The word is Latin, meaning “to bind back”.

In the beginning there was no religion.  The Word of God would come down every evening to communicate with Man (cf.Gen.3:8-9).  God and Man had fellowship.  But the Fall changed all that.

Then God instituted a religion.  To “religo” Adam and Eve to Himself, He slew some animals, shedding their blood just to cover their shame.  The fig leaf covering of Adam and Eve would have been sufficient if the Fall was the partaking of a natural fruit, and surely too, God would have to provide another fruit tree by which their eating of its fruit would have sufficed in the remission of their sin, for God’s law states: “Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe” (Ex.21:24-25).  True, even though the law was yet to be given, God’s judgment of sin could not in any way deviate from His righteousness and truth.  God is not unreasonable.  In judgment He is full of grace and mercy as shown in His dealing with Cain over his offering and his murdering Abel.

No, it was not the partaking of a fruit of a natural tree but a fruit that resulted in death ― fornication with the Serpent.  The Serpent beguiled Eve to taste something that was forbidden.  O, but only for a tasty moment!  And then, death set in!

Satan knew well that he could not deceive Adam, for Adam was an original creation of God.  If he could he would have used “Lady” Serpent to seduce Adam.  Adam knew the law of God states that every creature was to bring forth of its own kind.  To interbreed would result in the death of the seed; hence there is no life in that creature to reproduce LIFE of its own kind ever again.

Blood was involved in the Fall and therefore blood must be shed.  “Blood for blood”, for without the shedding of blood there would be no remission of sin.  Hence, God had to “religo” the first couple by shedding (innocent) blood.

From that time Adam and Eve practiced what God instituted.  They raised the two boys, Cain and Abel, under their wings.  When the boys grew into men, the day came that they brought forth their own offerings to the Lord.  Abel did exactly what was required according to the revelation he had received in the religion of God given to Adam.  However, Cain deceived himself when he introduced his own approach to God.  He created his own religion.  Instead of shedding the blood of an animal and offering it to his Creator, he gave the best of all that his hands had produced out of the ground.  Was blood shedding something Cain wanted to avoid or was it that he had no revelation of the blood even though he had seen that Adam offered such an offering?  Then again, when a sin-offering for him was provided, he spurned it. Cain simply held to his religious ideology and rejected God’s provided way of worship.  This spirit of the Serpent Seed is now seen in the life of many Church leaders and worshippers today.

No doubt, Cain knew who he was.  He was a hybrid, the son of the Serpent.  As such the way of God was contrary to his reasoning.  He was the first man to create a religion.  You can call it Cainism.

Man-made religions are the handiwork of the Devil.  They are created to sidetrack the worshippers from seeing the Truth.  Man-made religions are not about those in paganism that have nothing in common with the One True God of the Holy Scripture.  Rather they are about those found within Christianity, those who roof themselves under the wings of the Old and New Testaments.  There are men who would not only follow the way of Balaam but the mentality of Cain.  They would reason against the Word of God, and by and by, they would create religions using part of the Word of God.  Their religions are based mainly upon their creeds and dogmas, and even their personal opinions, which they called “revelations”.  That is why we have thousands of different organized denominational churches in Christianity.



It is clear from the Scripture that God is certainly not in “church-ianity” and “church-ology”.  When God gave His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to us, He did not even have Him pay a visit to the church of the Pharisees or the Sadducees, or even to try and correct their doctrines.  Like John the Baptist who came preaching the Gospel and rebuking the religious leaders because of their spirit, Jesus did the same.

The restoration of the elect to the Word of God in this age is the finale of God’s working in a people to bring them to perfection, and for their metamorphosis to meet their Lord in the air.  A messenger was sent with a message to call the elect out of the Babel system of man-made religious churches and to restore them to the Apostolic Fathers’ Faith.  However, it was not long after, that the spirit of Cain again was raised up among the believers that began to create various “religo” camps.  William Branham, the messenger, did not create a religion with his message.  Unfortunately, many of his followers did.  After his passing away in 1965, many preachers who were close to him in his ministry started taking the message around the world.  We thank God for them.  However, a number of those ministers have projected William Branham to be more than what he was ― that he was THE ABSOLUTE, that he was WITHOUT ERRORS, that he was the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, that he was the LORD BRANHAM CHRIST, and more.  O, how the Devil had a heyday back then, and even today.



Yes, for years, after Branham passed away, a good number of preachers have propagated themselves by putting themselves on a pedestal.  How did they put themselves up there?  Basically, they inspired fear upon their hearers by creating awe about themselves as the ones you should be listening to, and to believe all that they teach, else you would be an outcast.  And why did they do it?  They wanted the high place.  They inflated themselves as the only ones who have the truth or the only ones who have a special high calling to interpret the Word of God.  But such preachers are committing iniquities by being unfair to God in their handling of His Word and in their dealings with the believers.  Unlike what the Apostle Paul had written in 2 Corinthians 10:12-13, these preachers dare to classify or compare themselves with those who commend themselves. They even measure themselves by themselves, and compare themselves among themselves, boasting beyond measure and limits of the sphere which God appointed them.  What a shame!  Some have projected themselves either as the Elisha, possessing the mantle of Branham, or the Joshua who would take the Bride into the Rapture, or even the 8th Messenger who would perfect the Bride.  These preachers have put themselves higher than others.  They wanted to be someone special fulfilling a certain “one man ministry” that they claimed are written in the Scripture.  Their whole theological approach was nothing short of the warped mind of desperate presumptuous men grabbing the air for something that they can glory in.  They wanted to be the CHIEF or LEADING MAN of God.  They taught the doctrine that “there is always ONE MAJOR PROPHET or ONE CHIEF APOSTLE of God” leading God’s people.  Do we really see that in the Old and New Testaments respectively?  For an example, take these three prophets of the Old Testament era: Jeremiah, Daniel and Ezekiel; they were contemporaries prophesying in the year approximately between 627 BC and 530 BC.  Who then among the three was the MAJOR PROPHET?  (When Bro. Branham said that there were never two Major Prophets (or Messengers) on the earth at the same time, was he referring to those in the Old Testament age?  Check it out with the Word.)  And of all the Apostles in the Early Church, was there really a Chief Apostle?  Misapplying and misinterpreting the Scripture is the norm among such inconsiderate egoistic preachers and they have also the fondness to brag about themselves.  Of course, the Apostle Paul did brag but not as these who brag without substance while putting themselves above others ― to sit also upon the mount of the congregation of God.

The ONLY ONE WHO IS THE CHIEF is our Lord Jesus Christ.  He is THE SON of God, THE PROPHET of prophets (of Israel), THE CHIEF SHEPHERD (or PASTOR) of shepherds, THE APOSTLE (among all apostles) of our Faith, and THE ONLY HEAD of the Church.  For anyone to usurp the position of authority that belongs only to our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, and claims to be the sole leader, or leader of leaders, is standing on blasphemous ground.

The working of God with the children of Israel in the Old Testament era and the working of God in the New Testament era are totally different in approach.  In the former, God revealed Himself to them to give His Oracles.  There were the Laws and the Prophecies given by Messengers and Seers to separate and keep the people in the Word of God.  In the latter, God gave the Gospel to fulfill what was spoken of by the Law and the Prophets for the redemption of the people.  Under this Grace, God gave His Word by Christ’s “Ascension Gifts” ministry to teach and perfect the Redeemed.

Our Lord likened the believers of God to sheep.  Yes, for sheep are truly dumb animals.  They would eat anything that looks pleasantly green as if they are all food, but some greens are poisonous weeds.  A God-sent shepherd will lead his sheep to proper pasture to graze.  He knows and is able to identify poisonous weeds so as to keep his flock off them.

Nevertheless, Christ Jesus our Lord is still threshing His floor.  He is thoroughly purging it, ridding it of things that offend ― false doctrines and teachings and even those who stubbornly propagate their religions.



“What religion?” You might ask.  Simply, it is any teaching that pushes a creed, a dogma or a teaching, like those that promote Nicolaitanism.  It is any teaching that pushes or proclaims a man – an apostle, a false prophet or a self-proclaimed servant of God – to be the SUPER SPECIAL man of God.  It is any teaching that proclaims a man as the Chief Apostle or the Leading (Lead) Apostle or the ABSOLUTE, or whatever the TITLE that is churned up, as the ONLY ONE THAT YOU HAVE TO LINE UP YOUR FAITH AND DOCTRINES WITH.  Yes, with his doctrines and not with the WORD of God!  When such a teaching is created, a new religion is formed and therefore a new organization, and the leader is literally a religious CEO (Chief Executive Officer).  Such religion then entraps the souls of men to its teachings, such as, according to its creator, if one does not fully embrace its teachings, one is not a member of the Bride or one will not make the Rapture.  By such propagation, it creates fear among believers who are not grounded in the Word.  Confused, they will simply embrace the teachings without a thorough checking of the Word to see if those teachings are true.

The religion that William Branham was THE ABSOLUTE is not only false, but it is a Satanic doctrine.  The present religion that a certain minister is now the “LEAD APOSTLE”, after the death of his “CHIEF APOSTLE”, is also false.  It is this present religion that this message has to be written after some ministers have seen their sheep confused by this new so-called revelation.  These ministers have seen the lies in the former religion and have steered clear of its spirit, the spirit of Branhamism, but now this latter religion is trying to deceive the sheep under their care.

This message is not written in argument against the various teachings of the self-proclaimed “Chief Apostle” or self-proclaimed “Lead Apostle”.  This message is also not written to defend my teachings on the subjects which both these “super apostles” have found objectionable since the time the “Chief Apostle’s” teachings were questioned by certain other preachers in America and other nations.  I have never called their names and never picked on them publicly.  However, this message is written for two reasons.  Firstly, to show the foolish notion about the Church of Christ being led by one single Super Apostle called the Chief Apostle, and since he has passed away, a Leading Apostle is now the HEAD of all the ministers.  Secondly, being the main reason, if there is truly a SINGLE SUPER APOSTLE, be it CHIEF APOSTLE or LEAD APOSTLE, who will lead the Bride to perfection, to a unity of faith, by his teachings which all other apostles and ministers must line up with, then his doctrines and exegesis of Scripture cannot and must not contain errors.  (The claim: “These men, the Chief Apostle and Lead Apostle cannot be wrong!”  But the question is: What if they are wrong?)  If, per chance, their teachings do err, then for them to claim SOLE Leadership is dung, and for other ministers to simply follow such “super apostles” and their teachings solely for unity is plain stupidity.  What difference is there when compared to those who subjected themselves to follow the very doctrines of the “holy father” of Rome, or those who follows the dictate of the WCC or the NCC just to bring about a unity of faith (so-called, of course)?

I know that as soon as this message is read by those who are seduced by the spirit of Nicolaitanism, there will be objections.  There will be criticisms.  There will be attacks.  But I will not be drawn into this foolish religious debate over genealogies (cf.Tit.3:9; Prov.26:4).  However, just to “answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit” (Prov.26:5), let me emphasize: this message is written to prove one main pointthat if there is such an office of a Chief Apostle or a Lead Apostle, then the exegesis of Scripture by such men must be faithful to the Word of God.  After all they are supposed to be all-knowledgeable in the Word.  Any error on their exegesis of the Sacred Scripture cannot be tolerated because they are the epitome, the religious CEOs of the “Ascension Gifts” ministry.  But if proven that they did err – the Scripture will prove Itself – then the claim, the religion, of a Chief Apostle/Lead Apostle is nothing but a BIG LIE of fallen preachers who had succumbed to the temptation of fame ― BIG “I” over little “u”.



I believe in the unity of faith.  That the Bride will have the UNITY OF THE FAITH is certain.  We cannot force it.  Our Lord knows how to bring that about as we keep the UNITY OF THE SPIRIT in love and subjection, one to another.  Certainly, “seeing eye to eye” is not seeing it through the eyes of ONE MAN, one apostle, but the eyes of our Lord Jesus Christ.  (Have you not heard how many “believers” have died by “seeing eye to eye” with Jim Jones and David Koresh?  You might say that those people were deceived, and that they were cults.  But you, who follow a “Chief Apostle” or a “Lead Apostle”, are you not deceived and are you not a cult?  The spirit of Nicolaitanism has no boundaries.)  For the unity of the saints to be a reality, the individuals must agapao the Lord and His Word, be willing and obedient to hear what the Spirit of God says.

