the same thing on his idol. Traveling does something to you, when you see it yourself.
"So I--I believe I could look and see this." Yes. "I believe if I... I believe because I--I was changed like this, because..." I do that too, but remember heathens do the same thing. Why, the morals of Africa would snow... Some of them tribes would make Americans here that call themselves Christians feel ashamed of themselves, the morals and cleanness amongst the people who worship heathen idols. So maybe that's God. See what I mean? You--you see, when you look at the thing in the face, here's a great big circle here you've got to cover; so you've got to have somewhere to come back and place your hands.

Now, let's take the Lutheran claims. They fail. Let's take the Catholic claims. They fail. Let's take the Baptist claims, Pentecostals. They fail. So you can't put no confidence in them. But there's not one thing written in this Bible but what God has proved by somebody that it's the Truth. See? It's the Truth. As I've often said, "Maybe my faith won't climb where Enoch climbed, but I certainly wouldn't stand in anybody's way that could climb there." Great faith...

Now, getting this background that the reasons why I believe the Bible, and that's where I take my text. Now, next thing I want to say, that I do not believe the Bible contradicts Itself, and I have offered a challenge world around for any persons who claims such to come, prove it to me. Come, prove it. (7) The Bible doesn't contradict Itself; it's you contradicting the Bible. God cannot contradict Himself. If He does, then He isn't God. And if this Word is God then, and It's contradictory, then you make God contradicting Himself; then where is your God then? Kind of gets thick, doesn't it, complicated?

If God contradicts Himself, He's not no more than I am or no more than you are, for He can contradict Himself. The Word's there, but It's hid from the eyes of the wise and prudent.
That's why someone says that Matthew 28:19, where: "Go ye, teach all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, Son, Holy Ghost"; Acts 2:38 said, "Repent and be baptized in the Name of Jesus."...?... they're contradictory... It isn't a contradictory.

Everybody that's ever baptized has to be baptized in the Name of the Father, Son, Holy Ghost. And if you're not baptized using the Name of Jesus Christ, you're not baptized in the Name of the Father, Son, Holy Ghost. You're baptized in some titles that pertains to a Name. If that is--isn't the right revelation, then the Bible would be wrong when It went ahead, and everybody baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ. But if the Bible baptized, every one of the apostles all down through the age baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ after Jesus commissioned them to baptize them in the Name of the Father, Son, Holy Ghost, then the Bible absolutely contradicts Itself. But if you look at it, it isn't. They did just what He said: Not titles, but name. So there's no contradiction.

How many more could I pull out here that I've even got wrote down, that where people say It contradict Itself. I've asked for twenty-five years (almost thirty now) for someone to show me. It isn't there. No, sir. It's there, the Truth, all the Truth, and nothing but the Truth, and our faith rests right there, right there on what God said. (8) Don't--don't try to interpret It; just say it the way It says it. Don't put any private interpretation, and I believe that there's not anything else...

Now, I hope that if this hurts that it isn't me; I'm trying to say why I believe what I believe and the way I've acted the way I've acted--of the things that I done. I'm trying to show myself to the world, that I have done this because this is my conviction. (9) I believe that any word that's added to this Bible and whoever is guilty of doing it, his part will be taken out of the Book of Life: Revelation 21, "Whosoever shall add to This or take from This..." I do not believe that any creed, any dogma, anything else, but just (10) the literal Word of God is God's plan. Anything else is sinful and will be dealt with and will be eternally lost: any man, any creed, any denomination, or anything that will add to or take from one punctuation of this Word. God, Who is not a God of yesterday Who wrote a book and handed it out in a bunch of men's hands and let it be confused and everything else, then go to judge the world with that Book. But the God that wrote It lives, lives in It, and confirms His Word. (Now, in studying the tapes, I want you to study that real close right there--that remark. See?)

Now, I begin at Genesis, and I'm over to Revelations now bringing this together that this is God's Word. Revelation says that whosoever will take from It or add to It, the same will be taken, his part out of the Book of Life. I get to the Scripture, quote it after while: Revelations the last chapter. That's the 1st chapter shows now, what? What is the Word. Now, It is eternal. It must not be tampered with, added to, or taken away from. See? Must not be tampered with: God sees to that. It must not be added to--anything to It. Nothing can be taken from It because It's eternal. See? Now, now, to base upon to show you that, what I'm trying to say, is in between these (Genesis to Revelation) it will not mix with anything else.

Now, here's where we're going to differing, from here till five o'clock this afternoon. See? Here's where we're going to differ. How many will agree that this is God's Book of judgment, that we'll be judged according to the Word of God? It shall not be added to or taken away from. Then why has this been done? Now, we're getting to it. Why has this been done in such a rude way? Now, we're going to find it between Genesis and Revelation, right down in our time, down through other times.

Now, let me make that real clear for the tape. Now, after I have told you why I believe the Word, and what God said about It, and how It should not be taken or added to, taken from, I want to go into the dense part of it, to the context of this long text that I have drawed out, and explain to you and show you what happened; then you can see the reason I believe what I believe, see?

Now, It cannot be mixed, and It will not hybreed with nothing else. It will not hybreed. Today is a great day of hybreeding animals, corn, wheat, making a better looking product, but it's no good. It's rotten, no life in it: dies, can't reproduce itself. It's dead because everything that we have on earth today in its original form is a spoken Word of God.

That's why that a mule, a bastard-born animal with a crossbreeding cannot breed itself back again. God made a horse and He made a mule--or made a donkey. You breed them two together, you got a mule. It's a hybrid; therefore it can't breed itself back. (We're going to hit the serpent's seed after while now.) It can't breed itself back.

Now, what's my text? "The Spoken Word is the Original Seed." Now, I want to prove that. Let us turn now over to Matthew 24:35 just a moment and--and as we search through these Scriptures for a little while (and I'll see how much time we have), and I want to read here a word that Jesus said. Matthew 24 and the 35th verse--24th chapter, 35th verse--show how eternal this Word is, what we've been talking about.

Verily... (34)... Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Heavens and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away.

Now, could you mix anything with that then? Now, in the Book of Revelations the 22nd chapter and the 19th verse, I'd like to read this, Revelations the 22nd chapter and the 19th verse and see what this says. Let's begin with the 18th verse.

For I testify unto every man... (Now, remember from Genesis where He spoke the Word. See?) For I testify to every man... (That's priest, pope, bishop, state presbyter or whatever.)... that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

What about your dogmas? What about your unscriptural creeds that you're listening to, of all denominations, there's not a one excused.

... if any man shall take away from the words... ((11) saying it's not the same, you know. See?)... away... words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the holy city, and from the things that are written in this book.

Though he be a preacher (see), though he be a church member all of his life, though he be a bishop or a pope, whosoever shall take one word of this--just one word... Do you realize it was one word that Eve doubted that caused all the trouble? One spoken Word of God, Eve doubted to be the Truth, and it caused every sickness, every disease, every suffering baby, caused every hospital to be built, every operation was ever performed, every death that ever died, for one person to believe one--disbelieve one word. There you are.

What did Eve try to do? Hybreed it, mix it with something. (12) You've got to take it the way God spoke it. It won't mix with nothing. No, sir. Jesus one time said, "If you had the faith like a mustard seed..." I'm told that mustard seed won't hybreed. You can't mix it with nothing. You can mix other grains, but you can't mix mustard seed (See?), 'cause it won't hybreed. And if you've got that kind of faith, that's one--taking one Word of God... That's where so many evangelists crack up (We'll get to it later), how they say, "Oh, we believe this," and they'll take that and they believe that one word, and they can make that work, but what about the other one next to it? "Blessed is he that does all his biddings. Amen. (See?) He will have the right to enter into the Tree of Life for without are sorcerers, dogs, and laugh out loudmongers," and so forth. Now, I got a mixed class but I got a lot of context here that's just really flat, so I want you sisters to understand (See?); be sure to understand.
The Spoken Word is the Original Seed – Part 1Branham Tabernacle; JEFFERSONVILLE.IN  SUNDAY  62-0318M

Now, I will get on with your comments and points:

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

As you have already concurred,we want directly east,that is where scripture meets with scipture. The prophet clearly stated that YOU WILL RUN OUT OF SCRIPTURE GOING BOTH WAYS.BUT HE COMES AT THE END TO SHOW WHERE PEOPLE GOT IT WRONG ON BOTH THESE TWO SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT.

