Site Search:


Questions About The Branham Tabernacle Split - Part 3

Seek The Truth Blog

Questions About The Branham Tabernacle Split - Part 3:

We are still getting a lot of questions about the 1936 deed. I realized after answering the last one that this is my fault; not everyone is aware of the full extent of damage this deed does to the very core foundation of the message, and I did not fully address it in the last two posts. I will try my best to explain the two most common questions:

1) Couldn't Branham have received the deed AFTER paying off a mortgage?

2) Couldn't Branham have become Pentecostal BEFORE 1937?

These are very valid questions. But when one makes the assumption that William Branham was being honest in his life stories, several facts must be denied.

The first time I heard of the name and date problem, I decided not to say anything about it on this website. In the grand scheme of things, there are so many larger and more obvious issues -- such as every single aspect of the bridge prophecy's failure. And to be quite frank, it took me several months to realize that it really did matter if one single prophecy failed -- I honestly felt that William Branham was still a prophet of God until I fully understood what Scripture said about false prophets.

It wasn't until I started reviewing all of the information we have from 1931-1937 that the name and date issue with the deed was actually a real problem for Voice of God Recordings. I have seen people in the message defend this issue (and I myself defended it until I reviewed all the facts), but with one very dangerous defense: Pick one single quote that is vague enough to support some of the conflicting information.

It wasn't until started publishing city directories and newspaper articles that I realized the problem was bigger than I first thought. The biggest problem is the name.


The first time I noticed the dollar amount, I thought there was some sort of foul play, so I had to ask a title attorney. The 1936 deed was sold for the sum of $1.00 and "other considerations. Since the building was not likely purchased for one dollar, and since this usually implies an outside financial situation, we assume that some money was borrowed. In all cases, the deed is signed over to the new owner. A mortgage is handled through a lien on the property. Branham alludes to this when he mentions only having a "dollar and eighty cents":

And, God in Heaven knows, that lays right there in the corner of that Tabernacle stone since 1933, wrote on a page of a Bible, laying right there. Look how they've done it. Look what's come to pass. Impersonations, just exact. Said, "Let them alone, their folly will be made known in the same manner as Jambres and Jannes was." Here we are in that day. I seen the church then when we was just laying the cornerstone, people hanging in the sills and all around, standing around the walls of the Tabernacle. There you are. And they said, when it come up, the people of the city here, said, "Within the space of six months..." Us with one dollar and eighty cents to build a Tabernacle, a lot of the garage people done decided it was going to be their garage. But it's still a sheep pen for God's Sheep.
65-0718E - Spiritual Food In Due Season

Notice the "within the space of six months" and the date 1933.

Many of you are familiar with the photograph of Branham laying the cornerstone. Snelling was directly behind Branham, and beside him was his son who was between 4-6 years of age. That places the photograph between 1935-37, which is our date range.


The "Pentecostal" in the name is problematic. As early as 1933, William Branham was involved with Davis' Pentecostal church with sermons advertised in the newspaper such as "What is the Pentecostal Religion, and Why Have it?"

Davis' church was established between 1929 and 1931, based on city directories. And it initially was called the "Pentecostal Baptist Church." Hope was involved in that church, in the youth ministry, before she and William Branham wed. All of this places into question portions of the life story suggesting Branham's mother-in-law did not want her to become Pentecostal; she was already Pentecostal prior to their marriage.

Davis' church was not in the city directory as late as 1935. According to newspapers, Branham was having tent revivals after Davis' church closed, and then we begin seeing the Bille Branham Pentecostal Tabernacle.

But again, in my initial opinion over two years ago, this was a very minor issue. We have several other huge issues placing much larger topics into question. If there were only one or two issues, and they were questionable (and not having studied Scripture), I'd still be attending my grandfather's church. But some of the more fundamental issues cannot be reconciled. It wasn't until I realized that the 1936 date also places into question the 1933 commission -- and that Branham's details do not match recorded history. That was the turning point. It was at that moment that I realized almost none of William Branham's life story had any truth in it.