There is no such ministry as a Chief Apostle or a Lead Apostle.  There are only the Ascension Ministries of Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Shepherds and Teachers that are set in the Body of Christ to perfect the saints.  It is God’s business and God’s prerogative as to how He will bring about the Faith of His people throughout the world where He has sent his servants to all the scattered “little flocks” of sheep.  There are churches in the big cities of the world, there are churches in almost every corner of the jungles of Africa and India, and there are churches in freezing Siberian Tundra.  To even think that a so-called “Chief Apostle” or a so-called “Lead Apostle” is going to unite the thousands of believing churches in every country (with different languages) according to his every revelation is pathetic.  God deals and gives to each church what is needful but He requires also the believers to continue walking in the light of the Present Truth from one glory to another as it is revealed to them.  Most importantly, it is not how much you think you know; it is what you really know and to live it as you keep walking in the Truth.  Just read the life of the first generation Apostles and their ministries.  Many traveled to different countries preaching the Gospel and died in those countries.  Did they get to meet with each other yearly to make sure that they lined up with a Chief Apostle?  And who was that Chief Apostle, if there was such a one?  According to the so-called “Chief Apostle” (now deceased) and the so-called “Lead Apostle”, it was the Apostle Paul.  And according to the so-called “Lead Apostle”, the Lead Apostle of the Early Church was the Apostle John.  These are the dogmas of their own religions.  How ridiculous and unfounded is such a teaching.  Think about it.



I was accused by the so-called “Chief Apostle” of propagating that an assembly of believers can get by with some errors in their faith of the Word.  What a lie!  I believe that the Scripture has but only ONE TRUE INTERPRETATION and that interpretation does not come by the flesh but by the Holy Spirit of Almighty God.  Men may give their interpretations of the Scripture but it is the Holy Spirit that gives the revelation.  For a preacher to teach that he is the one who will bring the complete revelation of the Word is nothing but hogwash.  As I have said, I believe in the unity of the faith because there is but only ONE TRUE FAITH.  I believe that the saints (wherever the little corner of the world they live in) should keep walking toward perfection in Christ (cf.Heb.6:1) with the truth that are given them from time to time by the apostles God sent to them.  As God unfolds His glory for us saints to see and to walk therein, we are “being transformed into the same image from glory to glory” (cf.2Cor.3:17-18).  His revelation is ever progressively unfolded to us until the complete, the perfect, is come (cf.1Cor.13:9-10), and that is only when Christ returns.  Until then, “for we know in part and we prophesy in part”, so wrote the Apostle Paul.  Though all apostles are apostles yet all could only prophesy in part.  Apostles are not all the same or equal, for to each is given his own talents ― some ten folds, some thirty folds, some seventy folds and some hundred folds.  Each teaches what is given him and what he knows is true.  Each one learning from the others, complementing and supplementing one another, for none has the complete whole.  None of the Early Church Apostles ever claimed he was the Chief Apostle, and none can claim it today.  However, when true apostles consider the teachings of the others, they would be able to recognize the real Scriptural facts of the matter; for example, did not Peter recognize the deeper teachings of Paul (2Pet.3:16) even though he was the spokesman, and was the first one with the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, which he used on the Day of Pentecost?  And what about James’ teaching that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only” (Jam.2:24) ― did the other apostles see it as false because Paul taught “that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the law” (Rom.3:28)?  Did Peter or Paul run down James and his revelation as false?  [Note: Martin Luther was frustrated by James’ teaching and even called his epistle the “epistle of straw” and questioning its canonicity.]  Did not Peter teach that all of us subject ourselves one to another and be clothed with humility (1Pet.5:5)?

It is one thing for ministers to contend for the Truth that was once delivered to the saints but it is another thing to simply call names of other ministers to run them down over a small disagreement of views as if they have committed blasphemies.  Ministers, who run down others, think their actions are as righteous as Paul’s (cf.1Tim.1:18-20; 2Tim.2:16-18; 4:14-15).  Are they really?  A quick examination of their actions would reveal, most of the times, a spirit of self-righteousness and pride.  It is not about Truth, it’s about their teachings ― every bit of them is absolute, and they dislike anyone to be at variance with them, anyone within their circle or just near their circle.  Yes, whenever they would come across a teaching of someone they know and a teaching that affects their views, they would call the name of the minister and slight him; sometime even treat him as a blasphemer, or one who does them harm or evil.  Did any of the Early Church apostles do that?  Did Paul criticize all the apostles and the elders in Jerusalem for introducing three particular laws to the Gentile converts?  However, watch the spirit of many of the preachers today.  They may be charismatic, oratorical and educationally smart, but look at how they treat a fellow minister when it comes to a little different point of view over their teachings.

Unless a doctrine is detrimental to the Christian’s faith, such as the resurrection is past already”, or what is being propagated today, that Christ has come; the Millennium is now on and therefore the ordinances of Feet-washing and Communion are unnecessary”, calling names of ministers and running them down is nothing short of self-importance and arrogance.



Yes, egoistic religious carnal preachers have not only conquered the life of their followers with their doctrines but also their religious minds with a potpourri of deceptive dealings.  They are the ones splitting the Churches.  Fear, and not Faith, has come to dominate many believers’ life.  And such religious fear often leads to antagonism, sometime even hatred, towards those who disagree with them.

One German minister, who refuses to admit his false teaching of Polygamy (because of his own weakness in what he called “a little affair”), has been going about from nation to nation, making sure that believers know who he is ― that he is God’s man, that he has a special calling to feed the Bride, that he had received his special calling through the messenger Branham, that he had heard an audible voice of God for his special commission, and that he has been to almost every country in the world.  Calling himself an apostle, when he is only a missionary, he tried to set the Word in order but ended up with several erroneous teachings.  One such teaching was that the Holy City New Jerusalem is a literal city that will hang above the city of Jerusalem in the New Heaven and New Earth.  Still, he has many followers, some are even polygamists.  (This minister will deny anytime that he ever taught polygamy.  But I know better.)

Then there is this American minister with whom I once associated with and had respect for his stand against extreme believers in the Endtime Message (but not for his claim of being the “Chief Apostle” that came about later in his ministry).  Back in the 1970s and early 1980s, I had greatly helped him, enlarged his ministry, by sending hundreds and hundreds of his publication to all the churches around the world.  However, because his teachings were questioned by a Ghanaian minister, and a few others, who compared his teachings with mine, he became upset.  Going to his pulpit, he not only tore up my teachings to prove that his were the truth, and nothing but the truth, but also falsely accused me of several things that never existed.  He had the whole thing recorded on magnetic tape, and he sent it out all over the world.  These are his words:

I am not in the habit of calling names. I usually find that speaking against the wrong is all that is necessary; in order for the true children of God to keep on a straight course. But ever so often it becomes necessary to call names; just like the apostle Paul did, concerning certain ones that had gone contrary to the right way. Richard Gan, from Singapore, forced me to have to call his name; because of the way he conducted himself when he came here. I detected that he had a little bit different idea on some certain things; but wanting to give God a chance to teach him, I determined to respect him and say nothing about what I felt. But as time went on, it became obvious that he was working behind the scene, trying to feel out certain individuals that he felt might listen to him. For one thing he had this, what he called a revelation, that Noah was a pure seed, and only his wife was the impure seed. Well as long as he did not have this in print I did not think too much about it; but once he put it in print and started sending it out…

It came as a shock to me that he did not (of all Christian behaviours) first approach me to verify as to whichever fact or rumour it might have been.  Claiming that I forced him to call my name, he started shooting at me.  As a minister, believing himself to be the “Chief Apostle”, did he not know his Bible?  Why did he not go by The Good Book?  Did our Master not teach him that “if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone”?  What a shame!  His accusation that “as time went on, it became obvious that he was working behind the scene, trying to feel out certain individuals that he felt might listen to him” had not one ring of truth in it.  I wrote him a letter and requested him to produce two persons who would testify to the fact, and I would immediately fly to his church and confess before his whole congregation.  When asked to prove his accusation, he remained silent on the issue, but continued from time to time making presumptive remarks as well as to try and disprove some of my teachings because he could not see his own errors in his teachings.  In another sermon, he said, “let me remind all of you that I have never said Richard Gan is an apostle”, as if I am an apostle only by his say-so.  See how he had inflated himself beyond his calling!  This has always been the behaviour of many preachers who fear the loss of their fame and followers and their revelations (as is often seen among the Pentecostal-Charismatic preachers).  They would get hold of the tail of the dog to wag the dog so that the attention of the people is focused not on them and their teachings but upon something else of lesser importance, usually another preacher’s teachings.  They would not want you to see their own errors.

[Note: I have never given my testimony in full regarding the Lord’s calling and what He said to me.  To me something is better left unsaid so as not to draw opinionated attention.  And for many years since this minister severed his ties with me, by falsely accusing me of mischief to mislead his readers and listeners from his teachings, I have remained silent.  Only a few ministers within the circle and a few who corresponded with him have known the truth.  And it will remain as it was.]

Back in the 1970s when I first came across this minister’s publication (a periodical transcript of his sermon) and read a few of them, there was a common ground that we both shared, which is, that the Bible is THE ABSOLUTE.  Though there were some minor points of his teachings that I disagreed with, I had never taught against them or ran him down.  In fact, every issue of his publication that was mailed to me in bulks (upon my request), was repacked into smaller packages and redistributed to believers in other parts of the world with the little available fund we had from the little fellowship then.  He never ordered any of my publications to be sent out.  However, I was not concerned about that.  Only once, during a convention, did he make mention of one of my books, “LOGOS: The Beginning of the Creation of God”; nothing more.



Now, this same American preacher came to Singapore twice to minister the Word.  During the last visit, in 1981, a local evangelist drove me to pick him up from his hotel for the evening meeting.  The evangelist said to me, “Bro Gan, I am told that this preacher believes that he is the Chief Apostle.  Do you know about it?”

“No.  Never heard him said that.”

“How about we ask him?”

“Sure,” I said.  “At least we get it from the horse’s mouth.”

Well, arriving at his hotel room, the evangelist asked the preacher, in the presence of his wife and me, “Brother ___, do you claim or believe that you are the Chief Apostle?”

Without hesitation, the preacher smiled and replied with these words, “Brother, it is saying that the sun is as far in the east as it is in the west,” implying that he never claimed or believed that he was the Chief Apostle.  Now, whether or not he was telling the truth at that time, we would never know.  However, less than ten years later, his belief and teaching of a Chief Apostle became apparent.  His sermons gave inference to it.  Some of his followers were hailing it.  Was it because they had pushed so hard to putting him on a pedestal that he succumbed to satisfying their desire?  (A church in Manila, Philippines, declared the fact.  But sadly, that same church has since been fractioned into four.)  However, just before he passed away, a few years ago, a Nigerian minister, who not only came preaching certain revelations and lifting him up on a pedestal, but even prophesied that the “Chief Apostle” would not die but would see the Rapture.  O how deceptive man can be!  Man deceiving man, man put man on a pedestal so that he, in return, might be lifted up by the same.  O lying vanities!

O saints of God, remember the words of the angel to Bro. Branham ― “If thou would be SINCERE…”   Yes, sincerity is lacking among many ministers, and lies are plentiful in their mouths.  Take what the “Chief Apostle” said:

One man is not supposed to have it all; the body of Christ will be perfected by the five-fold ministry of Ephesians 4:11, because they will all have the same revelation, and will minister for the same purpose, not trying to build anything for self. Preachers who seek the favor of the people they preach to, will not always tell them what they need to hear; and that can make it hard on those that do obey God and preach a true revelation.

Yes, truly! “One man is not supposed to have it all.”  Yet the “Chief Apostle” was the one man who had it all!  He had always faulted other ministers and their teachings, especially mine, whenever he saw his teachings being threatened.  He would imply that his was the truth and that the unity of faith would be broken if the other ministers did not line up with his revelation.  O mine, how untrue that is!  The unity of faith was broken the moment he thought himself to be the CEO of all apostles.  Why?  Because he began fighting against others for not lining up with his revelation!  Is that what agape is?  Even the self-proclaimed “Lead Apostle” is doing the same, aping him, parroting him, while quoting Scripture that “knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth” (1Cor.8:1b).  These preachers meant well, but they were misguided.  It does not matter how anointed they claimed to be and how big their ministries are.  Saints of God, can you not see that Nicolaitan spirit?

[Note:  This so-called “Chief Apostle” believed and taught what he called the continuity of truth – CONTINUITY LIGHT – being passed down from one special anointed minister to another special anointed minister.  Though not openly claimed, he believed that he was the one who had the continuity of truth passed to him after the death of William Branham.  But he did not believe Branham to be the Absolute (as Branhamites do), yet he wanted others to line up with his revelation (which would make him the Absolute or else they are not in oneness of the faith and seeing eye to eye with the truth), and he did not agree to conform to some of the Church Orders that Bro. Branham taught and laid down in his Tabernacle.  (Well, neither do I on those two issues.)  But did Bro. Branham ever call his name and run him down during the church meetings in his Tabernacle?  No.  Bro. Branham did not have to defend his own doctrines by running down other ministers, but he did run down the spirit that tried to make him the Christ, the One Who is the Absolute.  On the other hand, this “Chief Apostle” ran down anyone who disagreed with even some of his doctrinal points, yet he did not even fight against the spirit that was lifting him up as the “Chief Apostle”.  What carnality!]