Thats true, my brother

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

However,there is no place or passage in this sermon that you can use against ONE and MANY,if there is any,may you kindly show me with continuity throughout the sermon.

My good brother. Be sure to note that we cannot take every statement or every quote that Brother Branham made on the question of Marriage and divorce and make them all line up and say the same thing. This is proven by the fact that he said “just this morning the Lord finished up with me on M&D”. But we must both agree that scripture straightens all confusion on our part.

Now coming to this “ONE and MANY” you mentioned, my counter argument is this. Scripturally, a man could put away his wife for:
1) Unconfessed fornication;
2) Adultery/dishonour - whereby I Corinthians 11:5 tells us that she has put him away;
3) Refusal to play the part of a wife or refusing him his conjugal rights. A good example is found in the Book of Esther where Ahasuerus put away Queen Vashti because she refused him. Also take note that Adam's Bride never bore the Life-Child because she left the Word.

You might wonder where temba is going with this information! Well, here it is. There are "MANY" who have been espoused to the "ONE" --Jesus Christ. I hope you can appreciate that He "ONE" has had MANY, for example;

(1)Isaiah 54:1-5, "Sing, O barren Israel, who has not borne Spiritual children and was put away for unfaithfulness (during the Captivity, and the Gentile dispensation); break forth into singing; cry aloud, you who have not labored with child: for more are the children of the desolate wife (Gentile converts born during your blindness and banishment for adultery against the Word of God, and murder of the Messiah), than were the Spiritual children (Old Testament saints) of the married wife" (Israel, before God put her away in desolation). God put away Israel and Judah for adultery --read Hosea 1-2 for a clearer picture.

(2)Christendom claims to be the Bride of Christ but put away her espoused Husband so she could commit adultery with the world whose affection she has bought with the love gifts God gave to her. Exactly like Israel (Ezekiel 16).

(3)He has divorced Rome and her once Protestant daughter churches from whom He is now calling out a Bride (Acts 15:14; Revelation 18:1-4). This espoused bride, the church, committed adultery against the Word at Nicea before He could take her to Himself in the rapture. Like Eve, they have refused His spoken Word which is the original Seed and Life, and received a hybrid seed that predestinates their children to spiritual death as Eve's children.

(4)The seven church ages, each with a Message (the gospel of THEIR salvation) whereby Christ sought to make love to her who called herself His wife. But in every Age, she who was not elect refused to consummate her marriage vow by union with the Word for HER day. But as Ahasuerus put away Queen Vashti, Christ also put her away.

He put away all those that were not subservient to Him and has chosen the Bride of today (the ONE who obeys His Word) whom He is to marry. Noteworthy is the fact that He is to marry ONE BRIDE and not many --Hallelujah! I hope you can see the “ONE in Many” –scripturally and spiritually. MANY, here includes the ones He was espoused to (so to speak) that He put away. But, as you can see, He is fixing to marry only one –the BRIDE! Amen.

Then, when you type that to the natural man under the second covenant (which has the double covenant in it), you can see that it has to transcend the same way until (after Calvary) it has to be ONE Husband and ONE Bride. So is it today, that a husband has to have ONE bride --just as it is in the spiritual! You might say, "But there are many different message churches?" --I say --yes sir, but they are ONE bride who speaks with ONE voice!  

I hope the Lord makes this clear to you, my brother.   

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

To the contrary,for the passages to make sense would actually be contrary to scripture because its not supposed to make sense,thats reasoning, which is the worst hindrance to faith.

That’s fine, but I hope you agree with me that the passages you are talking about cannot stand alone. They have to line up with scripture; otherwise there will be no difference with SDA's and Mohammedans’ claims.

[temba]

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

Its supposed to be THUS SAITH THE LORD,the prophet said it,we believe it even if we dont understand,we like Peter and the rest say,Where can we go Lord,for thou has words eternal.

I think that’s where we differ, my brother. I believe the prophet was not the absolute! The Word of God is the absolute. Not all that the prophet uttered was the “Thus Saith The Lord”, but all that is in the bible is!

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

Casting down all reasonings and doubts my brother. Why should it make sense when the prophet says,"This is going to stumble you,this is going to shock you. How can we have something contrary to what we have been taught,its God. God has given man a remedy to sin but man wont take God`s remedy.

Are you trying to say that statement he said was the “Thus Saith The Lord” as well? I think that was the prophet stating what he thought would happen to the listeners after he told them about the revelation that he later gave!

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

Listen to the prohesy of Danny Henry-narrow path,harder,which is the narrow path. Even if you go to the sermon which was a prelude to the four day message,A MAN RUNNING AWAY FROM THE PRESENCE OF THE LORD-it shows the weight on the prophet`s shoulders,how was he going to bring suuch a message to these people. Now God reveals His secrets to His prophets.This was a secret which was previously hidden,and on the 30th of August,you here the prophet on page 1112 of COD saying that he previously didnt know it until the seals were now revealed,God finished revealing M and D to him on that day.

Then if you agree that the revelation was finished on that day, how come the prophet still attributes polygamy to “being legal in them days” and therefore not in the New Testament days, well after this very revelation you are talking about?

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

It was progressive just like with the Serpent Seed where he preached it in 1958 but in 1964 is when God finished revealing it to him and goes further to tell Bro Lee to inject it into the Ephesian church age and now none of the clergy could question that and i quote PROVING HIS WORD (64/0816)paragraph 49 Is Dr. Lee Vayle in this morning? I wanted to ask if Dr. Lee Vayle... Are you here, Brother Vayle? Raise up your hand if you are. Is he in the back? All right, thank you, Brother Roy. And I want you to be sure to check those notes, Brother Vayle. You're somewhere in the crowds back there; I can't see, or in the hall. We have to watch, can't let too many stand, the fire marshal won't let us do that (You see?), and so we are... I want you to check my revelation on Serpent's Seed, to be injected into the first, Ephesian Church Age that he's writing, re-grammarizing it for me. Beautifully done! And I want you to check that and let somebody say something against the Serpent's Seed now, whether it was right, or not. So the Lord just gave it to me yesterday. See? Oh, it's beyond...
How I get a message, I'll be going along and something strikes me. Then... And if I know it's God, I'll take it over and find it in the Scripture. Then I have... It's never failed, but from Genesis to Revelations run true, no matter what people think about It. And it's been more so than ever since those Seven Seals. See? That did it that time. So the Lord bless you now as we study. Now, in respects to the Word...

I hope you will appreciate what I have highlighted in the quote you have given here. Imagine, even when he knew it was God, he had to go back to the scripture to confirm it. Hopefully you can appreciate my point about the importance of scripture scripture.

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

Now in the time we are living right now,its under that double covenant as stated here in M and D:"Now, we see, being that the continuity is broken, then the lifeline was broken. Also, the time line was broken. The covenant was broken, everything shattered. What caused it? A woman. That's what broke the covenant. Now, if you want to read that, you can read it: Genesis 3.

17-2 Now, it was then man was made to rule over the woman by God's Word. She was no more coequal with him. She was coequal in nature, you know. But when she broke God's Word, God made a man to be a ruler over her (Genesis 3:16, if you want to put it down). She was no more equal with the man. She was a breaker of God's Word".
29-4 That's why God forbids her to teach His Word. That's right. I Timothy 2:9-15: "I suffer not a woman to teach or to have any authority..." See? And also I Corinthians 14:34: "Let your women keep silent in the churches, for it's not permitted to them to speak, for they are commanded to be in silent, also saith the law."
And that is the double covenant there- Marriage and Divorce quote 33 Now, you see, then after the beginning it was--something else was introduced. Now, this is going to shock you. (Are you tired? Just set still just a little longer.) Then when the double covenant was made by man and woman through sex (another covenant altogether; not the original covenant, but another covenant), now what's introduced? Polygamy in all. Then after the beginning, polygamy was introduced both in man and in beast, after the beginning, the fall.
God now secondarily sets a new nature again by sex.

