In trying to determine if a witness is being truthful, journalists and lawyers will test all the elements of his or her testimony that can be tested. If this investigation reveals that the person was wrong in those details, this casts considerable doubt on the veracity of his or her entire story.
--Lee Strobel
Was Wm. Branham Really Commissioned by an Angel in 1946?
Angel’s Visit in Cabin or Cave?
Evil Spirit Flies into William Branham’s Ear
Pillar of Fire Descends in Switzerland
Pillar of Fire Photo, Houston, TX
Man Attempts to Expose William Branham as Fraud
Thinking Man's Filter
Light Over 1933 Baptism Updated May 31, 2004
Within the first four years of his ministry, William Branham told two conflicting versions of how he began his worldwide healing ministry. We will chronicle a timeline for each of these different accounts side by side to reveal some glaring contradictions that most Message believers are unaware of. The first timeline (column 1) comes from Wm. Branham’s booklet, "I Was Not Disobedient to the Heavenly Vision", published around 1946.
The second timeline (column 2) was obtained from pages 76-91 of Gordon Lindsay’s book, A Man Sent From God, published in 1950. Pay close attention to the dates in column 1 as they compare to those in column 2. Also note that in his first published version as it appears in "I Was Not Disobedient To the Heavenly Vision", Wm. Branham made no mention at all of being visited by an angel who commissioned him to start his healing ministry:
| I Was Not Disobedient to the Heavenly Vision | A Man Sent From God |
|---|---|
| In March 1945, Wm. Branham has vision of "a great mountain of the bread of life" from which he was to feed a large audience of people dressed in white robes under a tent or auditorium. The following night, he described the vision to his church. He makes no mention of being visited by an angel. | Wm. Branham said that on May 7, 1946, he was visited by an angel who commissioned him to start his Healing Campaign. On Memorial Sunday evening (May 26, 1946), he described this visitation to his church. |
| Three weeks after the vision (March or April of 1945), Wm . Branham received a telegram from Robert Daugherty requesting prayer for his dying daughter, Betty. | While Wm. Branham was describing the angelic visitation to his church on Memorial Sunday (May 26, 1946), a telegram is handed to him. The telegram was from a man named Robert Daugherty requesting him to come to St. Louis to pray for his dying daughter, Betty. | The night after he received the telegram, following Sunday evening service, Wm. Branham boarded a train for St. Louis and arrived the following morning (March or April of 1945). Betty was healed the next day after prayer. | On the evening of the church service during which he received the telegram, Wm. Branham boarded a train for St. Louis (May 26, 1946). Betty is healed the next day after prayer. | Three months after Betty was healed, Robert Daugherty asks Wm. Branham to come to St. Louis for a healing campaign (June or July of 1945). Wm. Branham agrees to come. The following Sunday, he tells his congregation of his plans, saying that he believed this would be the fulfillment of his "Bread of Life" vision. Wm. Branham still hasn't made mention of receiving a visit from an angel. | A few weeks after Betty's healing, Wm. Branham returned to St. Louis for a healing campaign (June 14, 1946). | Dates and events surrounding the St. Louis campaign indicate that it was held in June 1945 (note that in this booklet, WWII gas rationing was still in effect--gas rationing was immediately discontinued when when WWII ended in 1945; Billy Paul was 9 years old at the time [he was born in September 1935, making him 9 years old in June 1945 and 10 years old in June 1946]; the days of the week correspond to dates in 1945, not 1946). | The St. Louis healing campaign was conducted in June 1946.XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX |
In a sermon preached in 1958, Wm. Branham learns that Betty is in the meeting and discovers that it has been 13 years since she was healed in St. Louis. This would place the time of her healing and the beginning of Wm. Branham's healing campaigns in 1945, not 1946:
Good evening, friends. Very happy to be back tonight in the service of the Lord God, and trusting His blessings upon the services tonight. I was glad to see tonight Brother Robert Daugherty back in the room there. It was at Brother Daugherty that I--sponsored my first campaign. And I remember going to him... There's still some people setting here that help me get over there; and Brother Creech here, I think's one of them. ...