Just towards the end of 2009, four books came into my post office box.  Apparently the author, a Nigerian minister, who called himself the “Lead Apostle”, must have made sure that I received the books.  I did not request for them.  The package carried a UK postal service stamp.  A quick scan of the books revealed that he had taken up the religion that his predecessor (the “Chief Apostle”) had created, for he claimed leadership among apostles as the “Lead Apostle” and carried the religion one step further.  Simply, as the “Chief Apostle” was no more, there must be another apostle to lead the Ascension Ministry ― so the postulation went.  Of course, a new title had to be created; the apostle was to be called “Leading Apostle” or “Lead Apostle”, and he was to bring all believers into one unity of faith, everyone seeing eye to eye with the Word.  And this was to come to pass by all having to line up with his interpretation or revelation of the Word.  However, at this moment, why is the very church of the “Chief Apostle” not in agreement with the “Lead Apostle’s” teachings?  Have not both camps sat under the “Chief Apostle” and taught that there was to be a continuity of ministry and truth from one man, William Branham, to another?  Of course, each side has their reasons.  They are now fighting each other and continue to call names.

Saints, is this the work of God?  Or is there another spirit working about the person?  In every fellowship, good and bad attitudes are present as there is a mix of different sort of believers.  But when hypocrisy and deceit fill a minister’s life, he is entertaining an iniquitous spirit that will frame him with pride, creating a disharmony with other believers.



This is the view of the “Lead Apostle”, concerning those in America who no longer follow the “Chief Apostle”:

They will simply choke on the fact of a foreigner bearing the Continuity light, the Standard of truth for today. Yet, it is a fact that, although all apostles will have a true understanding of what truth is, and will stand firmly and faithfully for truth, and although all the apostles together make up the head of the 5 fold ministry, yet, Not all apostles will shed further light! And the Continuity light of Christ has a precise source, and a precise vessel, whether they like it or not! That is an infallible and undeniable Scriptural fact! These people just do not want to hear or accept the place of any lead ministry from another race, particularly Ham's race!

…the fact still remains that, within the apostolic ministry, there is a place for a torch bearer, one that leads the way, the one bearing the Continuity truth of Christ! And God alone determines that! And that vessel is sounding today from Africa, by the grace of God, and by God's sovereign election, for he is a black man!

THE TRUE 5 FOLD MINISTRY, WILL STRICTLY BE MADE UP OF A PEOPLE FIRMLY STANDING FOR THE CONTINUITY LIGHT OF CHRIST FOR THIS HOUR! And that goes for every apostle of today, for they will all have to follow the John of Rev. 10:11, a black man from Africa, in the Continuity light of Jesus Christ he bears,…

Truly, God is no respecter of persons.  The gifts and callings are without repentance.  The ministers in the Ascension Gifts are made up of different races and they are placed in churches throughout the world as God sees fit.  But to claim to be the “Chief Apostle” or “Lead Apostle”, be he white, black, brown, red or yellow, from whom the Light of Christ’s Word could only flow out to the Bride is nothing short of smugness, pure arrogance.  And this Nigerian preacher claims that God is now using an African man to lead.  What baloney!  Such claim could have only arisen from a biased notion about the racist issue between the Whites and the Blacks that has been around for generations of time.  “Yes, the Black has been suppressed ― down, down, down. But now, there are the super Black men in sports, in movies, in politics. They stood up among the White now ― up, up, up.  Now, it is God’s time to put a Black man in the forefront of His ministry in the Church.”  Blah, blah, blah…

Watch the spirit.  This so-called “Lead Apostle” would call names of those who disagreed with him, emphasizing how blind they have been.  Why?  He has to reinforce his religion and his claim of being the new CEO of the Ascension Ministry.  He teaches that all believers must check their teachings with the “Chief Apostle”.  And now that he is the leader, he thinks himself to be the yardstick for Truth and that all must line up with his inerrant revelation, that he is the one who has the real truth just like the way his predecessor, the “Chief Apostle”, had claimed for himself.  O Nicolaitan spirit!  What began as a deed in the First Church Age became a doctrine in the Third, and today is back into the Church of the end-time!  “Thus you also have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.  Repent, or else I will come to you quickly and will fight against them with the sword of My mouth” (Rev.2:15-16).



This “Lead Apostle” took shots at my teachings in his messages.  His actions were like his predecessor.  He picked the very same doctrines to try and discredit my ministry.  (This Nigerian minister and I have never met nor corresponded, yet he picked on me as if I am his enemy, just because his “Chief Apostle” took shots at me ― “Monkey see, monkey do.”)  Why are ministers, such as these “super apostles”, so uptight with someone else’s teachings, especially one who had some association with them, or even some sort of connection with them?  Do they feel that their ministries are threatened?  Or do they feel themselves to be the sole authorities of all true teachings (truth and nothing but the truth) and want everyone to subject to their revelations?  To other ministers and their doctrines, they can say that “we are all mortals, and are subject to mistakes”.  Yet, when it comes down to them, the fact in their statement does not apply to them.  Even this words of the “Lead Apostle” to his former pastor: “when in your sermons you start to equate yourself with Moses, and any one who disagrees with you (whether rightly or wrongly), as Dathan, Korah, and Abiram, you are cleverly but wrongly instilling fear into the minds of the flock” does not seem to apply to him.

The doctrinal subjects often picked against me are related to Cain, the Giants, and Canaan. Unlike certain men, the like of Bishop Cohen Reckart and Dalton Bruce, the “Chief Apostle” and “Lead Apostle” did not twist my words when they spoke about them though the former group did with some other doctrinal subjects.  However, it is time once again to clear the air on these teachings of CAIN, THE GIANTS and CANAAN.  I am not defending myself, but this piece of writing is to help the confused believers to take a careful look at the Word and see if both the “Chief Apostle” and “Lead Apostle” had done what the Scripture said ― “rightly dividing the word of truth”.

To all Christians who received the message to “COME OUT” of Mystery Babylon and her daughters, we know well how important it is to understand the doctrine of the Serpent Seed.  God had a Plan.  He had a Monogene through which He would manifest Himself.  However, Satan sought to undermine God’s Plan that was conceived in His Monogene (the Logos, the One True Seed) by bringing a Seed of Discrepancy against It.  The revelation of the Serpent Seed provides us an appreciation as to the questions of “Why the Blood Sacrifice?” and “Why the Blood of Jesus Christ?”, and the reasons for the ever increasing moral and religious degradations that we see in the world today.  The revelation of it also provides us an understanding of the seriousness of the sin of iniquity when it comes to our dealing with God and His Word, and fellowmen.



Let’s begin with the birth of Cain.

Gen. 4:1:  And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.
2:  And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. 

These verses show that Adam “knew” Eve only once and she brought forth two sons, the first was Cain and the second was Abel.  Verse 2 does not state that Adam “knew” his wife again and that she brought forth Abel.  [Note: In his teachings, the so-called “Lead Apostle” said that God through Moses employed the use of punctuation marks in the Scripture.  Does the original Hebrew Scripture really have punctuation marks?  His exegesis amounted to presumption to prove his point.  But the simple truth lies right there in the whole of chapter 4.]  Adam actually “knew” Eve again only after Abel was killed.  For the truth, read Genesis 4:25 – “And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.”  What age was Adam when Seth was born?  “And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:” (Gen.5:3).  After Seth was born in Adam’s 130th year, Adam then had other sons and daughters (cf.Gen.5:4).

That leads us to the question: How old was Cain and Abel when they offered their first sacrifice? Some say about 13 years, which they believe is the age of accountability.  Others say the age of 20 years, for that is when one could be made a soldier, or the age of 30 years when one could enter the service of God.  Still, others say the age of 40 years or 80 years or even 120 years.  Well, the Scripture does not tell us the actual age but from the birth of Seth, when Adam was 130 years old, we could more or less only estimate the year Cain and Abel offered their sacrifices and Cain murdering Abel.  Still, it’s just speculation.

Now, Eve’s bearing twins came about by superfetation.  Eve partook of the “Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil”, a perverted knowledge of sex, offered by the Serpent and she conceived Cain.  Later, Adam laid with her and she conceived Abel.  [Note: A careful study of the 4th chapter of Genesis will confirm that Cain’s father was the Serpent.  For more understanding, read the message on THE ORIGINAL SIN: What is it?.]  Foremost, notice that it was not Adam but Eve who named the firstborn, “Cain”, meaning, “Acquired” “I have gotten a man from the LORD”.  Cain was not Adam’s son and therefore it was not for Adam to name him.  In olden times, it was the duty of the father to name his children as can be seen in the Scripture (e.g. Gen.4:26; 5:3, 28-29; 16:15, etc.) unless there existed some variance or dispute in the relationship (e.g. Gen.19:36-38; 29:30-30:24).  Yes, Eve had acquired Cain from the LORD; how else could it be since all life come from the Creator.  A child born out of an unholy wedlock is still a life that comes from the Creator.  A mule, a zedonk, or a liger, is a hybrid.  Though such animals are not a part of the original creation, their lives also come from the Creator.  These animal-kinds cannot reproduce themselves by themselves.  Their (physical) seeds are dead.  Mankind is different, however, for he is created in God’s image and likeness, and God deals with him in his spirit-soul and not the flesh.  Hence, a mix of faith is (spiritual) death.  A spiritual seed cannot be unequally yoked with religious falsehood, the traditions of man, without resulting in spiritual death.

With the Serpent, Eve had gotten Cain from the LORD.  With Adam, Eve had gotten Abel from the LORD.  “And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground” (Gen.4:2).  The descriptions of the two individuals are the keys to understanding some of the other mysteries that lie hidden in the next few chapters of Genesis before the Call of Abram. It pays to observe carefully how the Spirit led Moses to pen the Scripture.



Gen. 4:3:  And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.
4:  And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:
5:  But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.
6:  And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7:  If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

As I have said afore, Cain was the first man to create a religion.  He approached God in his own way according to his own revelation, a revelation contrary to God’s Will, God’s Word.  His offering was therefore rejected.  But Abel was accepted as he brought to the Lord “the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof”, that is, “from the firstlings of his flock, the best of the best”.  (The term, “the fat thereof” is not referring to the “fatty fat” of the lamb that is required to be burnt in burnt offering or peace (fellowship) offering.  The self-styled “Lead Apostle” had it wrong.)  Nevertheless God provided Cain with a proper offering, a sin-offering, a lamb that stood right before him, and he had the power over it, to do as he please with it.  Verily, that is true!  (A similar situation was presented to Abraham in Genesis 22.  Abraham went and took the ram under subjection and offered him up for a burnt offering unto the Lord.)  Similarly, to all of mankind a sin-offering (cf.2Cor.5:21) is also presented before them: “What would you do with the Man called Christ?” “Choose you this day whom you will serve.”  O, would to God that Cain might take it (the sin-offering) and offer it up to Him.  But Cain was so full of self and pride that he had no desire for that sin-offering that God had provided for him (Gen.4:7).  Unlike Abraham who accepted God’s provided offering, a gift (cf.Gen.22:12-14), Cain rejected his.

Can the Bible have two interpretations?  A passage of Scripture maybe used differently as illustrations or types to help bring about an understanding of certain truth, but in itself only has one true interpretation.

This is what the so-called “Chief Apostle” said,

“Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?” (At that very time, God offered him the chance to claim first born rights in the family heritage if he would do right. In other words, if he would make a proper offering. Instead of making an offering God would accept, he allowed his anger to build up until he slew his half brother Abel. Notice in this next verse, the offer God made to him.) Gen. 4:7 “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee {shall be} his (Abel's) desire, and thou shalt rule over him.”

So God said to him, “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? If thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.” In other words: Cain, If you do not bring a proper sacrifice, your sin is still going to be held against you. It will not be forgiven.

I am trying to move on, but there are just so many points to bring in concerning Cain and his sacrifice, I hope you will just bear with me for a few more minutes. We know he could have brought an animal sacrifice, but he just simply did not have the nature to know how to go about it. Nevertheless the Lord did say, “And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him,” simply meaning, You are the first born in Adam’s house; therefore if you bring a proper sacrifice, you will also be accepted; and therefore fall heir to whatever Adam has to leave to his heirs, and Abel will look to you as such. All through the Old Testament, that was the custom. The first born of every house was the main heir, even though the father could give portions to the younger children, as Abraham did, before the main inheritance went to Isaac. Anyhow that is what God was establishing here, in what He said to Cain, If you do right, Abel’s desire will be to seek after you. In other words, Brother, will you help me a little, and so on.