  My good brother! Where in this passage you have quoted do we find, “Now in the time we are living right now,its under that double covenant”? These are your own manufactured words my brother! Even if he had said that, how would you be able to reconcile such utterance with the fact that the prophet gave 3 periods of time:
(1) From the beginning (where the first covenant was given) to Genesis 3:16 (which is the fall of man). The prophet calls this period a COVENANT.
(2) From Genesis 3:16 (where the double covenant was given) to the time of our Lord Jesus. The prophet calls this period a COVENANT.
(3) From the time of our lord (where redemption was fulfilled) to the end? The prophet does not call this period a covenant. This is because this period is a RESTORATION to what it was in the beginning. He even says, “That's the reason Jesus had to come through the woman, to bring it back to its original beginning again, without sex desire. He is virgin born.” This assertion is supported by the following scripture –Galatians 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 4:5 To REDEEM them that were under the law, that we might receive the ADOPTION OF SONS.    

Here is the quote where you get these 3 periods of time:

And He made her for man, and not man for her. Did you know that, that, "Woman was made for man, and not man for woman"? How many knows that? [Congregation says, "Amen."--Ed.] The Bible teaches that. All right. She was given a place in man, before the fall, equal over all creation. But "after" the fall, now here we bring the subject up. But "after" the fall, he was her ruler, she must keep silent in all matters, now after the original beginning is over.
Jesus said, "It wasn't so from the beginning." That's when time began, when God made it first in His original creation. All that understand, say "amen" again. [Congregation says, "Amen."--Ed.] In the beginning God created just one male and one female. But then the woman was made different from the animals, all other animals, for deception. Now watch now, "It wasn't so from the beginning." She was made, if she had stayed in original condition, she would have never been no fall. But she caused the fall and the interruption that broke the whole continuity of God, and throwed death, sorrow, and everything else, on the earth. She was made thus.
Now notice now "after" the beginning, after the beginning, after time began; back in that was Eternity, is over. Notice, after that fall was made by Eve, after the fall, there was need to be another covenant made. Now this is going to stumble you, but I'm going to give you the Scripture to prove that this is the Truth. Now notice after the fall, Jesus said... God, at the beginning, made one of a kind; but now, after the fall, now we're going beyond that. The covenant was co-equal; but now, after the fall, there is another covenant made. Now she was no longer ruler with him, each must have a separate covenant.
Now let's see if that's right. Let's take Genesis 3, and find out if this is right, now as we go along, 'cause we want to be positive of these things, they are taught out and brought out exactly true. So that maybe right here we have a little time, 'cause we're not too far from the end now, to get to the closing part of the subject, to show why and what about divorces, and so forth. Now in Genesis the 3rd chapter, and we will begin now with the 3rd, and the 16th verse. Let's begin at the 14th verse.
And the LORD... said unto the serpent, (now He is going to curse it), Because thou hast--thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all the cattle,... above every beast of the field; and upon thy belly thou shall go, and dust shall thou eat all the days of thy life:
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and the woman's seed; and it shall bruise thy head, and thou shall bruise his heel. (The promising, "coming through the woman," the Messiah, to redeem.)
Unto the woman he said,...
Now look, now there is the covenant with the serpent. Which, they were all alright beforehand, at the beginning, or before the beginning.
Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrows and thy conception; and in sorrow shall thou bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee, not no more co-equal together at all.
Now she has turned right around, and she is the ruler.
And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat... it: cursed be the ground (not cursed Adam, now) cursed be the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shall thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
Thorns... and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herbs of the field;
And in sweat of thy face shall thou eat bread, till thou returns to the ground; for out of it, out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

Two covenants. Now that closes "the beginning," of what Jesus said, "It wasn't so at the beginning." We got another covenant now (2nd covenant). Notice, it's another covenant. Now there is a covenant for the product, and the by-product. Notice, the fall brought trouble, death, to every creature of the creation, making a difference in all nature. Now let us notice what Jesus said about, "from the beginning it wasn't so." Now it is not so "from," it is now it is "after" the beginning. Now there is a double covenant.
First was just a covenant (1st covenant) , Adam and Eve was co-equal, one man and one woman. Now the woman sinned, and (what does she do?) that throwed them all to death, and God had to make a covenant by that, another covenant. Here it is right here in Genesis 3:16, He made another covenant.
Now the world is to be repopulated, not by the original creation of God, like in the beginning, not by the original creation, but by sex desire. Now that takes care of "the beginning," doesn't it? In the beginning there was only one man and one woman, one male and one female; but when she crossed that line and brought this sin, now the world is to be repopulated again, by sex, not by creation; by sex. See where the woman is at now, now? But that's the way the world is 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 is virgin born. (3rd period of time, but not a covenant) 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 will create again like He did Adam at the first time. Jesus made this possible, by God making Himself a Man and come into the world so He could die, through this woman. Now is testing time, by sin.

Now you see then, "after" the beginning, it was something else was introduced. Now this is going to shock you. Are you tired? [Congregation says, "No."--Ed.] Just sit still just a little longer.
Then when the double covenant was made by man and woman, through sex, another covenant altogether (not the original covenant, but another covenant), now what's introduced? Polygamy, in all. Then, after the beginning, polygamy was introduced both in man and in beasts; after the beginning, the fall. God now, secondarily, sets a new nature again, by sex. God created the first without sex. Do you believe that? [Congregation says, "Amen."--Ed.] Now it's another covenant with nature, He sets it in another order, by sex. Second covenant: one male, many females; one buck deer, a whole harem of does. Is that right? One bull, a whole herd of cattle, cows; one rooster, a yardful of hens. Is that right? One David, after His Own heart, with five hundred wives; with a hundred children born to him, in one year, of different women, a man after God's Own heart. One Solomon, with a thousand wives. But notice now, it wasn't so at the beginning, but now it's "after" the beginning. The woman has done this, then she just becomes what she is now. See?

David, the king which represented Christ! Hold that in your mind. David represented Christ. Do you believe that? [Congregation says, "Amen."--Ed.] Christ is setting, going to sit on his throne. And this David, a man after God's Own heart, had five hundred wives. See what I mean? David with his five hundred wives, Solomon with his thousand. And Solomon is the son of David, in the natural; which represents Jesus Christ, the Son of David, in the spiritual. But that's natural, sex life. This is going to be spiritual, created. Why? Created. See, that's the way it was at the beginning, but not now in this life we live in now.

Notice, don't fail this now, take it all down in your hearts. But not one of those women could even have one more husband. He is the original creation, not her. Not one of those women could have one more husband, but that one husband could have a thousand wives. That's THUS SAITH THE LORD. That's the Bible. Marriage And Divorce Branham Tabernacle JEFFERSONVILLE.IN  SUNDAY  65-0221M

In that 3rd period of time, we are told that the Second Adam is a quickening Spirit –which really means that Second Adam releases the CREATING life of God back to man. Thus we are back to that beginning, though still with the vestiges of the second covenant now! Hallelujah!

[temba]

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

God created the first without sex. now as you can ably see,i put the ONE who set that new nature in bold,and thats the Almighty Himself.

I appreciate that! But, what you seem to miss is that He started the original again in Jesus WHITHOUT SEX (just as it was in the beginning!).

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

And as long as there is sex then you are under that double covenant set by the Lord.

That is not exactly true my brother! Let me give you a good example. We say we are not under the Law as was given by Moses. But really we live under the vestiges of the Law. So could we say then because we observe (in our flesh) the Law of not killing another human being, then we are under the Law? God forbid, my brother. The real ‘EAST’ of it is that we observe the law in Christ Jesus, though we are still law-abiding fleshly beings. So, conclusively, we still have the vestiges of the law that control our flesh bodies, but are not under the law due to Calvary.

So the same follows on this case of the results of the double covenant –sex in this case! These are vestiges of the double covenant, but we are no longer under the double covenant because of Calvary. It is so dire that we have already started (under the auspices oh the Holy Ghost) until it will culminate to that time when brother Branham said "hallelujah, there will come a time when there will be no more sex!!" Amen.

