What a Man Soweth
Articles: Wealth; Feminists; Scientists
Inferring One Flesh—1 Cor 6:9-7:6
Let
us pray. Heavenly Father, we welcome You into our
midst, and we know we have been welcomed by You through the righteous Jesus
Christ, who died and gave his life for us upon
And
we appreciate everything You’ve done for us. And, may
we consider that which You have done for us, consider Who You are, and who we
are, and believe the truth of the Word in this great relationship which we have
with You, and not deal in any false humility as though we were very, very
humble in saying things which we know are contrary to Your Word, which really
our humility, then, is nothing but a perverted pride, rather than grateful
souls accepting the Truth and glorying in It.
Help
us to glory in Thee, O God of our salvation, even You Who are
salvation; and we give You the correct and proper glory therein. In Jesus’ Name
we pray. Amen.
You
may be seated.
1. Now,
before we get back to “Identification,” there are certain things that I usually
read in magazines and try to look at them, especially in the light of the hour
in which we live. And, you know, today we are looking at a very—I call
it—‘distraught’ and exaggerated condition, especially in
And,
of course, you know that the communist system was destroyed through the
capitalistic system and democracy. And
ARTICLE 1
2. Well,
our commerce today, as Bro. Branham said, would be taken over by
“The
Wall Street Journal said, ‘Ten thousand symbolized the astonishing success and giddy
exhuberance of the
Now right from the start,
the word ‘reflection’ there is a lie, because the image is one hundred percent
false, as you will see. Now, why he used the word ‘reflection’ is only
because I think he’s talking about giddiness, which is a misconception of what
the reality is.
3. Now
he says here:
“The Los
Angeles Times said it was a major milestone in the 17 year bull market,
fueled by now perhaps fueling the best U.S. economy in a generation. You have
to go deeper in the stories to see that someone’s fuel is someone else’s fumes,
or that some dishes are falling. The Post cited a performance gap in
which the thirty blue chip stocks of the giant corporations of the Dow Jones
Industrial Average had risen in the past by 8.9%” (That’s last year.) “while
the Russell index of the small stocks had fallen 5.26%.”
“‘The
underpinings of the market are slowly getting whittled away,’ said Mark
Arbiter. ‘It won’t be a healthy long-term condition.’” (The same can be said
about the human conditon.) “This week the United for a Fair Economy, a
Boston-based organization that tracks income and wealth trends, shows that the
boom has enriched only the top five percent of the households in
And
yet, everybody is investing in stocks—everybody. That’s the major cry across
4. “An astounding ninety-five percent of
the households have seen a decline in net worth.” (The economy, great time. My!
We’re having it good.)
“The
report’s shifting fortunes, the peril of the growing American wealth gap, found
to be between 1983-95, the richest one percent of households saw a rise in net
worth of 17.4% adjusted for inflation. The top two to five percent”… (This is
kind of blotted out.) “The top ninety-one to ninety-five percentiles of wealth
saw a drop of 2.3%.”
So,
what you’ve got here is the top two to five percent had a remarkable growth;
but the ninety-one to ninety-five percent, there’s a little bit of a gap in
there. Its net worth was 2.5%, that’s all, but then the eighty-one to ninety
percent saw 5.3%, the households that would place in the sixty-one to eighty
percent, fell 6.5%.
5. So,
what you’re looking at here is a very, very tiny percent is actually moving
ahead when it comes to wealth. Now the question is: where’s it going? It’s out there
somewhere. You know there’s no such thing as annihilation till God annihilates
it. And God hasn’t annihilated anything. So, it’s out there! What’s it doing?
“Then the
dishes really begin to break into pieces. The households that would rank in the
forty to sixty percentiles fall 11.5% in net worth. The bottom forty percent of
American households saw a collapse of seventy-six percent in net worth.”
So,
it depends on what percentile you’re in. Some of you sitting here, you don’t
realize that you’re eighty percent down from what you were. “Big
boom in
Oh,
he didn’t start it, but he didn’t stand in the way. The big hurrah is a lot of
bunk. It isn’t there.
6. Now,
listen:
“The
richest one percent of
Now
these figures are different from what I gave you some time back, when we found
that thirty percent of the people at one time owned seventy percent of the
wealth; and that declined to ten percent owning ninety percent of the wealth.
And these figures are pretty close.
So,
where’s the money? See? That’s one reason I say that I’m not too worried about
the computer meltdown, that we won’t have any lights and all [the Y2K concern].
I’m wondering what’s going to happen to anything you and I have—any stocks, any
bonds, any money, anything—that’s somewhere, like in escrow, being held by
somebody. It can be wiped out—boom! Like that! And they’ll say, “I’m sorry, we
got wiped out!”
And
they’ve got it all.
You
say, “What should I do?”