You know, Brother Robert, I believe it'd been better if I'd just kept it that way. 'Course, there'd probably wouldn't been as many saved, but just stay with one case till it's over, till you know. And the next day, I guess it was along two or three o'clock in the afternoon (or that same day, I don't remember now.), that I was setting in a car outside of the parsonage, and his father was there, and I was by myself. I'd felt the Spirit of the Lord come, and I went outside the parsonage and set out there. And little Betty was just like a wild person, just screaming. And doctors could do nothing for her. And mother and dad, both, they looked very bad; they'd set up days and weeks with her. And there a vision came just before the car, in front of the car. And I saw the vision and run in and told Brother Robert and them just what to do and the girl would be well.
I suppose you said she'd be here tomorrow night, didn't you, Brother Robert, to testify? So now that's been some fourteen years ago, I guess, twelve--fourteen years ago [someone says, "thirteen now"]--thirteen years ago, and she's a healthy, fine looking young woman. Will be here tomorrow night, the Lord willing... Divine healing lasts just as long as faith lasts (That's right.), just as long as faith last.
But From the Beginning it Was Not So, Ocotober 2, 1958 (tape #58-1002)
So why did Gordon Lindsay report in his book that 1946 was the year the angel appeared, followed shortly by Betty Daugherty's healing and the subsequent healing campaigns? The simple answer is that's what William Branham told him. Mr. Lindsay published A Man Sent From God in 1950. As early as 1947, William Branham had already been claiming to have been visited and commissioned by an angel. However, in perhaps the earliest recorded account we have of his claim, Mr. Branham alludes to the angel's visit and commission as taking place in 1945, not 1946:
A little over two years ago now [that would be 1945!--John Kennah], I was sitting in the room...
And just above me hung a great Star. And the Light was kind of a, more of a green, between green and yellow, shining on the floor. And coming walking through this Light, came a Man that looked like, as I said before, would weigh two hundred pounds, a huge Man...
And He said, "Fear not. I'm sent from the Presence of God to tell you that this peculiar life of yours, peculiar birth... [Blank.spot.on.tape--Ed.]... a gift of Divine healing to the peoples of the world." And said, "If you'll be sincere, and will get the people to believe you, there will be no disease stand before your prayer, not even to cancer." And He said, "It'll come to pass that you'll tell the people their diseases from a vibration over your hand. Then if you will be reverent long, then you'll tell the people the sins of their life, and the things that they have done."
The Angel and His Commission, November 2, 1947 (tape #47-1102)
Another point is that Gordon Lindsay reports that the weather was unseasonably rainy during the healing campaigns in St. Louis. I contacted the Missouri climatologist and requested precipitation data for St. Louis during the months of June 1945 and 1946. Although he had no data for St. Louis, he provided me with information for St. Charles, a suburb of St. Louis. From this data, I learned that June 1946 was actually unseasonably dry! Between the dates of June 14 and June 24, 1946 (10 days), there were 8 days of below average rainfall, 6 of which no rain fell at all. It only rained on the 15th, 16th and the 20th. The only day of which the rain might be officially classified as "heavy" (more than .3 inches per hour) would have been on June 20th, which received 1.5 inches for the entire day.
June 1945 is a different story. Rainfall was nearly twice as heavy as normal (June normal rainfall is 3.76 inches). June 1945 received 6.57 inches. Between June 14-24, it rained 6 days. Out of the 6, four were unseasonably heavy, receiving more than .12 inches for the day. The amount of rain that fell during those 11 days accounted for 2.76 of the total 6.57 inches for the month.
Again, Gordon Lindsay seems to have reported that these events occurred in 1946 based only upon William Branham's claims. The facts suggest they occurred in 1945.
One might ask, "If the healing campaign in ‘I Was Not Disobedient to the Heavenly Vision’ took place in 1945, why did Robert Daugherty, in his testimony on pages 86- 87 of A Man Sent From God, claim that Wm. Branham held the revival in St. Louis in 1946?"