Remember that when you get saved, you are still under the flesh –read the book of Romans to get a clearer picture. But we say we have eternal life right now, as we speak. One might ask, how? The answer is, by faith in the resurrected Christ and that very Christ is restoring man back to the beginning now --not tomorrow or next year!

Another example is rapture. We are in the rapture season (which commenced with the prophet announcing the "Bride Age") that will culminate in the literal translation of the body in the near future. Izvi zvinondinzwisa manyukunyuku, brother --Amen! We even go to the extend of saying "we are standing in heavenly places, in Christ Jesus!!!!!!!!!!!" I am really getting those goose bumps ---Amen and Amen!!  

I wonder how you can believe those assertions you put across, and then preach redemption. Redemption from what, one might ask! Remember REDEMPTION means to BRING BACK! So you need to ask yourself what you are being brought back from and to. I tell you --we have been REDEEMED back to the original (in Christ Jesus --by faith of course!).

I will go even further (on a limb, I might add) that:
1) Observance of the Law in the flesh
2) Observance of the double covenant in the flesh
3) etc....
Are tantamount to the rejection of the resurrected Christ!!!

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

But it wont be so in that world over yonder and neither was it so in the beginning,but we aint in the beginning,we are after the beginning.

My brother! We are in the beginning through Calvary! Why do you sing “Redeemed, redeemed…..” then?

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

And i guess that Paul should also have partook in marriage since he also sowed seeds of marriage to the people saying that they should marry,he had the rest of his lifwe to marry before his death also.

My brother!! Why do you make it look like we are reading different bibles? Why do you make this forum’s unbelievers think you can’t read and understand simple scriptural truths. Here is what Paul sowed on this issue.

1 Cor. 7: [7] For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. [8] I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.[9] But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
Here even an unbeliever could tell you that Paul is giving two options, and he was into one of these options. But your polygamous case is that Brother Branham said ONE (man) and MANY (women). Therefore, I say for him to line up with the scriptures he had to obey the following scripture –or else he was a false leader:
2Tim.2:[6] The husbandman that laboureth MUST be first partaker of the fruits.
So simple my brother!!

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

Thats why there is Rev 10verse 8-11 my brother,Jesus coming to ride the trail again in a many membered bride,fulfilling Christ is the mystery of God revealed the second fold. The prophet was sowing the Word which is in continuity with the whole bible like David like Solomon like the continuity of the whole bible

I hope you are not one of these return ministry brothers! I am sensing that here.

[temba]

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

Now Ephesians 4 verse 11 is not everyone my brother nor to anyone who desires no,

I agree

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

its the same God who ascended and descended and gave gifts to man. You have to be God called,God ordained,God selected,god equipped here to be in that five-fold ministry. Its different to who desires hey

. Correct

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

now the word used for one there is mia which can also be used to refer to first hey.

Remember what Brother Branham said in my first long quotation above? Please read numbers 8,9,10 and 12 that I highlighted in that quotation. That should serve you as a warning of these private interpretations and additions to the Word! If I am getting you right, you are trying to substitute ONE with FIRST so that it will suit the idea of 1st wife, second wife etc.? That is scary, my brother!!

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

You may also go further and read Deut 22 as well as lev 21verse7 and Eze 44 verse 22 which are referred to by the prophet in marriage and divorce in how priests marry.

I have no problems with these scriptures

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

So you aint given the status of a priest who can marry a widow of another priest hey. The five fold is diferent from these that desire and the deacons who are chosen by man.

I believe this is craziness my brother! I cannot believe you truly stand on these ideas! Deacons are chosen by man –true, but pastors are part of the five-fold ministry!

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

Actually contrary to your assertions,this sermon was preached on the 18th before the 21st when marriage and divorce was preached.

I put this forward because of the following statement of yours:
“ Having that in mind,it is of paramount importance to note that The lord finished revealing Mariage and divorce to the prophet to the prophet on 30 August 1964,read COD page 1113 which states that:64-0830M QUESTIONS.AND.ANSWERS.3_ JEFFERSONVILLE.IN COD SUNDAY_”

As you can see, my point is valid if we are to look at what you had said here. But since you seem to want one sermon that was preached after the M&D sermon, here is two for you:

133 Now, notice again how the natural bride types the spiritual. The Word says, that, "She was made for man, and not man made for her."
134 Now I'm going to speak, and why, in a few minutes, on the Bride of Christ, but I'm trying to show you thebackground of it.
135 "Woman was made for man, and not man for woman." That's the reason, under the old laws, that polygamy was legal
65-0429E THE.CHOOSING.OF.A.BRIDE_ LOS.ANGELES.CA V-2 N-28 THURSDAY_

220 Even Sarah said, "You know what's going to happen? You're going to have the baby, but I tell you the way we're going to do it. Hagar now is my maid, I'm going to give her to you." Cause, polygamy was legal then.
65-1126 WORKS.IS.FAITH.EXPRESSED_ SHREVEPORT.LA V-7 N-1 FRIDAY_

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

When its stated adultery there,it means there that Isaac was supposed to come thruogh the unadultwerated pure word that is through the promise given to Abraham and thatis through Sarah,hagar represented a slightly doubted promise,an adulteration of the pure promise hey-finito.

I believe this is what they term straw clutching! Why do you decide to privately interpret simple, plain English? This time you have decided to substitute “an adultery” with “ doubt of the pure promise”!! Mashura chaiwo aya!

Mountain, on 03 August 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

furthermore,she was under polygamy hey,look at the punctuation there,the comma after the adultery my brother,there is no conjuction hey,even if we were to go with your argument,then whatn would you say of rachel,zilpha,bilha,leah,that came after Abraham,tha built Israel.

Maybe this might answer you:
Notice Hagar, the stalk, which was the first beginning of the Seed springing up. Now, it didn't look anything like the Seed. It was the stalk, because she was a bondswoman, not in the promise at all; nothing to do with the Word, just a transporter of the Seed.
70 Notice Sarah, the tassel that had the pollen, that Jewish nation raised from her. From, come out of Sarah, brought Isaac; through Isaac, brought Jacob; Jacob brought the patriarchs; and through the patriarchs, brought forth a nation.

I think I have answered enough, so I will leave it here

[generaldexter]

Brother Temba Well done for contending for the faith that was once delivered to the saints

Why would one surely build a 'stature of a perfect man' through polygamy?

Where do they (P) really want to be restored to (Mal 4)? to Salomon and David? to who really?

As a conclusion what are the answer on polygamy from the first poster which we were promisd? Where are they in all these three pages?

I once met a person from the other faith who told me "Polygamy of the BORN AGAIN is peaceful" I have never heard such a thing before that a Born Again can be in polygamy? Maybe they don't know what being Born Again means

[chapungu]

generaldexter, on 10 August 2011 - 06:22 AM, said:

Brother Temba Well done for contending for the faith that was once delivered to the saints

Why would one surely build a 'stature of a perfect man' through polygamy?

Where do they (P) really want to be restored to (Mal 4)? to Salomon and David? to who really?

As a conclusion what are the answer on polygamy from the first poster which we were promisd? Where are they in all these three pages?

I once met a person from the other faith who told me "Polygamy of the BORN AGAIN is peaceful" I have never heard such a thing before that a Born Again can be in polygamy? Maybe they don't know what being Born Again means

Brothers you would never believe. Any man who listens to M&D 1965 preached by Brother Branham and if a follower of Brother Branham and does not see polygamy is not ordained to see it. It is not for you brethren to see it. Your arguments unfortunately show so much ignorance on the issue that it would take a  lot of time to educate you. Unfortunately you are not willing to learn so why educate a child who thinks he knows. You are not ordained ministers. Brother Branham said it best that unless it is revealed to you then you will never understand polygamy.  So be like Peter certain things we may teach may be hard to understand but do not comment negatively because you will be held accountable for your comments. I have seen many who spoke evil of this doctrine being humbled. Don't be one of them brothers. God bless you.