“Why art thou wroth? Why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? But if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.” God was speaking His will to Cain, but Cain was too bitter to take heed, and that was because of his very nature. As I said, God was actually speaking to him of the law of heritage which would fall to the firstborn, and it was being offered to him, but he just did not take heed, nor understand. Thou shalt rule over him, and his desire shall be unto you, meant, He will be jealous of you, and will want your place.

This interpretation is commonly held by the Aramaic Christians because of the custom of inheritance by the firstborn, but it is certainly not true Scripture interpretation.  Can both interpretations be correct?  The “Lead Apostle” tried to justify his “Chief Apostle’s” interpretation.  Saints, just remember, however good an interpretation sounds, if it is not true to Scripture, it’s an error; and an error is an error.  “Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar” (Rom.3:4).



Gen. 4:8:  And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.

Not long after, Cain talked with Abel.  Yes, he had a talk with Abel – on religion, his religion – no doubt about it.  Filled with envy, jealousy, emulation, wrath, and other works of the flesh, big brother gave little brother a talking down.  Such is the spirit that we see it manifests even in these days ― big preacher man (who thinks his religion is all supreme) running down little preacher man’s revelation.  Self important preacher rams down little preacher.  What arrogance!  What self-righteousness!

Well, the talk soon led to anger and anger to murder (cf.Gen.4:8).  Sure, big brother Cain did not like to be corrected by little brother Abel.  He did not like to be told the truth of his error and his pride.  Yes siree!  Neither does today’s big preacher (the self-made CEO type) like to be told the truth by little preacher.  So, what to do?  Silent the little fellow!  “Cain was of the wicked one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his works were evil and his brother's righteous” (1John 3:12).  Obviously!  How could Cain ever be righteous in his religious work when he was vicariously fathered by Satan through the Serpent?  Abel’s work was righteous because he came from Adam who came from God.  Both the son and the father were sons of God.  Cain was the son of the Serpent, and being the seed of the Serpent how could Cain be entitled to the inheritance of Adam as he was not the seed and firstborn of Adam? [Note: The intrusion of Satan, via the Serpent, into the midst of the garden that produced the seed of discrepancy was foreknown of God.  There was a purpose for that seed to be.  Remember, nothing takes God by surprise.]

Gen. 4:9:  And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?

When God called and questioned him about Abel, Cain was insolently violent, he literally retorted at God ― “I know not!!!  Am I my brother's keeper?!!!”

Gen. 4:10:  And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.
11:  And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand;
12:  When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.
13:  And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear.
14:  Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.
15:  And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

Cain was then placed under a curse in which the ground would no longer be able to yield its crops as it should be.  The harvests which were naturally plentiful would become barely sufficient.



Observe: God did not directly make Cain a fugitive and a vagabond.  He knew Cain would be one when He cursed the ground.  Indeed the curse on the ground would create, and did create, a fear in Cain.  Cain knew the consequence of such a curse, for as population increased, men, like him who farmed, would seek to kill him.  Therefore, he would have to run; he would be a fugitive and a vagabond (cf.Gen.4:13-14).

His fear and plea resulted in God once again showing him grace and mercy.  God promised him that he would not be so easily killed by any person who sought to kill him, adding further that a sevenfold vengeance would be upon anyone who took his life.  And the Lord set upon Cain a mark which made it ‘impossible’ for any person who sought to kill him to kill him.  That visible mark or evidence was a physical increased in his body size.  He became a giant, perhaps some two feet or so taller than his descendents who would be born later.  It was not any of the descendents of the godly line of Adam who would seek to kill him for, firstly, they were godly and possessed not one evil attribute genetically, and secondly, they were not farmers but animal herders.  Remember that Adam had dominion over all God’s creatures, and the Serpent was created to be Adam’s servant for manual chores.  The Serpent must be bigger and taller than Adam, perhaps, a foot taller than the 6-foot man, Adam.  (After the Serpent was stripped of his limbs and turned into a snake, for being an instrument of Satan to bring about the Fall, Adam then had to labour.  Read Genesis 3.)

[Note: Let me say this; the Lord showed me this revelation of the Mark of Cain back in the year 1981.  Before then, no one has ever preached on this truth, as far as I know, because it had never been revealed to anyone before.  Of course, there have been some who followed the so-called “Chief Apostle” wanting to believe that he must have had the revelation.  Why?  Simply because he was the CEO of apostles!  Foolish people!  That is how blind religious people can be, for they are attached to a man-made religion, being under a Nicolaitan spirit.

In the year 1984, I wrote and printed a message on the subject.  As revelation of the Word of God is progressively revealed, the book has gone through four printings and a few revisions, the last in 2003.  Because of this revelation, God was able to add to me the revelation of the Trail of the Serpent.  The first eleven chapters of Genesis are chapters I am well acquainted with.  Like all my messages in print, the book The Mark of the Wicked Ones was kept small for the purpose that Christians might search and study the Scripture regarding the doctrine.  There was not a need for me to detail every little area of the truth.  To do so would certainly take three or four times the number of pages that it currently has.]

Now, the self-styled “Lead Apostle”, true to the spirit of self-importance, and to the building up of his religion, has prided himself to be more knowledgeable and full of revelations by attacking me.  (Remember the big brother Cain attacking little brother Abel disease?)  He said,

The statement that Richard Gan made, as to what the Mark of Cain is, is a true statement, for it is the truth; but he obviously has no revelation of the Mark of Cain. He does not! That is a fact! I say that because the Scriptural foundation for this revelation, he flatly denied. I said, The Bible base for this revelation, is the very thing he denied! Then, if you deny what is the basis of something, then you have nothing!

What a strange “apostle”, if ever there was one, and full of arrogance!  I have the revelation of the Mark that God put on Cain and I have proven it, yet he comes round and aggressively blowing a trumpet that I do not!  How could a man have a Scriptural revelation without a Scriptural foundation?  Nevertheless, what is this “Lead Apostle’s” foundation ― his carnal reasoning?  Watch.  In explaining Genesis 4:15: “And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him”, he said:

It simply means, “Whosoever attempt to kill Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” You are looking at an attempt! The “slaying” here simply means, to attempt to slay! It is an attempt! Otherwise, the divine preservation of Cain’s life would be meaningless! So it has to be, and it really means, “Whosoever attempt to slay Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” This verse is looking at would-be murderers of Cain. It is a matter of how this verse was translated into modern day language.

Beloved, do not be deceived by this so-called “Lead Apostle’s” attempt to explain his so-called revelation by saying that the verse points to would-be murderers who would “attempt” to slay Cain.  It is a serious matter for one to attempt to add words into the Sacred Scripture.  This “Lead Apostle” went on to say this:

Yet, it is true, Cain pleaded for God to preserve his life supernaturally, that nobody would be able to kill him. Are you with me? And God agreed to that.

The “Lead Apostle” must have a new Bible that Christians could not purchase from a bookstore, or that he gave the Bible a new twist to where only he has the ability to bring forth new and strange revelations.  The Bible he possesses must be one edited by him.  My questions are: Where is it written in God’s Word that Cain pleaded for God to preserve his life?  And where did it say that God agreed to that?  My friend, it is one thing to read between the lines and prove it, but it is another thing to ADD to the Word of God.  Have you not read what the Spirit warned about anyone who does that?

The “Lead Apostle” also said that:

…the mark is strictly a means of deterrence! The marks deters people, for it was given to deter would be killers! It warns them off!

My, oh my, what revelation he has!  If the mark was “to preserve his life supernaturally by acting as a “deterrence”, would not turning Cain into a black man or a dwarf or a leper do?  Even an indelible mark etched on his forehead or a horn grown on his forehead would suffice?  After all, a supernatural God would protect him, no matter what the mark was.  And, if the mark was “strictly a means of deterrence”, then why should Cain become a fugitive and a vagabond?  If slayers were deterred strictly by Cain’s size and they left him alone, Cain would not be “driven from the face of the earth” as “a fugitive and a vagabond” but would have a permanent dwelling place.  Am I not right?  So what caused Cain to be a fugitive and a vagabond?



The increase in the physical body size of Cain was not just deterrence per se, it was for Cain’s deliverance from those who sought to kill him.  That’s right, a visible protective sign which was able to generate fear in any man who think to slay Cain.  However, fear would not necessarily deter a man from carrying out a murder, if his mind was set on doing it, regardless of Cain’s humongous size.  They might attempt but deliverance was certain for Cain because of his built and the shrewdness obtained from his father, the Serpent.  He could easily overpower an attacker or two, or even three.  But when a large number of attackers come against him, his size would have no deterring effect on them.  Think!  A full grown tusker elephant is not intimidated by one or two lions coming toward him, but when a pride of lions approaches, it is a totally different situation.  It is time for him to go somewhere else to graze.  Likewise, Cain could not be so stupid as to hang around, waiting for the group of men to approach and then call out to them, “Hey! Look at me! Look at my size! I am a giant and I weigh some 900 pounds! Does not my size scare you, you nitwits?!”  Would he?  Was Cain such an unwise Serpent seed as to behave so?  Absolutely not!  When he saw them afar he would have quickly packed his belongings and fled with his wife and younger children.  Obviously!  “A fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth” are words that would then be fulfilled.

Let us carefully look into the conversation between the Almighty God and Cain.

Gen.4:12:  When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.
13:  And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear.
14:  Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.
15:  And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

As I have said, when God told Cain that the soil of the earth would no longer yield its strength for whatever he would farm and that he would be a fugitive and a vagabond, Cain knew immediately how great and dreadful that punishment was.  He said to the Lord that his punishment was just too hard to bear, even to be pardoned, for that He had not only driven him “from the face of the earth”, from a life of peaceful settlement (to be able to stay and live in one place) but also “from thy face shall I be hid”, from God’s presence, from His favour.  Lastly, Cain added that he would be a fugitive and a vagabond, and that anyone and everyone, who should meet him, would want to kill him.  They would kill him.  Why?  Simply, because he was the man who brought about the curse of the ground!  But who were those who wanted to kill him?  Clearly, it is his descendents, those who farmed, of course.

Remember Cain did not plead for mercy that God should protect him.  There was no such agreement.  Cain merely stated the fact of what he expected as punishment on him when God cursed the ground.  That was a good enough reason, (or plea, not that Cain pleaded or begged for mercy) for God to show him mercy again.  (Would a Serpent seed really beg God for mercy, or even bow to His grace?  Just how did Cain respond to God’s query as to the where about of Abel?  Think about it.)  Yes, God is good and full of goodness, even to a Serpent seed.  He will be gracious to whom He will be gracious.  He will have mercy upon whom He will have mercy.



Now, watch what the Lord said to Cain, “Therefore, whoever kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.”  See?  Who was God speaking to?  Cain, of course!  Read Genesis 4:15 carefully.  There was no one else around; there were only two other human beings on the earth, and they were not in the field where Cain was.  So, unto Cain only were these words uttered, “Well, any slayer of Cain will suffer vengeance sevenfold.”  Or, “Then, if anyone kills Cain, a sevenfold vengeance will be taken on him.”

Now, observe the interpretation of the self-appointed “Lead Apostle”:

If you try to kill Cain you are going to die seven times before you actually die for it! You are going to die over and over, before you give up the ghost….  The person who would inflict the sevenfold vengeance on an attempted murderer of Cain can only be Cain himself.

What a twisty and faulty interpretation!  And read the extract on the left.  What buffoonery!  He dared to conceptualize that Cain was having a great time torturing his would be killers!  And then he dared to attribute that concept as coming from God!  What delusion!  Is that the anointing of God upon His “Lead Apostle” (as if God has one)?  Or is that a self-inflated preacher making himself something that he is not, more so when there is no such gift as a “Lead Apostle” given to the Bride of Christ?  [Note: Let me say this. A deluded man, thinking to be somebody, is a misguided man and he will teach whatever his deluded mind will conceptualize.  Perhaps more so, if he has a lawyer’s mind.  This self-proclaimed “Lead Apostle” is a smart educated man who studied to be a lawyer.  Saints of God, do not ever let your academic brain gets to you.]