Well,
I think the smart thing to do, if you’ve got anything at all, is to go to the
company and say, “I want my stuff now. I’ll take care of it.”
See?
If you can’t do it, get an accountant or lawyer, because you better not trust
anybody. And you’re going to find that more people are talking about this: the
meltdown being nothing but a niche or an opening for the crooks. Now I said it,
and two weeks later there came an article on it. And I’m not smart; I just
happen to know a little bit about life, because I’ve been ‘crooked’ so many
times now that… You know, I know crooked people. The reasons are many.
7. Now,
listen:
“Weekly
wages for the average American are twelve percent below their inflation
adjusted levels of 1973.” (Do you realize that’s 26 years ago?)
“Middle
income people are putting in the equivalent of eight weeks more time on the job
than in 1979” (Twenty years ago.) “but over the last decade the real pay for
extra hours is $2.20 an hour, which is less than minimum” (—half. So, all you
people working all these hours, across the board—not individuals now, but
across the board—$2.20 an hour.) “Americans are falling deeper into debt and
purchasing cars and other big ticket items. Debt, as a percentage of personal
income, has risen from 29.9% in 1949 to an estimated 84.8%, fifteen percent to
go, in 1997.”
“Credit
card debt in the
“The
wealth gap is so huge that Lester Thurow, professor of
8.
Before
Bro. Branham died, and at the time he died, the
Can
you buy gold coins? Sure, if you want to. I’d sooner have silver myself—a
little bit less conspicuous. All right.
9. “…That serious measures have to be
taken to address it such as wealth taxation, capping corporate tax deductions,
and stronger taxes for estates and capital gains.”
In
other words there’s got to be someplace where that money can’t pile up in the one
to ten percent. They’ve got to let their greedy hands let some of it go. And
the government will not do it, as it should do; although you’d think it should
do it. For instance, the Federal Reserve is not actually run by the government.
We don’t own it. Who owns it? God only knows. I don’t know. Nobody, it seems,
can tell you.
Now
they say, “All right. We’re not going to raise interest.”
“What
do you mean, ‘not going to raise interest’?”
“Well,
we’re going to put a lot of money out there and let the banks have it for four
percent.”
Why
give the banks the four percent? Where does it go from there? Guys borrow it.
Now money doesn’t breed; chickens breed, horses breed. Money doesn’t breed. How
are you going to multiply? So, who is going to bear the brunt of the whole
thing? The middle class and the lower class. So, now
you’re getting to a place here where you’re going to see the whole thing is
going to collapse. It’s got to.
Now,
remember: the Catholic Church is a beautiful image—(That’s what Bro. Branham
saw.) a beautiful, horrible woman. And John saw this beautiful church, and he
marveled. And they will come to the rescue of the world.
“Oh, poor, down-trodden people. Oh, nobody can save you, but
we can save you.”
Of
course, you’ll have to come to the Trinitarian ‘Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.’
You have to come into the concept. Remember the Trinitarian club?
10. So,
you see where we’re going? The whole system is so fraudulent and so
disgraceful, because money should be made by the
Believe
me, the situation will be murderous. As I mentioned, this lady that’s very
outstanding, (I don’t even know her name.) but she’s one of the authorities on
the Y2K, and she said very distinctly, “Now, people, please don’t hoard, or
someone could get killed”—meaning, if you hoard, someone could come in and cut
your throat. So, if you hoard something, you better be very careful how you eat
it. Like the little kids, you know, sneak a little candy now and then. They see
you getting too fat, they’ll be in here to get your
‘fatness’.
11. “It is so
huge that this bull needs a tranquilizer” (That’s the bull market to save the
china shop, the china closet.) “Ralph Anphora, chief strategist at Prudence
Security bragged that 10,000 (the level of the Dow Jones Index Average) is no
longer a ceiling—it’s the floor!” (Whoo—eee! I don’t want to be around… Oh,
look, it’s all right. As time goes by, we’ll be looking down at it.)
“And this
guy says, ‘Yes,’ and looking down at the debt-ridden masses who are searching
on the floor to pick up the pieces of their broken plates. If investors could
put aside their giddy exhuberance for a moment, it might be worth considering
that the last time the top one percent of Americans had this much wealth was in
1929, just before the crash, and the great depression.”
That’s
what we’ve been talking about. Bro. Branham said the financial system would be
one that’s completely gone. You know, I won’t read this here, but this is the
condition of the colleges…
ARTICLE 2
And
I won’t bother reading this about this lady—if you can call her a lady; her
name is Germaine Greer—that comes from
She
knew that was going to happen when she started it. She knew it. Women have
never been more in bondage in six thousand years, as they’re in bondage today.
The American women can talk about the East Indians, the Pakistanis, the
Iranians, and all the rest, who wear their veils, and they can’t show their
ankle—especially in
A
little girl, riding a bicycle; her ankles show. They took her out and beat her
almost to death. Another woman walked down the street, and they literally
killed her, because she exposed a little tiny bit of her body—her tinkly toes
or something.