[temba]

chapungu, on 11 August 2011 - 12:00 AM, said:

Brothers you would never believe. Any man who listens to M&D 1965 preached by Brother Branham and if a follower of Brother Branham and does not see polygamy is not ordained to see it . It is not for you brethren to see it. Your arguments unfortunately show so much ignorance on the issue that it would take a  lot of time to educate you . Unfortunately you are not willing to learn so why educate a child who thinks he knows. You are not ordained ministers. Brother Branham said it best that unless it is revealed to you then you will never understand polygamy.  So be like Peter certain things we may teach may be hard to understand but do not comment negatively because you will be held accountable for your comments. I have seen many who spoke evil of this doctrine being humbled. Don't be one of them brothers. God bless you.

Here comes those threats again! This time in a mild kinda way! In my answers, I gave quotes from the prophet and the SCRIPTURAL authentications for the Truths that are found in the Message of the hour (without ad hominems)!

For those who are reading these discussions, please note that what is highlighted in GREEN does not exist in any of the prophet's sermons!

[generaldexter]

chapungu, on 11 August 2011 - 12:00 AM, said:

Brothers you would never believe. Any man who listens to M&D 1965 preached by Brother Branham and if a follower of Brother Branham and does not see polygamy is not ordained to see it. It is not for you brethren to see it. Your arguments unfortunately show so much ignorance on the issue that it would take a  lot of time to educate you. Unfortunately you are not willing to learn so why educate a child who thinks he knows. You are not ordained ministers. Brother Branham said it best that unless it is revealed to you then you will never understand polygamy.  So be like Peter certain things we may teach may be hard to understand but do not comment negatively because you will be held accountable for your comments. I have seen many who spoke evil of this doctrine being humbled. Don't be one of them brothers. God bless you.

LOlest How could one be humbled by Polygamy doctrine?

The true church is enjoying the Third Pull right now whilst the wicked are maturing into sons of perdition, this is the harvest time. If people know Matthew 24:24 and the Spoken Word is the Original Seed, would not threaten the Bride in anyway because the Bride is riding the second trail of the this Ministry.

The Message is for the Bride and not people (Pgy) who  are 'bridegrooms themselves' Polygamy is a doctrine of bridegrooms and their women alike. It does not DOVETAIL with the Doctrine of Christ, Period!

Scripture HAVE NO private interpretation. Revelation of the scriptures must link up with rest of the Bible.
This reminds me of the saying "They went away from us because they were not part of us"

[Mountain]

My good brother. Be sure to note that we cannot take every statement or every quote that Brother Branham made on the question of Marriage and divorce and make them all line up and say the same thing. This is proven by the fact that he said “just this morning the Lord finished up with me on M&D”. But we must both agree that scripture straightens all confusion on our part.

My brother,when one comes and says i didnt know it before but now i habe it,ever since those seven seals then you have to take what he is saying. What is the essence of Amos 3 verse 7,to whom does God reveal His secrets,and whats the essence of Rev 10 verse 7,when he begins to sound,all the mystries will be clear. All the mysteries are plain now. Here in M and D is all you need,he laid it in the tape,its right there,as he said,all you need is in the tapes and the books and i repeat,all you need. he has given you the scripture. just to ask,did you know what those seven seals where before Rev 10v7,did you know of the trumpets,did you know of the rapture,then surely you cant expound the scriptures,its only after the Lord has spoken through a prophet that the message can be broadcast abroad and further.You have to make quote line up with quote as scripture lines up with scripture.The message by the prophet from the Lord straightened all the confusion.

Now coming to this “ONE and MANY” you mentioned, my counter argument is this. Scripturally, a man could put away his wife for:
1) Unconfessed fornication;
2) Adultery/dishonour - whereby I Corinthians 11:5 tells us that she has put him away;
3) Refusal to play the part of a wife or refusing him his conjugal rights. A good example is found in the Book of Esther where Ahasuerus put away Queen Vashti because she refused him. Also take note that Adam's Bride never bore the Life-Child because she left the Word.

IF YOU NOTICE HOW THE PROPHET USES THIS ONE AND MANY,ITS NOT TALKING OF THE STATUS OF THE MEN BECAUSE ITS NOT AGAINST THE MAN,BUT AGAINST THE WOMAN TO REMARRY,HE CAN REMARRY LIKE DAVID,LIKE SOLOMON,HOW DID DAVID REMARRY,DID HE FIRST PUT AWAY AND MARRY,HOW DID SOLOMON REMARRY,DID HE FIRST PUT AWAY AND MARRY,NO NO NO NO.THATS THE ONE AND MANY THERE,TAKE COGNISANCE THE HE SAYS THE ABIMELECH PROBABLY HAD A HAREM WHEN HE WANTED TO MARRY SARAH,THATS THE ONE AND MANY THERE.IT ACTUALLY SHOWS YOU THAT THIS IS IN LINE WITH ROMANS 7 WHERE IT IS THE WOMAN THAT IS BOUND TO THE LAW OF THE HUSBAND,THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS LAW OF THE WIFE,NO.

He put away all those that were not subservient to Him and has chosen the Bride of today (the ONE who obeys His Word) whom He is to marry. Noteworthy is the fact that He is to marry ONE BRIDE and not many --Hallelujah!EVEN AS YOU CAN ALSO NOTE THAT YES,TO HAVE MANY WIVES IS TO HAVE ONE WIFE,JUST AS DAVID HAD 500 BUT ALL WERE HIS WIFE(CHOOSING OF A BRIDE 19 65 PAGE 19) I hope you can see the “ONE in Many” –scripturally and spiritually. MANY, here includes the ones He was espoused to (so to speak) that He put away. But, as you can see, He is fixing to marry only one –the BRIDE! Amen.

Then, when you type that to the natural man under the second covenant (which has the double covenant in it), you can see that it has to transcend the same way until (after Calvary) it has to be ONE Husband and ONE Bride. So is it today, that a husband has to have ONE bride --just as it is in the spiritual! You might say, "But there are many different message churches?" --I say --yes sir, but they are ONE bride who speaks with ONE voice!  

I hope the Lord makes this clear to you, my brother. WELL MY BROTHER THAT SECOND COVENANT AS I PREVIOUSLY ALLUDED TO IS GEN 3 VS 16,A COVENANT FOR THE PRODUCT AND ONE FOR THE BY-PRODUCT.IF YOU CAN ABLY SHOW ME WHERE IT HAS NOW CHANGED THAT WE ARE NOW COEQUAL WITH WOMAN AS IT WAS IN THE BEGINNING OR IF I GET YOU YOU ARE SAYING THAT WE ARE BACK IN THE ORIGINAL BY VIRTUE OF CALVARY,WELL THAT MEANS SHE CAN PREACH HEY COZ SHE IS COEQUAL COZ YOU ARE NO LONGER RULING OVER HER COZ YOU CAN WEAR SAME CLOTHING COZ THEN IS ONE COVENANT,COZ SHE CAN ALSO DO WHAT SHE LIKES WITH HER HAIR.NO MY BROTHER,THE DOUBLE COVENANT IS STILL IN EXISTENCE.ALLM OF DAVID`S 500 WERE HIS WIFE,ONE BRIDE,THATS WHY YOU HEAR THE PROPHET IN M AND D SAYING THAT ITS A BRIDE MANY SINGULAR,A MANY MEMBERED BRIDE.NOTHING HAS CHANGED IN THE NATURAL,THIS BODY WILL ONLY BE REDEEMED WHEN YOU ARE GIVEN THAT ONE CELLSTIAL IN THE HEAVEN,OTHERWISE ITS REPOPULTION BY SEX.  


That’s fine, but I hope you agree with me that the passages you are talking about cannot stand alone. They have to line up with scripture; otherwise there will be no difference with SDA's and Mohammedans’ claims.
[/quote] I WOULD LIKE TO ASK WHETHER YOU BELIEVE THE PROPHET?IT SEEMS AS THOUGH YOU WANT YOUR OWN PERSONAL REVELATION WHEN THESE THINGS ARE ALREADY REVEALED.ITS ALREADY LINED UP WITH SCRIPTURE,THATS WHY THE ANGEL OF THE LORD TOLD THE PROPHET TO GET THE PEOPLE TO BELIVE HIM FIRST AND HE WOULD NOT FAIL.THAT DOESNT NOT MEAN I AM SAYING HE IS THE ABSOLUTE,BUT ITS LIKE PAUL SAYING FOLLOW ME AS I FOLLOW CHRIST.THATS WHY THE PROPHET HAD TO GO BACK TO SCRIPTURE TO HOW YOU AVERYTHING.