In the late 1940's, William Branham wrote and distributed a booklet called, "Jesus Christ the Same Yesterday, Today and Forever." In this booklet, Wm. Branham includes the testimony of Robert Daugherty. Rev. Daugherty's testimony which appears in Wm. Branham's booklet is nearly identical to the one that appears on pages 86-87 of A Man Sent From God. It is clear that the later version that appeared in Gordon Lindsay's book had been edited, since there are were a few changes made. The most notable difference between the two versions is in the ending. In the first version of Rev. Daugherty's testimony in "Jesus Christ the Same..." (page 14) he says,
That has been about 10 months ago. Our little Betty is now in perfect health and is as fat as she can be. I will be glad to write to anyone in question of her healing, or any of the healings that took place during rhe revival which Bro. Branham held here in St. Louis in 1945.
The healing that took place in the St. Louis revival is found in the book entitled "Heavenly Vision," by Bro. Branham. Be sure to read it.
Rev. Robert Dautherty, 2009 Gano Ave. St. Louis, Mo.
Rev. Daugherty originally testified that the St. Louis meetings were held in 1945, not 1946 as is reported in Gordon Lindsay's book! In another testimony in "Jesus Christ the Same..." (page 16), one person makes clear that Wm. Branham had already begun his healing ministry as early as June 10, 1945. Once again, we find that Gordon Lindsay was dependant upon unverified information he received from Wm. Branham when writing his book. The testimony of Rev. Daugherty which was published in A Man Sent From God was clearly revised to reflect Wm. Branham's later claim that he began his healing revival as a result of his angelic commission which he said occurred on May 7, 1946.
In summary: It’s clear that in the account given in "I Was Not Disobedient...", Wm. Branham claims his ministry started in 1945 as a result of his obedience to his "Bread of Life" vision. Not once does he tell of being commissioned by an angel.
However, in A Man Sent From God, and every subsequent account thereafter, Mr. Branham claims he began his ministry in 1946 after an angel commissioned him to do so. There is no mention of the vision of the "Bread of Life." In my opinion, it couldn’t be more obvious that Mr. Branham's testimony of having been visited and commissioned by an angel to begin a ministry of Divine Healing was developed long after he had already begun his worldwide ministry. The two different accounts of how his ministry began can't both be true. Are either of them true?
Adendum:
I was reading William Branham's testimony about how the angel came to him, and in the definitive account which appears in the sermon, "How The Angel Came To Me, And His Commission" (tape #55-0117), I found something quite interesting. Just before he went into the woods where he was to meet the angel that would commission him to start his healing campaigns, he said to his wife,
"I'm going to my place in the woods. I got about fifteen dollars; you take care of Billy." Billy was a little bitty boy then, a little bitty fellow. I said, "You--you take... That's enough for you and Billy to live on awhile. Call them up and tell them I'll--I may be back tomorrow, and I may not never be back. If I ain't back in the next five days, put a man on in my place." And I said, "Meda, I'll never come out of that woods until God promises me He will take that thing away from me and never let it happen again."
The same scene is described in Gordon Lindsay's book, A Man Sent From God (1950) on page 76:
...My wife came from the house frightened, and asked me what was wrong. Trying to get hold of myself, I sat down and told her that after all these twenty odd years of being conscious of this strange feeling, the time had come when I had to find out what it was all about. The crisis had come! I told her and my child good-bye, and warned her that if I did not come back in a few days, perhaps I might never return.
Now, here's the interesting part. Rebekah Branham-Smith, WMB's oldest daughter, was born on March 21, 1946. As you know, my contention is that WMB really started his healing campaigns in 1945, not 1946 as WMB has claimed since 1950. If WMB's crisis point came in May 1946, then Rebekah would have been a month and a half old. Yet in neither of the above two accounts does he acknowledge that Rebekah had even been born yet. This is further indication that WMB's first account of how his ministry began in 1945 is the most accurate, and that an angel did not commission him to pray for the sick on May 7, 1946, as he claimed in later years.