What
in the name of God is in men to think that that is a sexual come-on? They’re nothing
but beasts, so filthy that their lives are unimaginable. Now that’s
oppression—keeping women from society.
12. But,
what have we got here in
Now
I’m not against women; but, when the women got the vote, they began turning the
tide of what they wanted in their favor, and it didn’t turn in their favor.
Women politicians… I could say certain things about certain ones, because I
read their records. But we’ll let that go.
But,
I just wanted you to know here that even this woman, who led in this great
feminine movement, liberating women, especially sexually, now admits that the
women are caught in a trap.
Well,
what’s she going to do about it? She’s not going to do anything about it. There
is nothing she can do. And, what has happened since she wrote the book? The
feminists have turned on her. See? And she set the agenda for the future
feminism.
But
a woman adds, “It is very doubtful indeed whether it will set the feminist
agenda for anyone other than, well, Germaine Greer.” In other words, “We want
our licentious ways.”
As
Bro. Branham said, “Today, women have
become a sex-all disposal.”
So,
I want you to know that, as I’ve said before, that women voted themselves and
brought themselves into this particular trap by their so-called bid for
freedom, and now the very woman that started it is bewailing the fact. Well, I
think Eve bewailed the fact, too, that she got aligned and messed up the way she
did.
ARTICLE 3
13. There’s
an article here on “Scientists Find Evidence of God.” I’m not going to read it
all, but it says here, concerning this book that this scientist wrote
concerning the concept of God:
“The Designer had to be there, if there is a
design.” (He said:)) “I didn’t think anybody would accept a book. When we wrote
it, it was like being a lone wolf out there,” (Faxton tells Insight.)
“Hard-core materialists aren’t going to tolerate intelligence in nature.”
Ha!
A baboon is smarter than human beings, in my book… What are they talking about,
“Intelligence in nature?” Then, we’re not a part of nature, because we’ve got
intelligence. Therefore, we must be god, and that’s man become his own god.
These
are supposed to be scientific people! I wouldn’t give you a nickel for them. I
wouldn’t give you a nickel for them.
14. “Then I got lots of calls from scientists
and mathematicians who did.”
Years
ago scientists and mathematicians believed in God. It’s like Simpson… They
asked him, “Dr. Simpson,” the discoverer of ether, “What is the greatest
discovery you’ve made in your life.”
“The
greatest discovery I made was that I was a sinner, and Jesus Christ was my
Savior”
Hear
a man say that today. Just wish they did.
“Men and
women in every variety of scientific fields, who were coming to the same
conclusion that Faxton had, described the mystery of life’s origin. They, like
Faxton and his co-author, Daley, were coming across data in their laboratories
and scientific pursuits that no longer could be explained by the standard model
of Darwinian evolution.” (I understand
15. Now
other people speak in this article, but down here, after they begin to talk
about design, the intelligent design movement, origin and design, science and
culture at the Discovery Institute in Seattle, and different people that are
scientific, or pursue science with an open mind—not blinded—because once you’ve
been taught ‘a cow is a horse’, don’t tell me you’re going to know different.
You can’t do it. See? Because, if you postulate right now that Darwinism and
evolution is right, you’ve got to judge everything by that concept, because
that’s what you’ve been taught. That’s your standard, and you can judge nothing
else but that. As Bro. Branham said, “What
is your ultimate? What is your tie post?”
Now,
you see, I have my Tie Post, my Ultimate. That’s why I read these things and
fight, and tell you, “Look, let’s not get all messed up.”
16. Now
here’s what he said:
“What then
are those ideas? Now these people that come against the truth, first they argue
that their defense of design arises directly out of the empirical data they
have observed as scientists, rather than from any theological or philosophical
emotions they may hold.”
Now
the good side and the bad side, both have empirical data. I know that the
scientist who considers himself a true scientist does not take empirical data;
because, you see, the word ‘empirical’ comes from ‘empiric’, which means ‘a
person who is ignorant of scientific principle and relies solely on practical
experience’. It’s the same as when you read a report in a doctor’s magazine.
They
say, “This is not scientific by double blind. It’s anecdotal.”
So,
‘empirical’… If it’s empiric, it’s anecdotal. And, if it’s anecdotal, it’s
empiric. It’s something that you have looked at, something that you say cannot
be proven by what you call the ‘a priori premise’, which is B follows A, B
follows A, B follows A; 2 plus 2—four, so 2 plus 2—4 follows 2 plus 4; 3 plus
1—four follows. In other words it’s repetitive.
17. As I
showed you, Bro. Branham proved scientifically there was a God, because every
time in thousands and thousands and thousands of times, Bro. Branham said “THUS
SAITH THE LORD,” It never failed. Who was out there answering? That’s not
empirical evidence—no way, shape and form. That’s true scientific.