Now, watch and learn.  The Word of God says if anyone slays Cain, vengeance will be taken on him sevenfold”.  1) It states the possibility of killing Cain ― whosoever slayeth Cain”; not the impossibility 2) A sevenfold vengeance would be taken on the slayer; and certainly the vengeance could not be inflicted upon the slayer by Cain himself if Cain was already slain, could he?  In the first place, Cain had brought about the curse on the ground, why would he be revengeful on those who sought to kill him for what he did?  Had they done anything to Cain for Cain to seek revenge?  (A person seeks vengeance only after something is done to him, and not otherwise.  A person will defend himself only when he is attacked.)  The farmers were the ones who suffered because of the poor yield of their crops.  Revenge would be on their mind to kill Cain because of what he did to Abel that caused God to curse the ground.  When those who sought Cain’s life came upon him, Cain had two choices ― fight or flight.  That is the truth!

God is the Avenger and the Judge of the earth ― “O LORD God, to whom vengeance belongeth; O God, to whom vengeance belongeth, shew thyself” (Psa.94:1 cf.1Sam.24:12; Rom.12:19), and “shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” (Gen.18:25).  These words that God uttered: “Therefore, whoever kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold” was for Cain to know that it would be difficult for a slayer to kill him because God had given him an assurance that He would not just take a vengeance, but a sevenfold vengeance, on the killer.  The word “sevenfold” heightens the assurance.  (Why is it sevenfold?  Why not eightfold or tenfold, or some other numbers?  In the Bible the number “7” is God’s perfect number.  You can find plenty of it in the Scripture.  It is God’s seal.)  With regards to His assurance to Cain He was telling Cain that there is deliverance “And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.”



The self-proclaimed “Lead Apostle” said:

The Mark of Cain therefore, was his physique, his stature, his gigantic frame, for God transformed him right there and then, into a giant of a creature, right there in God’s divine presence.

Is it true, just by reading this one verse: “And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him”, like what you would see in a cartoon show, a man turning into a giant in a blink of an eye?  How silly.  Obviously, the increase in Cain’s physical size did not happen instantly but gradually over a period of time.  Learn.  It was many years later, after daughters were born to Adam, that Cain took one of them for his wife.  For anyone so foolish as to say that the increase in the physical size of Cain was instantaneous has a distorted mind.  For Cain to take a daughter of Adam to wife when he was a giant (say between 9 and10 feet) must have caused great pain to his wife (who was a little lower than 6 feet) as he lay with her.  But look at the picture that accompanied the message of this “Lead Apostle”.  Look at Cain’s size!  It would even make it totally impossible for the couple to copulate.  Was Cain blown up some 16-17 feet and weighing not less than 3000kg (3 tons)?  What a great revelation!  Foolishness!  [Note: The tallest giant ever existed measured about 13½ feet (cf.Deut.3:11).]

As there was yet no civilization of people, there was no need for God to give him an instantaneous growth.  He had given Cain a pledge.  Cain went off assured that he would receive the mark, the token, for his deliverance.  God had to give him time to have a wife, and to allow him time to have children, during which time his size might have grown little by little yet not affecting sexual union with his wife.  The Bible does not tell us how many children Cain had but he would have them all by the time he reached his humongous size that God had set for him.

Banished from God’s presence, Cain lived with his wife and fathered his first son; he called him Enoch.  When his children and his children’s children multiplied and filled the land, they would, by and by, come to understand why the earth failed to provide them good harvests.  The history of mankind was young; it would have been less than 300 years, therefore it was not difficult for them to learn the truth about the death of Abel and the reason for the gigantic size of Cain.  Frustrated and angry, many of the Cainites who farm would seek to kill Cain but because of his size, Cain could easily put a few men to flight should they come against him.  On the other hand, when a large group of men come against him, Cain would not hesitate to run.  As a result, he became a fugitive and a vagabond, as Yahweh said he would be.



Genesis 4 provides us a genealogy of Cain’s descendents.  Genesis 5 provides us a genealogy of Adam’s descendents.  Let us look at the two lineages of people.  The two lineages show only the name of the firstborns as the inheritance of the father goes to the firstborn.

On the side of Adam, after Abel was murdered, Adam had Seth.  Notice the wordings of Gen.5:3 – “And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:”  Because of the Fall sin was imputed upon Adam and the true image and likeness of God in Adam were marred, therefore Adam’s children could only be born “in his likeness, according to his image” [Young’s Literal Translation].  Otherwise, Adam’s children would each be in the likeness and image of God, their Father.

Now, Noah was the last of the pure Sethic Firstborns.  Noah’s firstborn was Japheth (cf. Gen.10:21) but his name was not listed after Noah solely because Japheth was not a pure Sethite, and naturally his brothers, Ham and Shem, could not be pure either.  The three sons of Noah then had their own respective and separate genealogies.  Notice also that Shem, the youngest, was placed first after Noah for obvious reason that he was the chosen one of God whose lineage would bring forth the Messiah.  [Note: There are those who would choose to believe that Ham was the youngest by reason of the Hebrew word “qatan” in Gen.9:24.  But “qatan” simply means “diminutive” as in least – less or lesser; small – smaller or smallest; young – younger or youngest.  The verse does not point Ham out as the youngest son; it simply points him out as Noah’s “diminutive son”.  (See Gen.1:16 – “lesser light”; 2Kg.5:2 – “little maid”.)]  Surely the sequence of the order of the three names after Noah proves the point about “the last shall be first, and the first last” (Matt.20:16).  That Japheth, Ham and Shem were born in that order is shown even in the order of their respective genealogies placed in Scripture.  Read Genesis chapter 10.  (Keep in mind that God is a God of order.)  The reverse order of placing the last first and the first last is seen also in the three sons of Terah, father of Abram, Nahor and Haran, and of whom Abram was the youngest and chosen of God for the Messianic line (cf.Gen.11:26).  [For your own elucidation, cross check Gen.11:26-32; 12:4 with Acts 7:2-4.]



Remember, there is orderliness in God.  We can see the harmony and arrangement in His creation.  Similarly, the genealogies of the two lineages are also given in an ordered way.  In the Sethic lineage there are ten names.  Noah was the last and Enoch was the seventh from Adam.  He who insists on following a man or a religious tradition and not the inspiration of Scripture is blind.  The so-called “Chief Apostle” tried several times to censor, to subjugate, the fact of my revelation that Noah was the last of the pure Sethic Firstborns by posting this question to his congregation and listeners:

To my critics, let me say, if you insist that Lamech was a pure seed, then it means he had to have a wife of a pure seed. That means Noah was a pure seed: and that he would have been a fool not to have taken one of his sisters for his wife: since he knew how God felt about that mixture…. If Noah was a pure Sethite, should not he have the revelation to marry a pure wife? So, you see, Richard Gan shot himself full of holes.

O, how quick he was to pass judgment on my teaching!  Why did he have to run me down, someone who had never spoken badly of him nor ran down his teachings, but instead had enlarged his ministry?  Obviously he did it to defend his teaching.  He could not tolerate anyone, who associated with him, not to “see eye to eye” with his eyes.  And in so doing, made a fool of himself instead!  “Seest thou a man that is hasty in his words? There is more hope of a fool than of him” (Prov.29:20).  However, had he examined his teaching carefully before he made his remark, he would have realized his error and would not have to eat his very words he uttered.  “Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned:…”  (Luke 6:37).  To him, Enoch was the last of the pure Sethite.  The reason for his view was apparent from what is recorded in the Book of Jude about Enoch (cf.Jude 1:14-16).  Nevertheless, a reply to him, did not have him admitting to his error nor did I receive an answer to this question, using his very own reasoning and questioning: “If Enoch was a pure Sethite, according to you, should not he have the revelation to marry a pure wife? So, you see, you shot yourself full of holes.”

When a man believes himself to know everything, he knows nothing.  “A man's pride shall bring him low: but honour shall uphold the humble in spirit” (Prov.29:23).  Anyway, his question is irrelevant and quite silly.  If Noah did take a pure seed and all his descendants had the same revelation to also take pure seed to wife (throughout all generations), then we would have a race of pure Sethic people on the earth today as all the Serpent seeds were destroyed in the Flood.  And with only Sethic people on earth, there would not have been wickedness, evil, immorality, etc., manifesting on the earth today.  Isn’t it?  But did it happen that way?  No, it did not.  Why not?  Simply because sin had already entered the human race in the Garden of Eden, pure seed or not, mankind did continue to make wrong choices.  We see “that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose” (Gen.6:2).  These “sons of God” were pure seeds.  They knew the will of God concerning mixed marriages.  Yet, they mixed married.  So the question, “Why did they mix marry?” is irrelevant and silly.  Just as the Fall of mankind did not catch God by surprise, the same is also true in Noah taking a seed not of his own race (cf.Rom.8:20).

To believe that Enoch was the last pure Sethic Firstborn would mean that his son Methusaleh, his grandson Lamech, and his great grandson Noah were not pure.  And by mixing the pure and the mixed seeds in the genealogy of Seth, son of Adam, would mean that God did not know how to make a proper genealogical list.  It would be an inconsistency to orderliness.  It is like buying a gold chain that has ten links, of which seven are pure gold and the rest are fool’s gold.  If God would divide the sheep from the goats (Matt.25:32-33), and would not allow the sinners in the congregation of the righteous (Psa.1:5), then His records of genealogies of the people, races and tribes must also follow the same strict order.  Just look at the other lineage ― Cain’s.  The same pattern, that I have established, is also seen in Cain’s genealogy, as recorded in Genesis 4:16-24.  Do not fool yourself that it is not.

What does the so-called “Lead Apostle” have to say regarding Enoch’s wife?  Of course, he has to say the same as his “Chief Apostle” or else there would be a break in the CONTINUITY LIGHT of truth, would not it?  (Remember, he claimed that he is the precise vessel from which the precise source of truth must flowJust pause and ponder if his claim is true.)  But why would Enoch marry a corrupt seed (or even a mixed seed, she was still corrupt); was Enoch a fool?  (Both these “super apostles” said Noah was a fool when I said that Noah had a corrupt seed for wife.  One was merely regurgitating the words of the other.)  Here are the words of the “Lead Apostle”:

Noah, being a prophet of God, with the soul quality he had, would have been a fool, to take a Serpent seed, a Cainite, when his own lineage was there, and with all the prophecies of Enoch, and the prophetic judgment name his own grandfather bore, being a living witness, a sign, even unto him! He would have been a fool, because the prophetic utterance of Enoch was not withheld from them! It was passed down to all of them, to let them know, “You watch that man Methuselah. He is a sign!” They knew that! So, why would he go and marry a Serpent seed, a Cainite, as Richard Gan wants us to believe? It is a wild and baseless assumption! And you will never get Richard Gan to drop that nonsense!

See?  His speech sounded like his “Chief Apostle’s” and he had the same spirit to try and do me in as his chief did.  The so-called “Chief Apostle” behaved so un-Christianly running me down for nothing.  [See end of this article for letter sent to him by a concerned believer.]  And this egotist “Lead Apostle” is possessed with a double portion of the same spirit.  Why, for the life of me, are they acting high and mighty?  Certainly, I will not drop what this “Lead Apostle” called nonsense.  Both “super apostles” have not set the truth of Noah’s true lineage in order according to the Word.  By putting forth ridiculous questions, giving preposterous answers, running down what I taught, and thus projected that they have the truth, and were teaching the truth.

Now, was Noah a fool to marry a Cainite?  And for that matter she being Naamah?  (Have you an answer, a reason, as to why the name of Naamah, a woman, is mentioned in the record of the genealogy of Cain?  If you say, you do not know, that you have no answer, or that it was just there, then you have no revelation as to why God has her name mentioned there.)  If I said that God had it planned that way for Noah to marry Naamah, will you call me a fool, a false teacher? Turn to your Bible and read Hosea the prophet.  Maybe you might want to ask Hosea, why he was such a fool as to marry a prostitute?  Was he a fool?  Would you, “Lead Apostle” (a title you gave yourself) want to marry a prostitute?  Surely, you would not; you would not want to be a fool.  Maybe you might want to ask God why He commanded Hosea to do so when no prophet, no man of God, have such a desire to do such a thing, to be one with a harlot in wedlock?  Or did God make him a fool for the sake of the northern kingdom of Israel?  If God had a plan to fulfill, would anything His children were channeled to do, so as to fulfill His plan, be called foolish?  (Take note that I am not referring to Christians who presumed to hear from God, saying, “God told me to do this…or that”.  I am referring to what is “Thus Saith the Lord” spoken to a spiritual man or woman of God.)  I believe the word “fool”, used by both “super apostles”, was very negative and demeaning.  But a fool Hosea was, a fool Paul was, a fool Noah was, and a fool I am.  So be it.  (2Cor.11:23;  1Cor.4:10; 1:25.)

