Site Search:


Letter to Joseph Branham

Seek The Truth Blog

Letter to Joseph Branham:

I wrote this letter to Joseph Branham almost a year ago. To date, I have received no reply--nor do I ever expect to. Initially, I did receive an email from a Voice of God employee stating that Joseph was, "deeply moved" by my letter and wanted to have a phone conversation. I gave Voice of God my contact information and the times that would be best to call. Not once did I receive a call. When I sent a follow-up email a few weeks later I received no reply--over 10 months later, I am still waiting.

Bottom line, there is no answer to give that would cast William Branham in a good light. The recordings themselves are enough to find him false. The issues with the message are very real and substantial, and message believers deserve to have answers to these questions--I deserve to have answers to these questions.

I have answers now, and because of the answers I left the message and haven't looked back.

I share this because I always intended to share it as well as JB's reply--I even stated so in my letter. In the past year, since no reply has been made, I felt it was time to share what I asked.

What Voice of God and Joseph Branham couldn't or wouldn't answer.


Brother Joseph,

For the sake of brevity I will get straight to the point. About six months ago, my husband and I left the message. It wasn't because we couldn't 'live the life' or because we wanted to have freedom. On the contrary! The condemnation and hurt that has resulted from this decision has been anything but freeing physically and emotionally—although I do admit I have never felt more free spiritually.

At the urging of a friend, I write to you today for answers to my core questions. You may ask yourself why you should answer me. I'm a nobody, I'm not an important player in the message, and I've never been a big donor to Voice of God Recordings. But I know one thing is for certain—I am very important to the Lord Jesus, so important that he died on a cross to save me from hell. I ask that you likewise find it in your heart to think of me as Christ does—his child, worth it all. Luke 15:1-7 is Jesus' parable of the lost sheep, and tells of how a Good Shepherd will leave the 99 to search for the one lost sheep. If it is helpful, consider me like that lost sheep, in need of a loving Shepherd to find me and bring me back into the fold. To date, there has not been a single person show any interest in doing so with any substantial effort. Perhaps you will be different. I have many people who will be privy to our correspondence that believe so.

My reasons for leaving the message boil down to three things: prophesies that did not come to pass, teachings that are extra-biblical, and inconsistencies in Brother Branham's life story that draw into question his integrity as it relates to every aspect of his ministry. To simplify, I am asking you to answer one question related to each of my three core problems with the message. They are as follows:

1) The Bridge Prophesy. Recently, Voice of God Recordings has published a video of a gentlemen that I will not name at this time who claims to have knowledge either second or third-hand of men being buried in the pillars of the Municipal Bridge. The problem I have with this explanation is twofold. First, it does not align with what Brother Branham said on the tapes happened to the 16 men. He says they fell off the BRIDGE and landed in the WATER. Your explanation is that they fell of the scaffolding before the bridge was even completed and landed in cement. Even if I was a message believer, this explanation would not pass the 'word test' since it does not line up with what Brother Branham said. Secondly, there is no historical record of any such event ever taking place—men falling into the water or concrete. The explanation has been given that the records could have been lost, but it is verifiable that no newspaper article for any day for the years that could have potentially held this event were lost. They are all preserved though our nation's archival system and are available for perusal for any interested party. Additionally, there are Coast Guard Station records, obituary records, engineering reports, etc. that list no disaster of this magnitude taking place during the time of construction. For a detailed analysis of the historical records related to the Bridge construction, see the comprehensive research done by

2) Extra-biblical teaching—specifically, that the pyramids and the zodiac were God's first bibles. Don't get me wrong—I think it is incredibly interesting to think about the symbology of the zodiac as it relates to the Gospel and God's eternal plan for salvation. It is intellectually stimulating and is very fun to read about and hear. Likewise, the talk of pyramids, capstones, etc is interesting. The idea that Enoch built the pyramids is fascinating and makes the observable pyramids of Egypt seem even more magnificent. But the fact remains it is not in scripture. Enoch is NOT described as building the pyramids, and divination and astrology and the study of it is forbidden under the law (Deuteronomy 18:10-14, Isaiah 47:13-14) the New Testament warning against doctrines that were not expressly written, genealogies, and fables (Titus 1:14, 2 Timothy 4:4). How am I supposed to accept the bible plus extra-biblical teaching? The bible is completely sufficient for ALL doctrine. What then, do we do with these teachings with no root in scripture? Do we ignore admonishing by Paul to reject fables and doctrines of men and instead cling to the perfect Word found in canon?

3) Life story inconsistencies—Particularly, the fact that Brother Branham was NOT under the cloud in Arizona in 1963. Your brother-in-law, George Smith has acknowledged this and given an explanation that he was under it in 'another dimension' and not physically under it. Again, if I were a message believer still this explanation would not pass the 'word test' for it directly contradicts what Brother Branham said on the matter. Brother Branham said repeatedly that he was under it when it appeared and the photos in Life Magazine were taken. He states that the men that were with him saw the cloud, and that the cloud appeared as the angels were leaving. If George Smith is to be believed, the angel's appearing caused the cloud and the cloud picture was taken a week prior, and not as Brother Branham was standing under it. There is no getting around the facts. The cloud appeared on February 28, 1963 200 miles away from where Brother Branham would hunt 8 days later. At the time Brother Branham was in Texas. There is no way to make the facts of the cloud and Brother Branham's account match up. In order to explain, George Smith was required to contradict Brother Branham. That calls into question everything related to this event, including the opening of the seals. How does one believe the message and, based upon the facts of this event, effectively ignore Brother Branham's testimony in this regard and continue to believe his testimony in other matters?

Brother Joseph, I don't write these things to try and stump you. I write them because they have completely stumped me! I am not a difficult person to appease. I am willing to change my mind and come back to the message if I am found wrong. What I can no longer do is believe something blindly because it is convenient and the path or least resistance when it comes to my friends and family still in the message. I want the truth. Jesus said that we SHALL know the truth and the truth SHALL make us free. I am holding to that promised Word!

I will end with this. I have seen the explanations Voice of God Recordings has put out regarding these things. Particularly, a Catch the Vision newsletter devoted to demonstrating 'mistakes' in the Bible in order to state that it is okay to have perceived mistakes in the message. That answer, to me, is entirely insufficient at this time. The Bible's so-called mistakes are easily reconciled with scripture. It is the perfect, flawless, Word of God. I don't expect the message to be at the same degree of perfection, and I believe that it is not. But repeatedly VoG has stated that it is in fact infallible and as absolute and perfect as God's holy Word of Scripture. I am not asking you, sir, who I know to be a busy man, to answer these questions with similar encouragements to 'only believe'. I need solid meat--answers to these questions from the Word of God, so that I can be right before the Lord if I am indeed wanting in some way.

I eagerly await your reply, as do the many I have taken the liberty of copying this correspondence to.


Kristi Gibson