And
remember,
He
looked up at that tremendous crack of thunder where the earth shook, and there
was Bro. Branham, and the scientists looked; then, they looked down, going on
their own stupid ways. They would not listen. They think that’s empirical, they
think that’s anecdotal.
Believe
me, I want to see one million scientists… I want to
see anybody, anybody, anybody, hundreds of thousands,
give me one “THUS SAITH THE LORD” and God answer back. Yeah, I want to see it.
I’m an angry person; you bet your life, because I can’t stand this other tripe
going on there and people won’t stand up for the legitimate, vindicated Word of
almighty God. They’re too soft to talk about vindication, too soft to talk
about reality, because they haven’t got any. It’s just anecdotal, empirical
hogwash!
18. “Now, one fellow says intelligent design
flows directly out of the data that are now available.” (That’s exactly true,
and you can’t make it any different.) “Now one fellow says, ‘My view is that
from empirical data we have, we cannot make affirmation of deity.’”
And
that’s what Billy Graham said. He’s right with these klunkheads. Why didn’t
Billy Graham have what Bro. Branham would call ‘adocity’ audacity? I don’t call
it that, because that word doesn’t suit my vocabulary concerning him. Why
didn’t he have the respect, when he heard about William Branham, to find out?
Paris
Reedhead understands. He’s even a better preacher than Graham ever was. And
Graham got where he is, because it was Randolph Hearst that said, “Puff up
Graham,” because they needed a figure. So, Billy Graham got the world’s
attention by a worldly godless man who messed with women, who was a skunk, all
down the line—Randolph Hearst, and he made this Bill Graham a big man.
Now
I’m not against Billy Graham. But, when he said, “You cannot prove there is a
God,” he is a liar. And, when he says, “Well, there’s a
feeling in man that reaches out.”
Well,
that’s the deep calling to deep, but that doesn’t mean anything. What if you
had a deep calling to deep and the spirit answered? Like Joseph Smith: he
became a mealy mouth, tripe-hanging Mormon. What good is that going to do? You
see?
19. “My view is that from empirical data we
have we cannot make affirmation of Deity.” (That’s exactly true.) “It is the
possibility that we arrive at, but we don’t have anecdotal.”
When
I tell you what I saw… You say, “Well, that couldn’t happen.”
Well,
it did happen! And, if we both go to hell, I’ll tramp on your head when I get
there, because you’re not going to make me a liar and some kind of a dupe. If
you had a rope here, I’d show you exactly what I saw,
like that cord was wrapped around me.
Well,
bless your heart. I have something here. Come on, get the camera on me. Okay.
Bro. Branham had this… I hope we don’t ruin things here. But anyway, he had
this… Well, I may not be able to do that, because I don’t think I can get the
whole shot. Yeah, here we are. Here we are. But he had one more loop I didn’t
have. And here he was, just like this. And I pulled on that cord, and I said,
“Oh, God,” and then it fell. What did it do? It fell right down his feet, right
around his ankles—two great big loops around his ankles. And I said, “Oh,
Lord.”
20. Now
I’m going to prove something: you know, the law of the
fulcrum and lever and so on. Well, if I had my feet bound, how would I act if
you pushed me? Flat on my back or on my face. And I said, “Oh, God, if he
trips, I’ve had it.”
I
never blinked my eye. I saw nothing happen, but suddenly that cord was right by
his side.
“Oh, Bro. Vayle!”
Don’t
‘Bro. Vayle’ me, child. I will meet you down the road, because there is a God,
and I saw Him in action. Don’t you talk about anecdotal, empirical crap to me!
I
know people don’t like this kind of preaching. I love it. I know what I’m
talking about; I was there. See? I saw the miracles. I heard the words, so I
know what I’m talking about here. We don’t go by anything which is ‘guess’ or ‘hope so’. We have a Tie Post of “THUS SAITH THE
LORD,” hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times, proving God was in that
man, God backed that man up, that prophet, and that is the Word of the Living
God. And nothing outside of this Message shall live.
What
lived outside of Paul’s Message? Nothing! What’ll live outside of this? Nothing.
21. Now:
“Here is one of the world’s foremost Darwinists,
“‘The
universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is
at bottom no design, no purpose, no evil and no good—nothing but blind,
pitiless indifference.’
In
other words you turn away God, this is what you are.
22. Now
I’ll just read down here further. He said here:
“We know
from experience that, when there’s a design, there’s a designer. And they talk
about the things that are irreducably complex, and they are. Behe argues that
the development of such an elaborate complex system in Darwinian evolutionary
terms by one small step after another simply won’t do because during any prior
step to all the complex parts working together, the system would be
nonfunctional.
What is
the probability of all those parts that have to work together, starting to work
together at a given moment?”
See?