The self-proclaimed “Lead Apostle” upholds the teaching of his “Chief Apostle”; he has to, and so he parroted exactly the very question that his chief asked of me:

…if Noah was a pure Sethite, a man who was not touched by the evil genes of the Cainites, how come he did not father a daughter?

Folks, hybridization causes genetic disturbances.  Notice that every firstborn Sethite from Adam to Lamech gave birth to sons and daughters because all of them married a pure seed (Sethic) woman.  But it was not so with Noah.  He had only sons.  This confirms that his wife was not a pure seed (Sethic) woman.  Certainly!  And it had nothing to do with any serpentine traits being fused in Noah, as the “Lead Apostle” wants his people to believe.  Nevertheless, let us not forget that God had His plan; knowing the future from the beginning, He gave to Noah and Naamah, just three sons, for the seeds are in the sons and not in the daughters.  Remember, it was God’s plan to populate the earth by the one blood that was in those three sons, a blood that was mixed with that of the Serpent seed (cf.Acts 17:26).

Trying hard to prove his revelation, the “Lead Apostle”, quoting Genesis 6:12, said:

It declares: “And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth!” Did you hear that? All flesh had corrupted his way! What does that show you? All flesh was defiled! There was no pure Sethite!

Wow!  That’s scary!  “All flesh was defiled! There was no pure Sethite!”  Does this “apostle” (if he was one) truly know the form of Jewish expression?  Does he think that the Bible was written by English-educated prophets and apostles?  Fellow saints, the Bible is Jewish, oriental in expression. Without going into it, just this: does he know anything about synecdoche, a figure of speech, used even in common literature?  Does the word “all” used in the verse, he quoted, truly means ALL as in every single one, without exception?  If he believes so, he would have a hard time trying to explain and justify the many passages of Scripture where this word appears.  Take these two examples, one from each Testament:

Num. 20:25:  Take Aaron and Eleazar his son, and bring them up unto mount Hor:
26:  And strip Aaron of his garments, and put them upon Eleazar his son: and Aaron shall be gathered unto his people, and shall die there.
27:  And Moses did as the LORD commanded: and they went up into mount Hor in the sight of
all the congregation.
28:  And Moses stripped Aaron of his garments, and put them upon Eleazar his son; and Aaron died there in the top of the mount: and Moses and Eleazar came down from the mount. 

Question: Did all, everyone single one, of the people of Israel, young and old, estimated to be around 3-4 millions, really saw with their eyes what was going on in Mount Hor?

John 8:1:  Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
2:  And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and
all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

Question: Who were all the people?  Were they Jews and the Romans and mixed multitude that lived throughout all the land of Israel?  Or were they just those living in the City of Jerusalem (estimated some 20,000 to 30,000 people)?  No matter what, did every single one really get up from their bed and go to hear Jesus in the temple?

[For just a little added knowledge on the language of God, go to my website for the article on INTERPRETING SACRED SCRIPTURE”.]



Notice that the Cainic lineage ends with the name of Lamech, who was sixth from Cain, the seed of the Serpent.  Hence, Lamech was the last of the pure Cainic Firstborns.  Let me show you the evidence.  The Scripture states that he took unto himself two wives, siring three sons and a daughter.

Gen. 4:19:  And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.
20:  And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle.
21:  And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ.
22:  And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah.

Lamech was the first man to wed two women.  Here we see POLYGAMY being introduced into the world, contrary to the prophetic words of Adam (cf.Gen.2:23-24).  For anyone to teach that God introduced polygamous marriage, he is either blind to the truth or he has a hidden carnal reason to teach so.  Also, for any preacher to teach that polygamy was first introduced by the Sethites, he either could not understand the Scripture writings or he thinks himself specially gifted.  Such a one is the self-styled “Lead Apostle”.  We will come to that later.

Observe carefully the descriptive statement of those four verses concerning Lamech’s family.  They are there for a reason.  They are some of the keys to understanding the populace of people prior to the Great Deluge that came in Noah’s day.

The names of Lamech’s wives were Adah and Zillah.  Adah bore Lamech his first son, Jabal, followed by Jubal.  And Zillah bore him a son, Tubal-Cain and a daughter, Naamah.  But notice Jabal, “he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle” and Jubal, “he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ”.  Why is there a need for the Scripture to make mention of them and of their trades?  Let me unfold the mystery to you.  It tells us that Adah was a Sethic woman.  Jabal, her firstborn, the shepherd, took to her genetic make-up, for the Sethites were mainly herders and dwelled in tents.  Jubal, on the other hand, took to his father Lamech's genetic make-up, for the Cainites were mainly inventors and instructors of every artificer, and dwelled in cities.  [Note: By that generation of Lamech, the Cainites had become more astute and prudent in their carnal serpentine mind.  Remember that they descended from the one Serpent Seed (Cain) whom Satan vicariously fathered through the Serpent.  They possessed the shrewd and subtle mind of Cain to build and invent things.  Also, the Cainic farming community had gotten smaller as cities were built, and inventions out of metals and minerals were crafted.]  Unlike Adah, Lamech’s second wife, Zillah, was undoubtedly a Cainite.

Since Jabal was the firstborn and being a mixed seed he was not a pure Cainite, not a pure Serpent seed, as his blood was watered down.  Hence, Lamech, his father, was the last of the pure Cainic firstborns.  The bloodline of the pure Serpent race ended with him.  Can you see now why God had Moses detailed Lamech’s polygamous marriage and why Cain’s genealogy went no further than him?  If Lamech had married two Cainic wives, his firstborn would be pure Serpent seed and his name would be listed under his (Lamech’s).  Then the names of his two wives and other children would not be mentioned.  (God was only concerned in listing the names of the pure firstborns in Cain’s genealogy as He was in Seth’s.)  See?

Concerning this issue of Lamech’s polygamous marriage, here is an explanation made by the “Lead Apostle”:

Polygamy, and by implication, adultery, was introduced into the picture, and satan was on the move! That should let you see they were eating off the tree of knowledge of good and evil (i.e. sex for pleasure), big time! Church, polygamy started with the line of Cain. You do not see that in Adam’s lineage.

That polygamous marriage started with Lamech is a fact.  You do not see that in Adam’s lineage is also a fact.  However, this so-called “Lead Apostle” contradicted himself in his “revelation” of Genesis 6, on the mixing of seeds, that when “the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose”, he said:

…the Sons of God were being seduced, and fornication started. And church, it began to grow, until it reached such a scale, that they began to take wives as they chose! That is wholesome immorality! That did not happen overnight! You have to see a gradual breakdown of something! But it later overtook and overwhelmed the Sethites! What does that show you? They began to have concubines! It went beyond fornication! They could not have enough of the Cainite women! They went berserk! Their sense of morality and holiness was completely broken down! They had many wives as they chose, concubines!

My! O my!  What a contradiction of revelations, a revelation of lying imaginations!  If this is not another wild conceptualizing of God’s Word, I don’t know what is?  Saints of God, take great care of what you hear and what you read.  “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world” (1John 4:1).  Amen.

Examine carefully the Sethic lifestyle and you will see that though they inherited the sin imputed upon Adam, they did not possess the serpentine nature.  Those that possessed the serpentine nature would be those who were born out of a mixed (Sethic and Cainic) parentage.  Remember that after the Great Deluge, except for Sethic Noah and Cainic Naamah, there was no other pure Sethite and pure Cainite.  So, as the Sethic people did not have the serpentine nature, how could they have the evil nature to malpractice the God-given nature of coupling with more than one wife?  Were some of them fornicators and had concubines?  How did this so-called “Lead Apostle” read his Bible?  Remember also that the “sons of God” were descendents, flesh and blood, of Adam.  They were not flesh and bone, by-products, like Eve was, who could be deceived into fornicating.  [Note: Do you understand the terms “flesh and blood” and “flesh and bone”?  No?  Then learn.  Think of a tree (representing Adam).  Break off one of its branches and grow it.  That’s your “flesh and bone”.  It does not begin from a seed of the tree; it comes from the side of the trunk of the tree.  That’s your by-product.  Now, take the seeds that you find in the fruits of the father tree and grow them.  They possess the sap of life (the blood) that flows from the root of the father tree into them; that’s your “flesh and blood”.  The Church of Jesus Christ, as His Bride, is spiritually flesh of His flesh and bone of His bone” for the Bride was taken from the side of Jesus Christ at Calvary.  But the individual seeds, bound back (“religo”) by His Blood, possess the Sap of Life of the Father that flows through Him to us. Hence, the seeds, the elect, of Christ cannot be deceived.]  Therefore, with the purity of genes from Adam through to Seth and down to the rest of the Sethites, how could they ever be deceived into fornication or any corrupt practices?  Though they were seduced to marry “pretty women” of the Cainic race, each of them certainly did not take more than one woman for wife.  They might marry Cainic wives and hence, become unequally yoked with them, but they could never be polygamists or fornicators.  They did not have a perverted gene.  You can be sure of that!  But those children born out of such unholy wedlock are no longer pure Sethites.  These were the ones who, later down the road, might take more than one wife after polygamy was introduced by Cainic Lamech, and not before.  Believe me.  It is a matter of influence, whatever evils the corrupt seeds started would soon lead these hybrid children into a cesspool of sins.  (Did the “Lead Apostle” take this statement, “and they took them wives of all which they chose” for a plurality of wives for each man?  If a man does not know how to read and study the Bible, how could he ever, ever, ever, think to teach to make sense of the Truth?  How can a preacher teach something that he does not really comprehend, and yet judge others for what they teach on the said subject matter?  We will come to more contradictions in his teachings later.)

Next, the “Lead Apostle” continued with these words:

Verse 20: “And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle.” This gives you your Nomads. Your nomad kind of people. These are your gypsies, your punks, gothics, and all such people.

How awful it is for this Nigerian preacher to conceptualize such extreme image out of one single verse!  Is it another of his many “great revelations”?  The verse merely says that “Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle”.  How is it that Jabal was also the father of the gypsies, the punks and the gothics, when he and his descendents lived in tents like the Sethites did, and had cattle like the Sethites who were herders of sheep, goats, and cows? Did not Abraham and his sons live in tents, and perhaps, temporary booths made of tree branches, and also did they not possess herds of livestock? Did they not wander all over the Land of Canaan like nomadic folks? And were Abraham’s descendents gypsies, punks and gothics?

When a preacher stretches his imagination, you know he has a warped mind; then you should know to be discerning about his authority and ministry.  Such a warped mind is what will take a verses on “apostle”,  “Paul” and “John”, and then magically weave it into a “Chief Apostle” or a “Lead Apostle”.  May God have mercy.



A failure to see the two seedlines – Seth’s and Cain’s – is a failure to understand the terms: “sons of God” and “sons of men” used in the Scripture.  Churchy theologians are messed up and have the term “sons of God” (first occurred in Genesis 6) to mean angels.  Taking the same term found also in the Book of Job, they coupled it with the statement of Jude 1:6, and interpreted that some of the fallen angels had either transformed themselves into men, or had pressed themselves into men, so as to cohabit with women to father the giants.  Not only is this teaching commonly taught among the organized churches but also among those in the Endtime Message churches.  I was given the revelation that such a teaching was wrong, back in the 1980s, after reading what the so-called “Chief Apostle” had erroneously taught on the term “sons of God” from the Book of Job.  This is what he said from two of his sermons:

Well angels are known to be sons of God also. That is why as we read about Job, we find the same terminology used. One day when the sons of God were being brought forth and God was having inspection, here came Satan among them. It is recorded in the 1st chapter of the book of Job. Verse 6, “Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them. And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? (Watch this.) Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.”

Before Gen. 1:1 he has already created himself a great host of angelic beings (Heb. 1:6), who also are immortal spirit beings (Hebrew 1:7) like unto himself, even possessing separate wills of their own — separate from the will of the Eternal One. One scripture should be sufficient to substantiate this thought. Recall when God asked Job the question, “Where were you when the sons of God shouted for joy as I laid out the foundations of the earth”, Job 38:4-7. However in Gen. 1:1 in the beginning of time he, the Eternal One, as God makes heaven and earth. Before that time God had already created his angelic host to fellowship and assist him with his creation.

Beloved, can the term “sons of God” refer both to a people who have a special relationship with God and to angels in their servant-hood with their Creator?  Evidently not!  So what does the term actually mean in the Scripture?

Let us be specific.  The term “sons of God” is never used for angelic beings.  The angels were not created to be sons of God; they were created to be servants of God.  There is no “Father-Son” relationship between God and the angels.  The angels stand before God as His servants and He their Owner-Master.  They were created as ministering spirits.