For more details concerning other serious discrepancies concerning the start of Wm. Branham's worldwide ministry and his Angelic Commission, Click on the following links:
Discrepancies in the Angel's alleged commission: William Branham's "conversion" and the angel's subsequent visit and statements seem more similar to experiences by other recent false prophets than to biblical events.Discrepancies in the actual location of the Angel's visit to Wr. Branham: Did it occur in a cabin or a cave?
Discrepancies in the Date of the Angel's Visit: William Branham was often unclear about the date and even the year of the Angel's commission.
Followers of Mr. Branham's Message know of his testimony of a visit by an angel in 1946. He has told his followers that he was praying in a secret cave in the woods when the angel appeared to him. His disciples even feel that they have discovered the location of the cave in recent years. But is this cave really the location of this supposed meeting in 1946? In a sermon preached in 1955, ("How the Angel Came to Me and His Commission," tape #55-0117), Mr. Branham describes the incident as occurring in "a little old dilapidated cabin", not a cave. He tells of pacing the floor, then sitting down on "a little old box of a thing." As he sat, he said that he saw a light begin to flicker in the room. He further describes the room as having wooden boards on the floor, and an old drum stove setting in the corner. As is his pattern, Mr. Branham's testiomy of this incident has changed over the years. One wonders why his followers so steadfastly believe everything he says when he is so prone to telling conflicting tales such as this.
The William Branham Evangelistic Association booklet, Twentieth Century Prophet, describes a vision that William Branham once had (page 44):
"...It seemed that he [Mr. Branham] appeared upon a green grassy hill, and just in front of him lay an old-fashioned four-cornered candy jar. Inside the jar was a large tobacco moth or fly -- trying to free itself. He started to turn to his right, and there was the mighty angel standing looking at him. The angel said, "See what I have to show you." Then Brother Branham saw an arm cast a stone, and break the candy jar. The tobacco moth tried to fly away. But it could not get off the ground; its body was too heavy for its short wings.Then out of the moth came swarms of flies, and one of the flies flew in Brother Branham’s ear. The angel said unto him "The flies which you have seen represent evil spirits, such as spirits of divination and fortune-telling."
Then he warned, "Be careful." This was repeated three times. After that Brother Branham came to himself."
It is interesting to note that the evil spirit that flew into Mr. Branham’s ear never flew back out. Could this be a symbolic explanation for Mr. Branham’s many false prophecies and unbiblical teachings?
William Branham was prone to attributing photographic anomalies to manifestations of the Holy Spirit. One such example can be seen in a series of photographs taken in 1955 at a breakfast meeting in Lausanne, Switzerland, where Mr. Branham was a guest speaker (see, Footprints on the Sands of Time, pages 566-567). He describes the incident surrounding the photos in the following sermon:
...And in Germany they said they wanted to see if they could take the picture. And they stood there, and we got a great breakfast where them Dutch Reform, and Lutheran, and all kinds of ministers, and they was questioning me. And this German said, "Can I take the pictures?" (At Lausanne.) One of those great big German cameras with the Poloroid. I said, "He might permit it, sir. I do not know. He did in America two or three times." I said, "He might do it. I don't know." So it... And I said, "If He starts..."
He said, "Can I take the picture?"
I said, "It isn't a flash?"
He said, "No, sir, it isn't a flash. It's just a still picture; they don't have to have a flash."
I said, "All right, 'cause I don't want to see a flash, and don't take pictures while it's going on, 'cause it's a Light Itself..."
...That big German camera taken the picture just as fast as it could. And that German rushed right down, and put them in the acid, and brought it forth. Here was the Holy Ghost, the Pillar of Fire, coming down. Here's where It anointed, and here's where It went back.