[Mountain]

generaldexter, on 11 August 2011 - 07:35 AM, said:

LOlest How could one be humbled by Polygamy doctrine?

The true church is enjoying the Third Pull right now whilst the wicked are maturing into sons of perdition, this is the harvest time. If people know Matthew 24:24 and the Spoken Word is the Original Seed, would not threaten the Bride in anyway because the Bride is riding the second trail of the this Ministry.

The Message is for the Bride and not people (Pgy) who  are 'bridegrooms themselves' Polygamy is a doctrine of bridegrooms and their women alike. It does not DOVETAIL with the Doctrine of Christ, Period!

Scripture HAVE NO private interpretation. Revelation of the scriptures must link up with rest of the Bible.
This reminds me of the saying "They went away from us because they were not part of us"

ALAS FOR IT IS REVEALED TO BABES WHO ARE WILLING TO LEARN MY BROTHER.I SEE IT ALL LINKING UP WITH SCIRPTURE AS THE PROPHET SAID,LIKE DAVID LIKE SOLOMON LIKE THE CONTINUITY OF THE WHOLE BIBLE.THESE ARE THE DIVINELY REVEALED NYSTERY TRUTHS THAT LITERALLY TURN OUR HEARTS BACK,ITS THOSE MYSTERIES CONTAINED IN THE SEALS NOW REVEALED WHICH ARE AS STATED IN THE SERMON,IT IS THE RISING OF THE SUN(MARRIAge,divorce,SERPENT SEED,ETRENAL SECURITY).YOU CANT TALK OF THE THIRD PULL WHEN SPEAKING OF IMPERSONATIONS OD DISCEREMNT WHICH IS A ONE MAN SCRIPTURE,THE LAST SIGN BEFORE A CHANGE OF BODY AS WITH SARAH,AND AS MY BROTHER HAS SAID,AS HE HAs just repeated WHAT THE PROPHET SAID,YOU DONT KNOW POLYGAMY UNLESS ITS REVEALED.READ PAGE 10 AND SEE IF YOU ARE NOT ON THAT FIRST SCHOOL OF THOUGH WHICH IS STATED AS BEING WRONG.HUSBANDS RULE YOUR HOMES,RULE YOUR HOMES WITH THE WORD NOTE WITH YOUR THOUGHTS.CAN YOU PLEASE ABLY SHOW US WHAT THAT SECOND TRAIL IS,CAN YOU PLIZ SHOW US WHAT WILL BRING ABOUT THE SQUEEZE ON YOU WHEN YOU HAVE THE SEEDS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH,REFUSING TO GIVE IN MARRIAGE.MAY THE LORD BLESS YOU BROTHERS,HANZI IF YOU DONT KNOW IT DONT CRITICISE AND FURTHER MORE AS BRO CHAPUNGU SAID,YOU ARE JUST HEAPING DAMNATION UPON YOURSELVES,THAT IS BY BLASPHEMING THE HOLY GHOST IN THE BRIDE,THE SECOND FOLD.GOD BLESS YOU BUT I CANT SEE WHY YOU DONT SEE IT MY BROTHERS,WHY

[generaldexter]

Mountain, on 11 August 2011 - 03:27 PM, said:

ALAS FOR IT IS REVEALED TO BABES WHO ARE WILLING TO LEARN MY BROTHER.I SEE IT ALL LINKING UP WITH SCIRPTURE AS THE PROPHET SAID,LIKE DAVID LIKE SOLOMON LIKE THE CONTINUITY OF THE WHOLE BIBLE.THESE ARE THE DIVINELY REVEALED NYSTERY TRUTHS THAT LITERALLY TURN OUR HEARTS BACK,ITS THOSE MYSTERIES CONTAINED IN THE SEALS NOW REVEALED WHICH ARE AS STATED IN THE SERMON,IT IS THE RISING OF THE SUN(MARRIAge,divorce,SERPENT SEED,ETRENAL SECURITY).YOU CANT TALK OF THE THIRD PULL WHEN SPEAKING OF IMPERSONATIONS OD DISCEREMNT WHICH IS A ONE MAN SCRIPTURE,THE LAST SIGN BEFORE A CHANGE OF BODY AS WITH SARAH,AND AS MY BROTHER HAS SAID,AS HE HAs just repeated WHAT THE PROPHET SAID,YOU DONT KNOW POLYGAMY UNLESS ITS REVEALED.READ PAGE 10 AND SEE IF YOU ARE NOT ON THAT FIRST SCHOOL OF THOUGH WHICH IS STATED AS BEING WRONG.HUSBANDS RULE YOUR HOMES,RULE YOUR HOMES WITH THE WORD NOTE WITH YOUR THOUGHTS.CAN YOU PLEASE ABLY SHOW US WHAT THAT SECOND TRAIL IS,CAN YOU PLIZ SHOW US WHAT WILL BRING ABOUT THE SQUEEZE ON YOU WHEN YOU HAVE THE SEEDS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH,REFUSING TO GIVE IN MARRIAGE.MAY THE LORD BLESS YOU BROTHERS,HANZI IF YOU DONT KNOW IT DONT CRITICISE AND FURTHER MORE AS BRO CHAPUNGU SAID,YOU ARE JUST HEAPING DAMNATION UPON YOURSELVES,THAT IS BY BLASPHEMING THE HOLY GHOST IN THE BRIDE,THE SECOND FOLD.GOD BLESS YOU BUT I CANT SEE WHY YOU DONT SEE IT MY BROTHERS,WHY

This is waste of time to discuss Christianity with polygamy people. Go ahead marrying and giving in marriages.  It is already written, its up to you know which fruit is good or bad for food.
Your type of knowledge will either make you a christian or a son of perdition. I insist polygamy, adultery and fornication do not need any virtue to practice, anyone can do it for it is in every man's nature. But the Holy Spirit in me constrains me to do what is right. The only sense you need for polygamy is LUSTFUL EYES and Viagra (mandarack which Liya gave to jacob for sex the other night)
By the is there Bride amongst the polygamy bunch? Yes if you come out and leave your virtue-less practices!!

[temba]

Mountain, on 11 August 2011 - 03:27 PM, said:

I WOULD LIKE TO ASK WHETHER YOU BELIEVE THE PROPHET?IT SEEMS AS THOUGH YOU WANT YOUR OWN PERSONAL REVELATION WHEN THESE THINGS ARE ALREADY REVEALED.ITS ALREADY LINED UP WITH SCRIPTURE,THATS WHY THE ANGEL OF THE LORD TOLD THE PROPHET TO GET THE PEOPLE TO BELIVE HIM FIRST AND HE WOULD NOT FAIL.THAT DOESNT NOT MEAN I AM SAYING HE IS THE ABSOLUTE,BUT ITS LIKE PAUL SAYING FOLLOW ME AS I FOLLOW CHRIST.THATS WHY THE PROPHET HAD TO GO BACK TO SCRIPTURE TO HOW YOU AVERYTHING.

That same prophet you claim to believe is the one who said the following, well after all these revelations you talk about:

133 Now, notice again how the natural bride types the spiritual. The Word says, that, "She was made for man, and not man made for her."
134 Now I'm going to speak, and why, in a few minutes, on the Bride of Christ, but I'm trying to show you thebackground of it.
135 "Woman was made for man, and not man for woman." That's the reason, under the old laws, that polygamy was legal
65-0429E THE.CHOOSING.OF.A.BRIDE_ LOS.ANGELES.CA V-2 N-28 THURSDAY_

220 Even Sarah said, "You know what's going to happen? You're going to have the baby, but I tell you the way we're going to do it. Hagar now is my maid, I'm going to give her to you." Cause, polygamy was legal then.
65-1126 WORKS.IS.FAITH.EXPRESSED_ SHREVEPORT.LA V-7 N-1 FRIDAY_

I wonder why you avoid this by all means?