That’s your big bang. Just a tiny bit of a section out, (That is that big bang
delayed.) we wouldn’t even be here.
“Just the
irreducible complexity of a mousetrap indicates a design that renders the
possibility of these parts working together, so the irreducible complexity of
the cellular protein delivery system indicates a design.
Am I
outside the bounds of science?” (That’s what the fellow says, and finally
decided that he was, but adds,) “It’s incumbent upon intelligent design
adherents that we come to a realistic understanding of what the movement is
without destroying the integrity of science.”
Now,
isn’t that… Have you ever heard anything like that?
That’s the guy who cheats on his wife, destroys the home, and then blames his
wife, when he’s the skunk that did it. He said, “Now, listen; you guys…”
23. Well,
Bro. Branham took up the challenge: “THUS SAITH THE LORD” in
When
he prayed in Jesus’ Name, the man with burnt out eyes, the eyeballs gone,
suddenly saw and screamed. And, what did they do? They ran to him, knowing ‘God
was in him’, and, if they could touch ‘him’, they’d touch God.
Ha!
Heathens know a million times more than Christians! Oh, now I could start
screaming and laughing and just crying and climbing the wall right now, because
I feel so good to know that we have the light, we have the truth, and we’re not
sitting on a can of dynamite. We’re not like those school kids in Columbine
where someone comes and gets us with a gun, and we don’t have a future.
They
can get us with a gun, and that’d be fine, because we do have a future. See?
We’ve come to a realistic understanding without destroying the integrity of
science—the integrity of science. How much integrity have they got? It’s
absolutely proven, time after time, the scientists, so-called, have lied. What about the “Rand Report”? I think that’s from
What
about that Italian-named guy that said he discovered all about AIDS down there
in
Integrity? They don’t have any integrity. What is a lie? The
truth distorted.
24. Now:
“Paxton
takes a certain solace in the fact that the contemporary design movement isn’t
introducing something new to science. The great physicist,
Again, I
don’t know whether it’s going to be two years or twenty, but that’s where the
date of science is heading. Science of sense…”
Sense…
Oh, ‘sense’, do they? Well, what kind of a crock is that? You don’t sense.
You’ve got to know! So, how can you trust these idiots?
On
one hand they blame me; on the other hand, now suddenly they’re just like me.
They want to think that, but I don’t have to sense anything, because right now
I don’t have any feelings about these things… I ‘know’. I don’t have to feel
joys; I don’t have to feel sad; I don’t have to feel anything; I know! A cup is
a cup; a pen is a pen; a horse is a horse; a pig is a pig. God is God! And His
Word is vindicated. Now I’m a seed of that God. I don’t have to worry about
these knot heads. That’s too nice of an expression.
25. “Scientists sense that something is not
quite right. There are new ideas we need new definitions for.”
So,
man is what? What is he? Is he an anthropoid or a…? What is he? What’s a cow?
What’s a horse? What’s a pig? What’s to eat? What’s to digest? What’s to drink?
What’s to have blood? Right kind of blood?
These
people are so ridiculous, so inane, so stupid, and they’re teaching the whole
world! And, if you don’t embrace the Darwinian theory,
they’ll throw you out.
“Dembski
wrote a recent book, The Design Inference.”
Design
inference? Oh, I infer this is a pen. Oh, the pen… I infer it is a pen! I don’t
infer that these people are jerks. I know they’re jerks. I don’t infer
anything. I wouldn’t give you a plug nickel for a carload of them.
“There
are new ideas that we need new definitions.”
They
ought to read the Book of Romans, and they’d find out exactly what they are.
“Design inference” is just ‘infer’. Hey, this fellow made this pen… Oh, come
on, stupid, you just infer, and I just infer. I just infer you people here, and
you infer that I’m here. Yeah, this is the junk that’s going on today.
26. I’m
not finished. I’ll soon be finished with it.
“Inference
presents in great detail how the intelligent design argument satisfies logic
and probability.” (There’s no probability. It satisfies logic.) “Like to
compare the movement’s influence on science to be freedom of democracy’s
movement, and their effect on Eastern Europe’s criticism of Darwinism now
threatens the hegemony” (That means the dominance of the leadership or the…
well, it’s like a dictator…) “of Darwinism, he says, just as the move toward
freedom upset the Soviet Empire.
Dembski
emphasizes that the intelligent design movement must prove its scientific
mettle, but he none the less waxes his fancy about where intelligent design may
lead. Questions of morality can seemingly be added, revival of the whole notion
of natural law.”
That’s
where the women tried to get… Who’s that black man? Clarence Thomas.
He
said, “What do you believe?”
“I
believe in natural law.”
I
think
And
so, they went to get him. They had believed Anita Hill, and they smeared
Thomas—tried to destroy him. When it came to the other feminists and the
sleaze-ball, prostitute, harlot women… Oh, my, they just ran to Anita Hill and
all the others…
But,
when a good woman stood up, they stepped aside: no, Baby Boy Clinton couldn’t
do those things.