We Would See Jesus, Dallas, TX, June 12, 1958
In another sermon, he says that the camera shooting the pictures was stationary throughout the breakfast meeting:
The Angel of the Lord always appears to me on the right hand side, every time, and there the... to--to prove that it's true, there goes the Angel of the Lord off on the right hand side, just exactly. And here's a picture afterwards, that there was nothing left in the building. And we got, we got around twenty something pictures between these two things, and... the camera stationary setting at the same place, and nothing at all showed any other wise.Below are four photos from that meeting. A close examination of the photos will reveal the following observations:
Faith in Action, Chicago, IL, October 3, 1955
Photo #1- (Left) The room is lit only by sunlight from the windows. It appears that the photographer took the photo while standing on a chair because, from the photo's perspective, he is above the people who are standing in the room. No flash was used here.
Photo #2- (Right) The photographer takes this photo with a flash from the same perspective as photo 1. It appears that the flash is reflected back from a glass window behind Wm. Branham, or perhaps from a large mirror on the wall in the next room behind Mr. Branham.
Photo #3- (Left) A second flash photo, only this time it appears that the photographer isn't standing quite as high as the previous photos. Look at the portraits that hang in the room behind Mr. Branham. They seem to get lower as the progression of photos continues, indicating that the camera was lower when it took each photo. This explains why the camera flash also appears lower in the window behind Mr. Branham.
Photo #4- (Right) Here, everyone is now sitting. The photographer appears to have gotten off the chair and is standing on the ground when taking this picture. Consequently, the reflected flash is at the height of Mr. Branham's head.
It is clear that Mr. Branham was either mistaken or deliberately misleading when he said that the photographer used no flash in the photos. It is also clear that the camera was not stationary during the series of photos as he said. The descending light is obviously a reflection of the camera flash off of a window or mirror directly behind Mr. Branham.
From our discussion forum, Lee (aka Pencilsmudge) offers a fascinating illustration to a forum member referred to as "Numbers" (#2345.48). Lee writes:
_______________________________________________________________
The photographer promised no flash. So he went against what he'd said and decided to use a flash?
I don't know if the photographer promised not to use a flash. I do know he used a flash (or other photography light). Look at the light/shadow patterns. The one photo of the four that has the dark shadows is the way it is because the light is coming from the right side of the picture (predominantly)...through the window. Natural light. The other three have almost no cast shadows but everyone is lit from the camera side (our point of view). this would only be because the light in the photo/room is coming from where the camera is...the same light being reflected in the glass at the back of the room.
In the pictures the portraits on the far back wall would appear to be HIGHER if the camera was in a lower position.
Higher is relative, Numbers. Yes, the pictures would be higher in relation to the camera, but not in relation to everything else. As our POV (point of view) moves lower, EVERYthing moves higher in relation to the POV. But... the important thing to remember is the things closest to our POV will move higher faster, while those things further away will move higher slower in relation to the closer things. This would mean the picture/painting in the far room through the glass will move higher in our POV, but will appear lower than the window frames, which are closer to us and therefore moving higher faster as our POV changes.
I put togethre a rough diagram hours ago (long before reading your post this afternoon) of the perspective in the photos. I'm going to try and post them with this so you can see.
If you ever did perspective drawings in grade school art class, you know that the horizon line is also the "eye sight" line -- it always corresponds to the eye's level. The horizon line moves with our POV. The lines moving away from us in the perspective drawing ( which are parallel to one another) will all converge at one point on the horizon line -- called "the vanishing point."
See this crude example I made in Photoshop a little while ago (click to see it larger):
The blue line is the Horizon line, the red the converging parallel lines,
all meeting at the vanishing point.
When we point a camera, the exact spot the center of the lense points to is the vanishing point.
Now look at the photos (thumbnail links to larger images):
The horizon line in each photo is the blue line. I found it roughly by tracing the lines moving away from us in perspective (faint red). In each photo, the lines converge at one point - just like the perspective illustration. In each photo case, they converge right where the "orb" is. The orb is the vanishing point in each photo. That means it is the point where the camera is looking most directly. Why would the orb consistently be found right at the POV vanishing point, Numbers? Because it is the reflection of the light (flash or flood) coming from right where the camera is.
In the pictures the portraits on the far back wall would appear to be HIGHER if the camera was in a lower position.