Mountain, on 11 August 2011 - 03:27 PM, said:

My brother,when one comes and says i didnt know it before but now i habe it,ever since those seven seals then you have to take what he is saying.

This was said before the two quotes I have given above, so explain on behalf of the prophet (like polygamy believers seem to like to do --eagerly) the discrepancy in those different utterances. You like to "take what he is saying", but when he says the above two quotes you hide your head in sand like a Garukuni!

Mountain, on 11 August 2011 - 03:27 PM, said:

What is the essence of Amos 3 verse 7,to whom does God reveal His secrets,and whats the essence of Rev 10 verse 7,when he begins to sound,all the mystries will be clear.

Well as far as I am concerned the above two quotes were said by the same man well after the 7 seals --then argue that for a while!

Mountain, on 11 August 2011 - 03:27 PM, said:

All the mysteries are plain now. Here in M and D is all you need,he laid it in the tape,its right there,as he said,all you need is in the tapes and the books and i repeat,all you need.

Don't you think there is some contradiction in your nuance? You say "tape" and he says "tapes"!!!!!! On top of that one of the so called "tapes" has the above quotes of which we await garukuni to surface and acknowledge! And possibly interpret, privately, what they might probably mean!

Mountain, on 11 August 2011 - 03:27 PM, said:

he has given you the scripture. just to ask,did you know what those seven seals where before Rev 10v7,did you know of the trumpets,did you know of the rapture,

Did you know of the above two quotes and what they entail?

Mountain, on 11 August 2011 - 03:27 PM, said:

then surely you cant expound the scriptures,its only after the Lord has spoken through a prophet that the message can be broadcast abroad and further.You have to make quote line up with quote as scripture lines up with scripture.The message by the prophet from the Lord straightened all the confusion.

Well can you then try to line up the above two quotations with polygamists' lustful practices today?

Mountain, on 11 August 2011 - 03:27 PM, said:

IF YOU NOTICE HOW THE PROPHET USES THIS ONE AND MANY,ITS NOT TALKING OF THE STATUS OF THE MEN BECAUSE ITS NOT AGAINST THE MAN,BUT AGAINST THE WOMAN TO REMARRY,HE CAN REMARRY LIKE DAVID,LIKE SOLOMON,HOW DID DAVID REMARRY,DID HE FIRST PUT AWAY AND MARRY,HOW DID SOLOMON REMARRY,DID HE FIRST PUT AWAY AND MARRY,NO NO NO NO.THATS THE ONE AND MANY THERE,TAKE COGNISANCE THE HE SAYS THE ABIMELECH PROBABLY HAD A HAREM WHEN HE WANTED TO MARRY SARAH,THATS THE ONE AND MANY THERE.IT ACTUALLY SHOWS YOU THAT THIS IS IN LINE WITH ROMANS 7 WHERE IT IS THE WOMAN THAT IS BOUND TO THE LAW OF THE HUSBAND,THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS LAW OF THE WIFE,NO.

This is so simple to answer. Here is the answer:
under the old laws, that polygamy was legal
65-0429E THE.CHOOSING.OF.A.BRIDE_ LOS.ANGELES.CA V-2 N-28 THURSDAY_

[temba]

Mountain, on 11 August 2011 - 03:27 PM, said:

WELL MY BROTHER THAT SECOND COVENANT AS I PREVIOUSLY ALLUDED TO IS GEN 3 VS 16,A COVENANT FOR THE PRODUCT AND ONE FOR THE BY-PRODUCT.IF YOU CAN ABLY SHOW ME WHERE IT HAS NOW CHANGED THAT WE ARE NOW COEQUAL WITH WOMAN AS IT WAS IN THE BEGINNING OR IF I GET YOU YOU ARE SAYING THAT WE ARE BACK IN THE ORIGINAL BY VIRTUE OF CALVARY,

Well, here is the co-equalness my brother:
Gal.3:[28] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
She cannot do all the things you mention, because in this flesh she is bound by the vestiges of the double covenant as I tried to elaborate above --to no avail it seems!

Mountain, on 11 August 2011 - 03:27 PM, said:

WELL THAT MEANS SHE CAN PREACH HEY COZ SHE IS COEQUAL COZ YOU ARE NO LONGER RULING OVER HER COZ YOU CAN WEAR SAME CLOTHING COZ THEN IS ONE COVENANT,COZ SHE CAN ALSO DO WHAT SHE LIKES WITH HER HAIR.

You don't seem to have understood all the examples that I gave you in my earlier examples. Try and substitute wherever I said, rapture, the law, eternal life --with these things you are talking about and see whether there is any contradiction to my assertions in line with the scriptures.

Mountain, on 11 August 2011 - 03:27 PM, said:

NO MY BROTHER,THE DOUBLE COVENANT IS STILL IN EXISTENCE.

No wonder you expect redemption in the future!!

Mountain, on 11 August 2011 - 03:27 PM, said:

ALLM OF DAVID`S 500 WERE HIS WIFE,ONE BRIDE,THATS WHY YOU HEAR THE PROPHET IN M AND D SAYING THAT ITS A BRIDE MANY SINGULAR,A MANY MEMBERED BRIDE.NOTHING HAS CHANGED IN THE NATURAL,THIS BODY WILL ONLY BE REDEEMED WHEN YOU ARE GIVEN THAT ONE CELLSTIAL IN THE HEAVEN,OTHERWISE ITS REPOPULTION BY SEX.

Here is scripture for you my brother:
Col.1:[14] In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
My brother, when Jesus redeemed Adam, He potentially redeemed all of Adam's children --Whomsoever will! In other words, potentially, all of Adam's children were redeemed because we were all in Adam! Imagine, you have just denied REDEMPTION with your own mouth! Or maybe should I say keyboard? You have just postponed your redemption! You have just denied the theme of Calvary! You have just denied MY resurrected Lord. So if I equate you to the SDAs, you should not be surprised!
And I think, with a heavy heart, I better terminate this conversation forthwith!!!!!!!!!

[chapungu]

Brother Mountain we appreciate your efforts. As expected those who deny the Word would never accept it. This is not for them. It is for us to believe and manifest polygamy.

You asked why they do not accept it. Brother it is simple. The one wife that our brothers are married to are powerful. They have zero chance of leading one wife let alone two. That is the sad reality. This is the age of female domineering spirit. Only a true amadoda sibili can have more than one wife the rest are men who have been subdued by the Jezebel spirit of this day. Jezebel did not only come back with paint on her face, she has come wearing long hair and long skirts and dominating her husband.

God has no use for cowards so said the Prophet.

God bless you brothers.

[chapungu]

With all due respect brothers this is the scripture you are using to support your doctrine co-eqaul? Gal.3:[28] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.



This is the same verse that JUanita Bynam, Joyce Myers and Paula White use to preach in the pulpit. Brothers quit because you lead people astray. You will be judged for doing God a service without it being His will. Stop it now. Otherwise you will have the blood of lost souls here on your head.

This kind of false teaching will send people to hell and you will be held accountable for it Brother Temba. Stop this aint no game. You will have to answer for your false teaching here. If you choose to deceive yourself that is your choice but do not willingly deceive people here. This is what makes me upset because you are wilfully deceiving people and you have been told by non-message believers that your stance on  'polygamy' is deceitful.

[temba]

chapungu, on 12 August 2011 - 11:00 PM, said:

With all due respect brothers this is the scripture you are using to support your doctrine co-eqaul? Gal.3:[28] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.



This is the same verse that JUanita Bynam, Joyce Myers and Paula White use to preach in the pulpit. Brothers quit because you lead people astray. You will be judged for doing God a service without it being His will. Stop it now. Otherwise you will have the blood of lost souls here on your head.

This kind of false teaching will send people to hell and you will be held accountable for it Brother Temba. Stop this aint no game. You will have to answer for your false teaching here. If you choose to deceive yourself that is your choice but do not willingly deceive people here. This is what makes me upset because you are wilfully deceiving people and you have been told by non-message believers that your stance on  'polygamy' is deceitful.