Now
I’m talking about this, because I want you to know where your civilization is.
It isn’t. It isn’t! It’s all shot. It’s gone.
27. It
says:
“Questions
of morality can seemingly be added.”
Well,
if that’s the case, why worry about what happened out there in Columbine school
in
He
also wrote a book, called Kabloona, on the Eskimos. And in this igloo
where they were building an eskimo… And they had these
long knives. Of course, civilization was up there by now. They had these long
knives to cut snow and ice. One fellow was there, his belly completely bared,
because he was working and held up. And the big belly was sticking out there.
So, the guy just shoved his knife right through and killed him.
He
had no conscience. He just wanted to see what would happen.
Maybe
those kids also just wanted to see what happens. They were experimenting in a
true, scientific way. I could tell you about the law of a priori. You take a
.45 or a sawed-off shotgun, and you hit a guy between the eyes: he’s dead,
dead, dead, ninety-nine times out of a hundred, if not a hundred. See where
these guys are going? Merciful God. I don’t know what
they’re thinking about.
28. “There’s a seminar on detecting design in
nature. The annual gathering of the American Affiliation of Scientists in July
compares the situation of intelligent design now is with where quantum physics
was a century ago.
Max
Planck, the quantum theorist, despared somewhat about getting his theory
accepted by his fellow physicists. Faxton points out he concludes that for his
theory to gain respectability a whole generation of scientists would have to
die off and be replaced by younger men and women with more flexible minds,
ready to move in the direction data took them, which would be towards the
quantum hypothesis. What he has done to make intelligent design acceptable, he
concludes, is to overcome the inertia of the age.”
And,
you know, Darwin himself said, “If at just one time it could be proven that his
idea of choice, and no definite pattern, then the whole theory falls apart.”
And,
of course, Darwin himself gave up the theory before he died. But this is your
situation here.
29. Now
the reason I read this is because this kind of teaching, though excellent, (It’s very good.) leads only back to
So
now, with the scientific world saying, “Yes, there is a designer”—so-called
science, as Paul says, “Falsely so-called”—the Catholic Church can take this up
with impunity, with no problem at all, and the antichrist comes on the scene.
30. Now
with this thought I’m going to be closing on this subject: if you pick up your
magazines and look around, you are going to find articles on Satanism, and
everybody is deploring Satanism, and they’re talking about these kids in school
killing each other in Satanism. And they’re talking about it around the earth.
Let
me tell you something: they will not account for one one hundreth (1/100th)
of one one hundreth (1/100th) of one percent or one one thousandeth
(1/1000th) of one one thousandeth (1/1000th) of one
percent. Forget it! It’s bunkum. It’s a red herring the devil is pulling across
your track.
As
Bro. Branham taught us, “Never mind
Communism. Remember, it’s
That’s
what you’re looking at. So, I thought I better read… I’ve left a lot of stuff
out here, but… because it’s going to take too much time.
31. Now last
Sunday morning, when we got in the subject of the “Life of the Blood of the
Cross,” I brought out particularly that you cannot, under any consideration,
believe that ‘the Blood of Jesus Christ, though cleansing you and scattering
sin until there be no evidence of it, therefore how can you be called a
sinner’, does not obviate for one minute the Word of God that says, “Whatsoever
a man sows, that shall he also reap.” [Gal 6:7]
You
can be forgiven, and I don’t doubt it, but you have to face the consequences of
what you do. And the trouble in our churches… My
upbringing was poor, and no doubt most of your upbringing was poor, except for
you young people that have come up under godly parents… you did not realize and
were not taught that you will, you will, you will, will, will, will reap what
you sow! There’s no two ways about it. And the Blood of Jesus Christ will not
cover it. No way, shape, and form.
And
I brought out that which… I know you don’t have to believe me… it’s what I
myself hold to, but I don’t hold to it in such a way that I would make a
tremendous issue of it—except in this church here where I have a part, and I
was the founder—and that is: I said that I would not want, and at this point I
would not have, a deacon or an elder, who, even prior to his so-called
conversion (born-again experience) fathered a child and left the women pregnant
and left her with the baby; because my Bible tells me one hundred percent that
a man that doesn’t take care of his own household is worse than an infidel. [1
Tim 5:8]
32. And
he may try to beg the question and say, “Well, that’s not my family.”
Then,
whose is it? Now that’s the question. Now, how that is dealt with will make a
great deal of difference. If they want the child up for adoption and they both
agree, then that’s fine. But, what have they done? They’ve made somebody happy,
no doubt, and I’m glad for them. They’ve made some couple happy to have that
baby. But shrugging our responsibility, allowing it to fall upon somebody else,
gives us demerits of such an extent that, having sowed it, will we continue
that path, having got away with it? Or will we repent, try to do something
about it—in some cases can’t, but do the best to wipe that record out, although
it can never be wiped out? That child born, an entity with a soul, could go
either to heaven or hell.