The term “sons of God” actually denotes the special relationship of man to God — as His children.  Furthermore, the term “sons of God” do not only show the existence of a “Father-Son relationship” but also the ability to procreate (and be a father) — “Be fruitful, and multiply.”   The angelic beings were not created to procreate; they were not told to “be fruitful, and multiply”.  Being spirits, they are always portrayed as “men”, never as “women” and they are asexual, sexless (Mark 12:25).  In the Scripture they are often called “stars” (Job 38:7; Dan.8:10; Rev.1:16a, cf.1:20; 8:12; 9:1).

Job 1:6 and 2:1 are the two verses of Scripture erroneously interpreted by all theologians (as far as I know) to be events that took place in Heaven with the “sons of God” being the angels and that Satan came also into the very Presence of God.  However, the truth is, the events took place on earth and the “sons of God” were not angels (be they holy angels or fallen angels) but the worshippers of God in the days of Job.  It was in such an assembly of worshippers that Satan entered in and, through one or more of them, accused Job.

For an apostle, much less the so-called “Chief Apostle”, to teach on one hand that the “sons of God” in the Book of Job were angels, but on the other hand that in the Book of Genesis the “sons of God” were the Godly Sethic people, is truly pathetic.  Where is the consistency of Bible exegesis? To set the Word in order, one has to be consistent with terminological usage.  When one flip-flops terminologies as he sees fit, he does it to push-fit his teachings.

O, yes, the self-styled “Leading Apostle”, however, did teach it the way I taught it.  But from where or whom exactly did he get the understanding in the first place?  And why did he contradict his “Chief Apostle”?  Should not he, as “Lead Apostle”, line up his revelation with his “Chief Apostle”?  Did not both these “special apostles” teach about a CONTINUITY LIGHT being passed from a “super apostle” to another “super apostle”?  Please give us an answer “Lead Apostle”, truthfully and without dissimulation, if you will, less iniquity be found in thee.



Now, read what God had Moses written in –

Gen. 4:22:  And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah.

Have you noticed what was written? “…and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah.”

Why did God make mention of a woman’s name under the last name listed in the genealogy of Cain?  Yes, why?  Just who was Naamah?  Who was she that her name is even mentioned in the Scripture?  Certainly God did not put her name there, or even add words to His Scripture, just to make the Bible a bigger book.  If you know the Scripture, think of Rahab, Ruth and Mary.  Who are these three women?  Why are their names mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus Christ?  Well, simply because they played a part in the history that brought about the Church of Jesus Christ.  Likewise, Naamah played a part in the history of mankind.  Undoubtedly, she was the wife of perfect Noah (Gen.6:9b).  [Note: The word “perfect” used to describe Noah is translated from the Hebrew word “tamim” which means “without blemish” in terms of breed or pedigree.  Hence, the Scripture clearly show us that Noah was a “pure breed” Sethite, and not a hybrid.  (Any Bible believer who refuses to see and admit the actual Hebrew or Greek word(s) used by the Holy Spirit in His Scripture has spit God in His Face.  It is one thing to not see it because of ignorance; it is another to see it and then turn the eyes away from the fact.)  Notice also that Noah's first son was born when he was 500 years old.  The other firstborn (of the Adamic race) before him had theirs before they were 190 years oldWhy was there this big gap in age?  The reason is apparent when we realize that by the time Noah was born, the Cainites' influence upon the Sethites was so strong that all except Noah (not excluding certain others who were before him) were drawn into the net of the Cainites' lifestyle.  Unlike his siblings, uncles and cousins, who have gone into the world of mixed marriage, Noah waited patiently for nearly 500 years for God to provide him a wife.  More importantly, Noah grew up to be a righteous man, and he walked with God and was the only Sethite, among his people, who found grace in the eyes of God.]



Gen. 4:25:  And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.
26:  And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

Now, the term “sons of God” refers to the Sethites and the “sons of men” refers to the Cainites.  This can be established by the record of Genesis 6.  The “sons of God” (i.e. family of God or children of God) are those that belong to God, and the “sons of men” (i.e. family of men or children of men) refers to the rest of the earthly mortal human beings.  Though the self-appointed “Lead Apostle” agreed to the terminologies, he again contradicted himself.  It is correct when he said:

And for Scriptural identification in the beginning, God used the term “men” to identify the Cainites, sons of the Serpent, because they were mere mortals, carnal creatures, earth bound class of humanity.

“And it came to pass, when men (Plural. That is the Cainite line) began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them... (And daughters. Not sons, but daughters) “WERE BORN UNTO THEM,…”  Unto who? Unto “men”!  Who were these men? The Cainites!

However, in his desire to be a BIG man, in his challenge against me, he changed his mind like what his predecessor, the “Chief Apostle”, did.  For the sake of unity, he had to maintain the CONTINUITY LIGHT with his predecessor, whether the light was true or false.  In his flip-flop, this is what he said:

Verse 26 of Genesis chapter 4: “Then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.” Richard Gan said it means that men began to call upon the name of the Lord in profanity. But that is absolute nonsense! If you cannot see the revelation in that name calling, and see that that was standing for something to set the line of Seth apart from the line of Cain, then how would you recognize that the line of Seth ever served God?...

It is a simple verse, but it stands out! It is written clearly to distinguish the line of Seth, from the line of Cain….

See the contradiction?  By foolishly following a ridiculous religion under the Nicolaitan spirit, he contradicted himself.  He was merely parroting what his “Chief Apostle” said.  He had to call my teaching “absolute nonsense” just so that his “Chief Apostle” would be his Absolute Truth Bearer.  For the sake of “seeing eye to eye” in a man-made religious unity, he was willing to sacrifice the Truth.

Watch and learn.  Was the revelation of Adam, in his worship of Yahweh, really lost in his son Seth, or in his grandson, Enos ― in two generations?  The answer is a NO.  True worship of God was never lost among the true sons of God.  The children of Seth, the sons of God, were already set apart from the children of Cain, the sons of men They knew how to worship Yahweh since the day that the LORD “religo” Adam and Eve to Himself by a blood sacrifice.  On the other hand, the Cainites were a degrading lot.  Remember that Cain created his own religion.  Though he knew that Yahweh desired the best, he gave Him the best of his garden’s yields but not a sin-offering of blood sacrifice.  That, my friend, is how you would recognize the difference in worship between the two lineages.  Do not forget that Satan’s aim is to undermine the faith of God among the human race by taking the Truth and fornicate it with lies.  So, by the third generation, Cain’s descendents had corrupted themselves more by taking the name of Yahweh and invoked it onto their graven images and idols.  (See how dangerous it is when a man takes a Word of God and twists It to form a religion of his own making?)  Yes, just like the children of Israel at Mount Sinai who demanded of Aaron: “Make us gods, which shall go before us”, and Aaron made a molten calf, saying, “These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.”

Saints of God that is what the verse of Genesis 4:26 means.  After Enos was born, in his generation, those Cainic men (not “sons of God”) began to make themselves idols and invoked the Name of the LORD (Yahweh) upon them.  They profaned the Name of Yahweh.  That’s the truth!  When further disputed by the so-called “Chief Apostle”, back in the 1980-1990s, a further study into the Hebrew text revealed more light of the truth.  The statement, “then began (Heb: khaw-lal’ ) men to call upon the name of the LORD” is as in Hebrew:

אז  הוחל  לקרא  בשׁם  יהוה׃

Strong’s Concordance defines this word הוחל (khaw-lal’) as: A primitive root (compare H2470); properly to bore, that is, (by implication) to wound, to dissolve; figuratively to profane (a person, place or thing), to break (one’s word), to begin (as if by an opening-wedge); denominatively (from H2485) to play (the flute): - begin (X men began), defile, X break, defile, X eat (as common things), X first, X gather the grape thereof, X take inheritance, pipe, player on instruments, pollute, (cast as) profane (self), prostitute, slay (slain), sorrow, stain, wound.

The statement therefore should be read like this: “at that time men started to profane the name of Yahweh as they invoked it upon their idols.”

Notice that Enoch, the son of Cain, had a city built in his name by his father.  That would have to be in the generation after Enos was born.  The city was only built by Cain after there was a sizeable population of people in the days of Enoch.  Ancient cities always centered round a place of worship.  The name Enoch embraces the meanings of “teach, train, initiate, discipline”.  Apparently, Enoch was disciplined and trained up in the religion of his father.  In those two generations of less than 300 years, the religion of Cain had taken a new twist.  Cainic Enoch was the man who initiated idolatry worship.  He taught the people to call upon the Name of Yahweh upon their idols.  (Opposite to Cainic Enoch is Sethic Enoch who taught mankind the fear of Yahweh that they should flee from the judgment of God to come.)

Saints, once again, to say this: if a preacher is not consistent with the words used in Scripture, then by his religious warped mind he can twist them however he likes to suit and force-fit his so-called revelation.  If “sons of God” be children of God, then they cannot be angels or the children of men.  If “sons of men” be children of men, then they cannot be “sons of God”; they cannot be Sethites but Cainites.  The Scripture is consistent.  You cannot change one iota.  The children of Seth had always been worshipping the Lord God.  They did not start worshipping God after Enos was born so as to tell the rest of the world, “Hey, look! We are God’s true worshippers!  We are not like you and you are not like us!  We are special and separate people!  That’s why we are now beginning to cry unto God!”  Do you understand?

Of a truth, the self-appointed “Lead Apostle” really had no idea what he was talking about.  He was just full of hot air, preaching absolute nonsense and calling it truth, not only on this point but many others of which I would not touch on (as I am not sent to deliberate on preachers’ false teachings.)  Using the authority of a so-called “Lead Apostle”, he pushes his opinionated “revelation” upon the undiscerning believers, who are then deceived into following a man’s religion.  Blind teacher, he is!  “When the teacher be blind, the disciple is born blind; when the blind leads the blind, both will fall into the ditch.”



Gen. 6:1:  And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2:  That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3:  And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4:  There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
5:  And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6:  And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
7:  And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
8:  But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

This passage of Scripture has many theologians pulling their hair trying to figure out who fathered the giants.  Many failed to understand because they failed to see the two separate lineages of Seth and Cain.  Now, that is understandable because they are blinded by organized religions.  But here came a Nigerian preacher, who thought himself wiser to think that he had true revelation, just because he assigned himself a self-elevated position of “Lead Apostle”.  The theologians taught that the “sons of God” were fallen angels, who either transformed themselves into physical men or pressed themselves into men to co-habit with women, and thus produce giants.  This “Lead Apostle” had twisted himself into knots by his extreme conceptualizing of the Word.  This is what he expounded:

In Genesis chapter 6, the devil tampered with that law. …he played with the DNA. I said he played with the genes of men! And in the line of Cain, what came forth? They were producing more daughters than male children! …These daughters had to now look to the Sethite line to get a husband! They had a male shortage!

Is it true, that the devil personally had manipulated the DNA of the Cainites?  Or was he saying that the Cainites were scientific geniuses and had the scientific equipments to look into one of God’s microscopic structures to select the sex of their children?  These theories are but fragments of his presumptuous mind.  Moreover, he buttered up his imagination with these words, “These daughters had to now look to the Sethite line to get a husband!  They had a male shortage!”  Is it really?  Is that true?  What does the Bible say?  Read:

Gen. 6:1:  And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2:  That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

The verses simply state the following facts, that, it so happened as time passed, when the children of men began to multiply on earth, daughters were born to them; then the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were pretty looking, so they took them for wives those whom they liked.  See?  There is nothing that anyone can read between the lines to say that Satan manipulated the DNA in whatever ways.  The verses do not even imply that more daughters were born to the Cainites.  Not at all!  It only says that daughters were born and that the sons of God saw them attractive and took them for wives.  There were daughters born in both camps of people but those in the Cainic camp were “fair” to look upon.  That is all that the words say.  [Note: The Branhamites have a way of twisting Bro. Branham’s words to suit their teachings because of their so-called revelations.  It is also true that among those who are not Branhamites, there are believers, such as this “Lead Apostle”, who have also a way of twisting the Word of God to force fit their revelations.]

Why and how were the Cainic women “fair”?  (The word “fair” does not mean “fair skin”; it means “good to look at, attractive”.)  The answer lies in their application of cosmetics.  By the time this event of Genesis 6 took place, which would be around the generations of Cainan and Mahalaleel, the Cainites were beginning to be sophisticated people.  Living in the open field was different from living in the city.  The daughters of men who labored with their parents in the farms and lived in the open field, certainly did not adulterate their faces or dressed trendy.  (Have you ever seen a woman farmer dress elegantly and with a painted face working in the field?)  But for those who were city dwellers, they surely did dress different and they did paint their faces too.  It was the “fairness” of faces that attracted the sons of God.  When each one was tempted, he was drawn away by his own desires and enticed.  Then after desire had conceived, it gave way to sin (cf.Jam.1:14-15).  These weak “sons of God” went over to those “fair ladies” and took those they fancied for wives.  But how many wives did these fallen “sons of God” take for themselves?  Did each of them take more than one?  Were they practicing polygamy?  Were they fornicating as well?