Look at the portrait/painting in the far room through the glass. Do you see where the horizon line passes through the painting in each of the three orb photos? In the first, the horizon line passes through the painting halfway it's height. In the second, just slightly lower; the third, the horizon line is right at the painting's bottom. If you see how the horizon line moves faster through the window panes, you'll see what I meant earlier that things move up and down faster the closer they are to the POV.
Numbers, it is without any doubt a light source coming from the area of the cameraman.
God bless you
Lee
And George J. Lacy, the head of the FBI, of finger print and documents took from California and came to the Shell building in there and examined the picture, and said, "Mr. Branham, I've been your critic, and I said it was psychology." But said, "The mechanical eye of this camera won't take psychology. The light struck the lens." And so, you have the picture now. And one of them's in Washington, D.C., in the religious Hall of Art, with a note under it, "The only supernatural being was ever photographed in the history of the world." And now, then if you're ever through there, stop in and see it.There are several problems with Mr. Branham’s assessment of the photo:
Show Us the Father, Tucson, AZ, (tape #63-0606)
- George J. Lacy was a freelance examiner of questioned documents and was never on the payroll at the FBI. A letter I received from the FBI, dated June 5, 2002, confirmed that Mr. Lacy was never an employee of the FBI. At the time the photograph was taken, he was working closely with the Harris County Sheriff’s Department in Houston, Texas.
- Contrary to Mr. Branham’s claims, Mr. Lacy’s report does not indicate that the light above Mr. Branham’s head was supernatural in origin. His conclusion was simply that the light was the result of a light source actually being photographed and not the result of a double exposure or any other photographic anomaly (to read the text of Mr. Lacy’s report, Click Here. To see a reproduction of his actual report, Click Here).
- Contrary to Mr. Branham’s claim, this photograph did not hang in Washington D.C. in the religious Hall of Art. In fact, there was no religious Hall of Art then, and as far as I could learn, there still is not. I have been unable to determine that this photograph has ever been publicly displayed in any exhibit in Washington D.C. While I attended the Message church in Tucson, my pastor searched long and hard for any display of the photo in Washington D.C. His conclusion was that Mr. Branham probably saw a vision of it hanging there in the future and supposed that it was hanging there at the time he made the statement.
- From our forum, Lee (aka Pencilsmudge) makes the following observation:
William Branham sometimes warned his listeners against testing the authenticity of his gifts. He frequently gave testimony of a man who entered one of his prayer lines in an attempt to expose him as a fraud by writing fictitious illnesses on his prayer card. He expected Mr. Branham to identify the illnesses that were written on the card, thereby proving that Mr. Branham was getting his information by "telepathy" rather than from the Lord. If this incident indeed happened, it is not on any of his existing sermon recordings. Various accounts of this incident can be read in the following sermons by William Branham:
- Moses’ Commission, January 10, 1950 (tape #50-0110)
- God Commissioning Moses the Prophet, May 8, 1953(tape #53-0508)
- South Africa Testimony, September 2, 1954 (tape #54-0902)
- Blind Bartimaeus, April 7, 1956 (tape #56-0407)
- Jehovah-Jireh, December 9, 1956 (tape #56-1209E)
- Blind Bartimaeus, January 27, 1957(tape #57-0127E)
- Thirsting For Life, June 30, 1957(tape #57-0630)
- Queen of Sheba, February 8, 1958 (tape #58-0208)
- Christ Outside the Door, March 30, 1958 (tape #58-0330E)
- Jehovah-Jireh, February 12, 1961 (tape #61-0212M)
- Have Not I Sent Thee?, January 24, 1962 (tape #62-0124)
- Three Kinds of Believers, November 24, 1963 (tape #63-1124E)
- The man received the diseases that he wrote on his card and was still suffering from them (1953).
- The man had died from his diseases (1954).
- The man was bedfast "to this day" (1956).
- The man ran screaming from the auditorium when Mr. Branham publicly exposed his plan (1956).
- The man died a year after the incident (January 1957).
- The man was still in "serious condition" (June 1957).
- The man died 6 months after the incident from cancer (1958).