Now
the child is not necessarily illegitimate: that’s when two couples, married,
have a key club, and the woman gets pregnant by a married man other than her
husband—that’s the illegitimate child. Bro. Branham said, “You’ll always notice they’re peculiar”.
Now
I met a boy like that. His mother was not able to get pregnant, because the
father had too low a sperm count. So, she persuaded him that she should have
intercourse with a man that she named, and get pregnant, and have the baby.
Now, like a complete fool, he agreed.
Around
me it’s “Goodbye, sister;” down the road. And any man would not tolerate that
hokum.
33. Well,
now here’s a beautiful story: she had the baby, and in a short while she dumped
him on the husband who wasn’t the father, and took off down the road like the
harlot she was.
I
knew that boy very well. What Bro. Branham said is true: they are peculiar. He
came toward this Message—even thought he might preach, but so erratic, it was
pitiful. I can’t judge the man, but I’m telling you that… Look, this is serious
what I’m talking about. And, if our children are not trained to understand the
law of sowing and reaping, and pin it down in its seriousness, there’s
something wrong with us, because we are going to see our kids sowing and
reaping what we don’t want, the same as those people out there in Colorado who
never watched those boys.
Even
when the neighbor (And I think they lost a son named ‘Brown’.) found the
material on the network and in letters that this boy was determined to kill his
neighbor’s son, they took it to the sheriff’s office, and you know what they
said? They said, “A threat cannot be punished, because he’s under the First
Amendment.”
34. Well,
Russell [Evans], I want to ask you a question. You know quite a bit of law. Why
did my lawyer warn me not to write a letter, even to a man that I could insult
and punch him in the nose letter-wise, but not say one word that constituted a
threat? Huh? Then, how come those boys got away with it under the First
Amendment? See? There you are.
Well,
you see, Bro. Evans has studied a lot of law—Blackstone, and the whole
bunch—which is basic. See? I want to know why I couldn’t do it, and I merely
wanted justice. Give me my money back. But they can threaten
to take a life, and did on several occasions, and the cops said, “Oh, my.
Oh, my.”
I
want to know something. Sowing and reaping. Sowing and reaping. Okay.
35. Let
me get to the subject here, what we’re dealing with. We go first of all to Deuteronomy,
and we’re going to read a blistering attack. Oh, I beg your pardon; I don’t
want Deuteronomy yet. I want Genesis. We’ll get to Deuteronomy shortly. We go
to Genesis 38, and this is a story, and it’s a true story. It says:
(1) And
it came to pass at that time, that
(2) And
(3) And
she conceived, and bare a son; and called his name Er.
(4) And
she conceived again, and bare a son; and called his name Onan.
(5) And
she again conceived, and bare a son; and called his name Shelah: and he was at
Chezib, when she bare him.
(6) And
(7) And
Er,
(8) And
(9) And
Onan knew that the seed would not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in
unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should
give seed to his brother.
(10) And
the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he also slew him.
Now
it wasn’t an act of withdrawal that God Almighty hated—his spilling it on the
ground—as far as I can see; that is, what he actually killed that boy for. It
was because he refused the law of God to raise up
children to his brother.
You
say, “How could that be?”
By
the selective sperm that came from the father and the mother in nature would be
identical, but branded according to… In other words, if I had a brother, full
brother, and you had a full brother, that child could actually be either my
brother’s or mine, according to our blood lines. But God, separating the life
of the sperm directing where that seed goes, that boy, that man that died,
would have actually had children that were his. Because you
tell me where you got your sperm, except from Adam. It’s a common
integer across the line. That solves that mystery.
36. Now,
let’s go a little further.
(11) Then
said Judah to Tamar his daughter in law, Remain a widow at thy father’s house,
till Shelah my son be grown: for he said, Lest peradventure he die also, as his
brethren did. And Tamar went and dwelt in her father’s house.
(12) And
in process of time the daughter of Shuah Judah’s wife died; and Judah was
comforted, and went up unto his sheepshearers to Timnath, he and his friend
Hirah the Adullamite.
(13) And
it was told Tamar, saying, Behold thy father in law goeth up to Timnath to
shear his sheep.
(14) So
she put her widow’s garments off from her, and covered her head with a vail,
and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by the way to Timnath;
for she saw that Shelah was grown, and she was not given unto him to wife. (Now
this is the law of God—the tradition that they had to carry.)
(15) When
(16) And
he turned unto her by the way, and said, Go to, I pray thee, let me come in
unto thee; (for he knew not that she was his daughter-in-law.) And she said,
What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me?