Chapungu
Have you ever noticed that whenever you address me, you are ever sending me to hell or just castigating me personally instead of what I say?

If you look at the way I used Gal.3:28, you will be the first to acknowledge that I did not use it to support any female domination in this flesh. I even went to the extent of explaining my point as follows:

"She cannot do all the things you mention, because in this flesh she is bound by the vestiges of the double covenant as I tried to elaborate above --to no avail it seems!"

I used that scripture to show how God sees both male and female. If you do not really understand my belief on the roll of women in this natural life, please check my posts (on this forum) where I talked about women preachers. Those posts will show you that you have a completely wrong perception on what I believe. But if you still believe what you are accusing me of, then (to you) I must be a confused man --to say women cannot preach in one post and then come on this post and say the opposite! I believe I am sane enough to know better!

What I have put across here is to show everybody the status quo now, scripturally. Rapture is a process, quitting the observance of the law is a process, attaining eternal life (whilst we are still in these natural bodies) is a process --but we claim these very things as we speak now! One might be tempted to ask us to show them these things that we claim, but we cannot demonstrate them scientifically, although we believe that by faith (in Jesus Christ) we do have them!

We have eternal life now (NOT in the future) by faith in Adam's redemption on Calvary. The One who redeemed (bought back) Adam and his race (us in this case) came back to dwell in those He redeemed. Imagine, after He redeemed them, they go back to the same old stuff He redeemed them from --polygamy that is --and then He comes and dwell in them and their lustful, polygamous filth! What a contradiction that could be!  

[chapungu]

temba, on 13 August 2011 - 01:57 AM, said:

Chapungu
Have you ever noticed that whenever you address me, you are ever sending me to hell or just castigating me personally instead of what I say?

If you look at the way I used Gal.3:28, you will be the first to acknowledge that I did not use it to support any female domination in this flesh. I even went to the extent of explaining my point as follows:

"She cannot do all the things you mention, because in this flesh she is bound by the vestiges of the double covenant as I tried to elaborate above --to no avail it seems!"

I used that scripture to show how God sees both male and female. If you do not really understand my belief on the roll of women in this natural life, please check my posts (on this forum) where I talked about women preachers. Those posts will show you that you have a completely wrong perception on what I believe. But if you still believe what you are accusing me of, then (to you) I must be a confused man --to say women cannot preach in one post and then come on this post and say the opposite! I believe I am sane enough to know better!

What I have put across here is to show everybody the status quo now, scripturally. Rapture is a process, quitting the observance of the law is a process, attaining eternal life (whilst we are still in these natural bodies) is a process --but we claim these very things as we speak now! One might be tempted to ask us to show them these things that we claim, but we cannot demonstrate them scientifically, although we believe that by faith (in Jesus Christ) we do have them!

We have eternal life now (NOT in the future) by faith in Adam's redemption on Calvary. The One who redeemed (bought back) Adam and his race (us in this case) came back to dwell in those He redeemed. Imagine, after He redeemed them, they go back to the same old stuff He redeemed them from --polygamy that is --and then He comes and dwell in them and their lustful, polygamous filth! What a contradiction that could be!  

Brother what I am rebuking the evil spirit of dishonesty. You are always here trying to represent the message but you are doing so deceitfully. Deny the message in your own home but do not deceive people on this forum.

I never said you believe women should not preach. But I said the bible verse you used is the same one used by Jezebel women preachers which is the same dominweering spirit that cows men into denying polygamy.

Brother if you have sex with your wife and as long as you have sex with your wife and as long as you reproduce by havin g sex with your wife that is sex law by polygamy and when we stop having sex which is when we are translated that is when all this stops. The final part of the rapture is body translation. You body is not being translated bit by bit it will be translated in the twinklin g of an eye.  


That is bible doctrine. That is absolutely the unadulterated word of God. You keep blaspheming the Word of God then you will answer to God. You do not know what you writing. packing a spoke word but denying the Word of God. That is utter hypocrisy.

You have sex with your wife, you reproduce by having sex with your wife an d the Prophet taught very cleary we are under the sex law by polygamy. When you hypocrites who have sex stop having sex then come tell us about polygamy otherwise we have no time for hypocrites like you who pack the spoken word they do not believe. Now stop deceiving people here. It is bad enough you have deceived yourself but unforgivable that you want to drag others into your deception because of your lack of courage to stand for God.

God has no use for cowards. Brother Branham was absolutely clear we are un der the sex law by polygamy. That is what he taught. You have sex with your wife yet claim polygamy is wrong . What are you a eunuch? You are  deceiver of men annointed by an evil spirit from hell that wants you to deceive people here. Stop this. You have nodesire for the truth. No courage to stand for the courage. When you muster some courage to teach your family the truth then come teach others. I have no use for men who have no courage of their convictions. God has no use for men like that and neither hav e I. You are absolutely wrong and you know it. But you want to drag others with you. Like this is some game we are playing. This aint politics. You are playing with God's Word. Keep doing it and you reap what you sow. Don't be stiff necked denying the word of God because you lack courage.

That bible verse you misquote is clear. It is about salvation. To whosoever will let  him come , he who hunger let him also come. Whether jew or gentile, male or female. It does not matter let him or her come and drink from the fountain that will never run dry. Not co-eqaul covenant what utter lies from hell. Those devil's lies. There is n o co-eqaul as long as you are in this flesh.

Women cannot preach because of the un-eqaul coventant
Women have a dress code because of the un-eqaul covenant
People die because we are still under the un-eqaul covenant
People get sick because we are still under the un-eqaul covenant
You have sex for pleasure because you are under the un-eqaul covenant
You have children by having sex because you are under the un-eqaul

We are all under the sex law by polygamy as taught by the messenger of this age Brother William Marrion Branham. Now you want us to listen to you or him? You are not even ordained minister. Whose word should I believe yours or a vindicated Prophet? Get thee behind me satan you deceiver of men.

[temba]

chapungu, on 13 August 2011 - 03:38 AM, said:

Brother what I am rebuking the evil spirit of dishonesty. You are always here trying to represent the message but you are doing so deceitfully. Deny the message in your own home but do not deceive people on this forum.

You see? Exactly what I am saying. You call me a deceiver --without foundation at all! I do not call you such, though I believe polygamy in the New Testament is full of deception through lust! None of the Pentecostal fathers (whom we, our hearts, are supposed to be turned to) ever practiced it. Have you ever noticed that you and your kin are the only ones that have introduced polygamy since Matthew 1:1 up to the end of the Book of Revelations? Even brother Branham never instituted it in his own church! That should strike you as odd, as far as I am concerned.

chapungu, on 13 August 2011 - 03:38 AM, said:

I never said you believe women should not preach.

Going through what you have written is very essential for your points to be understood! This statement is truly jumbled up!

chapungu, on 13 August 2011 - 03:38 AM, said:

But I said the bible verse you used is the same one used by Jezebel women preachers which is the same dominweering spirit that cows men into denying polygamy.

As I said above, you and your gang are the only ones in all scripture (New Testament, that is) that believe such lustful practices. Even brother Branham attributed it to a practice that was legal under the Law, and not in the New Testament!

chapungu, on 13 August 2011 - 03:38 AM, said:

Brother if you have sex with your wife and as long as you have sex with your wife and as long as you reproduce by havin g sex with your wife that is sex law by polygamy and when we stop having sex which is when we are translated that is when all this stops.

That is childish argument used by SDA's to observe the Law! For those who are interested in what scripture says, here are some scriptures that show you that polygamy was legal in them days and not in the New Testament:

Matt.5:[32] But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his WIFE (not WIVES or one of his wives), saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Mark.10:[7] For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife

1Cor.7:[2] Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.

Eph.5:[31] For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

1Tim.3:[2] A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
[12] Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Tit.1:[6] If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

1Pet.3:[7] Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

One might rant about me being the devil, and then use the term "brother" on one he knows to be a true deceiver --but I will not be drawn into such tantrums! My lesson stems from the malefactors at the Cross!