- The man was carried from the auditorium paralyzed and is still paralyzed (1958--note that in 1956 Mr. Branham said he ran screaming from the building).
- The man died on the platform sixty seconds after Mr. Branham exposed him (1961).
- The man died six weeks after the meeting (1962).
Mr. Branham has made these types of varying "embellishments" so often throughout his ministry that one should not rely on his statements without independent, coroborating substantiation. However pure his motives might have been, the veracity of Mr. Branham's uncororborated testimonies is at best questionable.
To read the actual quotes from the the sermons listed above, Click Here.
So I turned around and went down by the river, and I thought, "I'll go down here and hide till they get done so I can get out." And on the road down, I happened to draw... My attention was drawn to look over to my right side, and as I did, there laid a empty cigarette package, where one of them had throwed down in all the running of the--when the squirrels were going through the bushes. And I picked up this certain cigarette pack and was look... I never picked it up (I beg your pardon.); I looked down at it. I didn't pick it up, 'cause I don't like the smell of the things to begin with. And I looked down there, and it's a--a certain tobacco company that I guess I shouldn't call their name, but you'll know. It said on there, "A thinking man's filter and a smoking man's taste ."Did the Holy Spirit tell Mr. Branham to pick up the cigarette pack or not? Did he obey the Lord’s instruction to pick it up, or did he just leave it on the ground? This would seem to be a minor contradiction, but Mr. Branham asks his followers to believe that during this episode, the Lord actually had a brief conversation with him, telling him that his next sermon would come from that cigarette pack:
A Thinking Man’s Filter, August 22, 1965 (tape #65-0822E)I was going, walking through the woods; I was squirrel hunting (this fall) and I looked down. And, of course, I can't call the cigarette company. You know it. And there laid a--a cigarette pack laying there. And I just passed by it, looking for--in the woods. And I seen that package laying there, and I looked back again, it said, "A thinking man's filter, a smoking man's taste ." I just started walking on through the woods. And Holy Spirit said, "Turn and pick that up." I reached down and picked it up, "A thinking man's filter, a smoking man's taste ."
Leadership, December 7, 1965 (tape #65-1207)
I started walking on down a little further in the woods, and Something attracted me, "Go back to that cigarette pack." I thought, "Heavenly Father, I'm going down here to that tree where those squirrels was spoke into existence by You one morning. Why would You call me back?" And Something said, "You've got a sermon coming for Sunday. Your text is wrote on it." I thought, "On a cigarette pack?" I went back. And I begin to think, "A thinking man's filter," what a deception that is. If a man was a thinking man, he wouldn't smoke at all. But, you see, people swallow that.One would think that after this exchange with the Lord, Mr. Branham couldn’t have been more confident that this sermon was inspired by God. However, at the end of the sermon, A Thinking Man’s Filter, Mr. Branham displays a profound doubt that the Lord really led him to preach this sermon from the likes of a cigarette package, even asking forgiveness if the text of his sermon was sacrilegious:
God’s Power to Transform, September 11, 1965 (tape #65-0911)
I pray for myself with them, that, Lord Jesus, that You'll hold Your Filter. And if I'm saying anything sacrilegious, Lord, I--in my heart I don't know it. I pray that if it's wrong for me to take Your Word and use such a thing as that, You forgive me for it. But, Lord, I thought when You spoke to me there in the woods, You know the time and the morning, it just--I couldn't get it off my mind. I accepted it as coming from You.Mr. Branham’s urge to read what was written on a discarded carton of cigarettes in the woods later evolved into a detailed conversation with God in which he was told to use the slogan from the cigarette pack as the text for his next sermon. At the end of the sermon, Mr. Branham expressed concern that the use of the slogan, "Thinking Man’s Filter," may have been sacrilegious, even though he earlier said God instructed him to to use it. Was Mr. Branham always as sure that his "revelations" were from the Lord as he led us to believe? Or was the manner in which he received them more similar to what we’ve read here?
A Thinking Man’s Filter, August 22, 1965 (tape #65-0822E)
For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
I Corinthians 14:8