(17) And
he said, I will send thee a kid from the flock. And she said, Wilt thou give me
a pledge, till thou send it?
(18) And
he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Your signet, your
bracelets, and the staff in your hand. And he gave it her, and came in unto
her, and she conceived by him.
(19) And
she arose, and went away, and laid by her vail from her, and put on the
garments of her widowhood.
(20) And
(21) Then
he asked the men of that place, saying, Where is the harlot, that was openly by
the way side? And they said, There was no harlot in this place.
(22) And
he returned back to
(23) And
(24) And
it came to pass about three months after, that it was told
Now,
if you were back there, what would you think of betraying a woman who’d be
burnt? Now she’s pregnant. So, you’re going to be guilty of two murders—the
mother, and the child that is not yet born. Nice, isn’t it? Very
nice.
37. You
say you can sow without reaping? Don’t you delude yourself.
The world since the Garden of Eden has been trying to sow without reaping and
reap without sowing. Now this answers the question, “Are the Roman Catholics
right when they say a woman raped cannot have an abortion?”
Well,
God’s law let the baby die with the woman. Now I’m not saying “THUS SAITH THE
LORD” as the prophet. I’ll tell you one thing: if a woman is raped and is going
to have a baby, I certainly would not be against abortion anymore than I’m
against a woman whose life is endangered by childbirth. Tie the cords. I could
be wrong, but I’m just telling you by inference—by inference.
38. Now
we’ll read some Scripture where you find out where the man that raped this
woman has to die, and the couples who commit adultery have to die. Now I’m
going to tell you something: remember, the blood of the sacrifice was in
Say,
“Well, let’s just offer a sacrifice.”
Hmm… No, the sacrifice is for the soul. When that soul gets
right with God, it’s certain she begins to live right,
and the Bible commands us that we put away adulteries. ‘We’ put away this; ‘we’
put away that. It doesn’t say one thing about God doing it for us. So, when I
hear people tell me: “God took away my smoking,” que sera… I don’t say He
doesn’t. What good does it do you?
I
saw his father go plumb down the drain too. But I saw a man in
Did
that man ever turn to the Message? No. So, what is he now? Under
obligation with leanness of soul. Now he will reap what he sowed, which
is unbelief in the presence of God through God manifesting through a man’s
human flesh.
You
say, “Bro. Vayle, I don’t believe it.”
You
don’t have to believe anything. I’m telling you what’s right. He will answer,
because he sowed it! He went to God for a favor, but he didn’t return it. Now God
does us a favor of saving us, we ought to live for him.
39. Well,
let’s go a little further.
(25) When
she had brought forth, she sent to her father in law, saying, By the man, whose
these are am I with child: and she said, Discern, I pray thee, whose are these,
the signet, and bracelets, and staff. (That’s what she said. Now, watch the
reply:)
(26) And
Well,
wasn’t that sweet? I’m just talking sarcastically, because this to me is
hypocrisy. Why didn’t he get married? Okay.
40. Let’s
see. That’s the start of it. Deuteronomy 23:2—I won’t get anywhere except on
this tonight. We’ll go over It tomorrow. By the grace
of God, we’ll go right to the “Identification,” because we’re already well into
my notes, in order, whatever they are. I’ve got Bro. Branham’s notes in order. All right. Deuteronomy 23:2:
(2) A
bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth
generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
Now,
of course, we understand illegitimacy in a different way than this here. This
is where an Israelite marries a foreign woman, or visa
versa—I suppose you could put it that way, too. But illegitimacy is
illegitimacy. Anything out of wedlock is not truly illegitimate, (It’s only
when those couples…) because the woman could be a young virgin, seduced by a
married man. The child, then, would not be a bastard child. It would not be
truly illegitimate. We have Scripture and things for that. But these are things
that Bro. Branham taught, so I know of wherein I speak; and I found the very
quote on what Bro. Branham was saying.
41. Now,
what I want you to notice here, for the tenth generation… It takes ten
generations to clear it. Now Bro. Branham brought that out. Now, let’s just
stop a minute. What if I married a black man to a white woman or visa versa, or
a Chinese to an Indian, or visa versa, or a Japanese
to somebody else of another race and color—talking about the black and white.
Let us say that this black man marries a white woman. The child born, (Let us
say is a girl.) is called a ‘mulatto’, because she’s one half.
Now
she’s a pretty girl and very desirable, so she marries a white man and they
have a child—beautiful little girl, with beautiful color, and she is called a
‘quadroon’. She’s one quarter.
Now
she has a daughter, even more beautiful still, and beautiful coloring, and she
marries a white man. Now they have an octoroon. That’s one eighth.
Now
this has a daughter also, and she marries a white man. The child is white.
Reverse it and it’s black.
Now
that’s your first generation mulatto, the second one is quadroon, the third one
is an octoroon, and the last one bows out. That’s not many generations.