Here are the answers, the revelations of the “Lead Apostle”, part of which we read afore:

The Cainite daughters came, dressed very alluringly; highly provocatively. And before you knew it, the Sons of God were being seduced, and fornication started. And church, it began to grow, until it reached such a scale, that they began to take wives as they chose! That is wholesome immorality! That did not happen overnight! You have to see a gradual breakdown of something! But it later overtook and overwhelmed the Sethites! What does that show you? They began to have concubines! It went beyond fornication! They could not have enough of the Cainite women! They went berserk! Their sense of morality and holiness was completely broken down! They had many wives as they chose, concubines!

Does this statement: “and they took them wives of all which they chose” show a plurality of wives taken by each and every fallen Sethite?  Is that how, by this statement, this Nigerian preacher arrive at his revelation?  (This is the question I asked afore under the heading LAST OF THE PURE CAINIC FIRSTBORNS.)  He contradicted this very truth that he had uttered in the same message:

Do not forget, the Sethite line only had death imputed into their bloodstream. Period! And as such, they would live for so long, and then die; but they had no evil attributes in them at all! They did not have hate, murder, immorality, violence, etc., injected into their genetic make-up, being pure seeds of Adam, who was himself a pure seed of God, being a Son of God! Precisely!

Folks, it is one thing for a small preacher (like me) to make a mistake like that, but for a supposedly big preacher such as this self-styled “Lead Apostle” it should not be so.  How could he lead other apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers when he has but contradictory teachings?  God never had a one-man ministry that ever brings about perfection in God’s people, not in the Old Testament time, and it will not be so in the New Testament time.  No siree!  In the Old Testament, you see a prophet and he may have a school of disciples. You see Jeremiah, Daniel and Ezekiel ministering to the people of God at the same time.  Who then was the Lead (or Chief) Prophet, at that time, if there was such a one?  A religious preacher with a warped mind might read between the lines somewhere and teach that there was such a one.  Absurd revelation is easily created by one who thinks himself to be somebody.  In the New Testament, we have but seven Church Age Messengers, each with a specific message to their respective age.  The last one has come and gone.  His specific message cried out to us to “Come out of her! Come out from among Mystery Babylon and her daughters!  And return to the Original Word!  Back to the Apostolic Fathers’ Faith!”  Truly, it is in the Word that the elect can now be perfected by the Ascension Gifts that Christ gave to the Church.  “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers” (Eph.4:11).  Amen?!  Or did the Bible say, “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; and one chief apostle and one lead apostle?  It seems that some people’s Bible read as such.



Here, take a lesson about simple basic statements.  If you cannot understand this simple ABCs, then you can forget about the deep things of God’s Word.  Look at these statements from the Bible and tell me how many wives Abraham and Nahor, and the two sons of Naomi had at that time, and then turn to your Bible and read the respective passages in the Scripture.

Gen. 11:29:  And Abram and Nahor took them wives:

Ruth 1:3:  And Elimelech Naomi's husband died; and she was left, and her two sons.
4:  And they took them wives of the women of Moab;

Saints of God, take heed about reading between the lines so that you would not end up with wild notions and casting wild oats of a doctrine like this self-proclaimed “Lead Apostle”.  Not all lines in the Bible actually contain anything between them for you to scrutinize.  And if you screw your eyes too hard for nothing, you will surely come up with something screwy.  Be warned!  Don’t play with the Fire of God!

Now, lesson 2, if plurality of things (wives, concubines, faces, etc.) is the intention of the Author of the Book, look at these examples:

2Sam. 5:13:  And David took him more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem, after he was come from Hebron: and there were yet sons and daughters born to David. 

Eze. 1:6:  And every one had four faces, and every one had four wings. 

Folks, do you see now?  If those fallen sons of God took to themselves many wives, the Word would have stated so, somewhat like this: “and every one took them wives of all which they chose.”  See?



In another part of his exegesis on the mixing of the seed lines, the “Lead Apostle” had this to say with regards to the Sethic Firstborns marrying at a younger age:

Why was the age of marriage dropping when they had longevity of life?! What was going on?! It tells me a story! Only one thing could have been going on: Mixed marriage was going on, and it was becoming difficult to get a good wife! It had to be that! And it was that!

Notice that this preacher often re-assured himself about his revelations by exclaiming, “Precisely! Absolutely! Exactly!”  And here, he assured him with “It had to be that! And it was that!”  But whatever he thought it was, whatever told him “a story”, it was not that!  That’s right!  Loud exclamations do not make falsehood a truth.  Look at the discrepancies he created with his own contradictions.  Firstly, according to him, there was a shortage of men from the Cainic race, such that the Cainic women had to look for Sethic men; then why should it be difficult for the remaining Sethic men to get good Sethic wives since many Sethic men, after being tempted, had gone over to marry those attractive Cainic women?  Was there also a shortage of Sethic women?  Secondly, was there a sudden large incursion of Cainic men crossing over into the Sethic community to marry the Sethic women?  What would attract a whole lot of earthly corrupt Cainic men to marry plain-Jane daughters of God?  Think.  How on earth could a preacher come to such a crazy conclusion, a crazy story indeed, by just looking at the age of Seth down to Enoch?  Thirdly, should not the declining age of marriage tells us the opposite, that there were plenty of good Sethic women around for the Sethic men to pick and choose, and thus, they had early marriages?  Tell me, if I am not making sense.  Furthermore, it was only after Enoch married and had his first son, Methuselah, at the age of 65 years, that we see a different pattern emerge.  The marriage age of the last three patriarchs increased way above 180 years (passed that of Jared), with Noah marrying at or before the age of 500 years.  And, what does that tell us?  Simply, that finding a good wife was getting harder.  By Noah’s time, there were perhaps none to have.  But in the mystery of God’s Plan, God allowed Noah to have Naamah, the daughter of Lamech, descendent of Cain, for wife, so that after the Flood which rid all physical Serpent seeds, the world would no longer see one Serpent seed, male or female.  There would be no more pure Cainites or Sethites on the earth after the Flood, except Sethic Noah and Cainic Naamah (and Noah bore no children by Naamah this side of the Flood).  All who dwells on the earth today carry the bloodline that flows from Sethic Noah and his Cainic wife, a mixture of two bloods, through his three sons, Japheth, Ham and Shem.  All individuals today carry within them the serpentine nature in their genes; some more, some less.

Take note: God specifically and specially deals with HIS PEOPLE.  The way the words were written through Moses tells us so.  In Genesis 6:2, we read, “That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose”.  Moses specifically emphasized that the sons of God had crossed over to the Cainic side for wives.  The Word did not further say it any other way.  Of course, that does not mean that the Cainic men did not take Sethic women for wives.  They did, as Scripture show, even in the polygamous marriage of Lamech.  You do not have to read between any lines to see the fact.  Plainly, God put the responsibility for the degradation of the pure bloodline of Seth (or Adam) on the sons of God, not the Cainic people, not even the “fair daughters of men”.  When a group of weak sons of God ventured over to the other camp and took wives, their lifestyle changed.  It created an impact on the rest of their people.  As year after year, and decade after decade passed, the influence grew, and more and more Sethites would leave the fold of the Sethic community to take wives from the other camp.  (Sure, like many weak Christians are doing today. “God knows I love Him. I feel alright marrying an unbelieving wife.  I pray that God will open her eyes to see Jesus.  I am not a sexually corrupt Christian who will fornicate or have two wives or concubines.”)  Left unchecked, the whole Sethic “church” soon followed the steps of those fallen sons of God.

It is clear that the “Lead Apostle” is nothing short of a self deluded claim made by an arrogant man.  As seen in his exegesis, he is a man who tends to exaggerate the Word of God.  If he did it with verses here and there, he certainly did the same with those verses about the Apostolic Ministry to the Church; he exaggerated that the Bible teaches that a “Lead Apostle” (who would come out of Africa) would continue with the ministry of his so-called “Chief Apostle”, so that it might fulfill the unity of faith that Christ prayed for.  The following words of his should be re-examined in his own heart for certainly he is a man who does not have a revelation but lots of presumption and distorted conceptualizing of Scripture.

Until a man has a Scriptural base, he does not have a revelation! He does not! Because it is not hit and miss! It is not guess work! Revelation gives certainty, for it is an anchor! The revelation of God is life, and therefore, it is a tie post! Absolutely!

Yes, well spoken and it is the truth!  And we will examine more of his guess work as we look into the Word of God, into this same passage of Genesis 6:1-8.



Regarding the giants, whence came they, and how came they into the world, the self-styled “Lead Apostle” said:

“There were giants” (plural) “in the earth in those days.” Which days? The days before the mixed marriages! Absolutely!... Verse 4: “There were giants in the earth in those days” (when Cainite men began to multiply on the face of the earth according to verse 1); “and also after that” (i.e. there were also giants after that. When?) “when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men” (when the Sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair, according to verse 2, and mixed marriages started), “and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.” Let us hold it for a while. Moses reveals: “There were giants in the earth in those days” (Which days? Days before mixed marriages started!) “and also after that”. (That simply means there were also giants in the earth when mixed marriages started)! There were not only giants in those days in which the Cainite line started multiplying, producing an abundance of daughters, there were also giants “also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men!” That is clear!

This interpretation came by two Arabic writers, Elmacinus and Patricides.  John Gill, in his commentary on Genesis 6, made mention of their opinion.  Few commentaries even touched on the time frame, knowing the difficulty of the wordings.  Simply grabbing from commentaries because it sounded good or right, does not mean it is right.  In any case, men may comment on the Bible or interpret the Bible, but it is God who gives the revelation.  Is the interpretation correct; does it show a revelation consistent with other pieces of truth in the Word?

Now, this “Lead Apostle” was claiming his exegesis was correct by running me down.  Why must he behave like his “Chief Apostle”?  Simply because, when they picked on some preachers by name, they were trying to show how smart they are, how anointed they were, when it comes to having revelation.  For such preachers to preach and teach without name calling is difficult.  They just have to heighten their self-importance as the CEOs of ministers.  If this self-styled “Lead Apostle” has no self-respect (though he might claim he loves God and the Word), he will continue to do so, thinking that he is doing the right thing; thinking that he is doing exactly right like what Paul did, by calling names; thinking that he is doing God a service; thinking that he is bringing the saints into one accord and one faith.  The one reason that I could think of, as to why this “Lead Apostle” picked this interpretation, is for him to call my name, to put down my revelation of the MARK OF CAIN as being Biblically correct because I do not believe that Cain was the father of the giants.  He thinks that he has the true revelation about the MARK OF CAIN because it has to do with Cain being the father of the giants.

Well, let’s examine carefully the passage of Genesis 6:1-8.  But first, let me admonish you not to believe in this so-called “Lead Apostle” when he said that God used commas, semi-colons, and other punctuation marks in writing His Scripture.  That’s a lie.  Remember that the original Sacred Scripture was written in ancient Hebrew writing.  Such writing had no spaces between words; so it was difficult at times to tell where a word began or where it ended.  Also, there were no punctuation marks, and no spaces between sentences, paragraphs, or even divisions; so it was often hard to determine the meaning of a writer after the words had been deciphered.  The same holds true for the Greek New Testament.  Nevertheless, we all know that the communication of thoughts is done by a chain of words, not just a mere phrase or clause.  The greater the scope of the thought, the longer the chain of words will be.  Reading through Genesis chapter 6, we see an entire thought in verses 1 to 8 showing God’s intention to destroy mankind.  In that passage, Moses, the writer ―
1) gave us the time ― in those days when population multiplied;
2) told us what God saw mixed marriages that produced giants and also increased the evil in mankind;
3) presented us God’s reason for the destructionas His Spirit shall not always strive with mankind, and as much as it repented Him to do it, He would have to destroy them and the creatures on the earth.



Gen. 6:4:  There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

The phrase in those days” refers to that period of time before God’s destruction of the earth (by a deluge) when the following events took place: 1) Giants, some physical giants and some intellectual giants, were born when the two races of people intermarried; and 2) as interbreeding continues from that generation to the next, the children that descended out of such marriages were more wicked and their thoughts were only evil continually.

The phrase “and also after that” refers to the time after the destruction of all that which God saw “in those days”, by destroying the earth with a great flood.  And there were giants also after that great flood of destruction.

It is clear from Scripture that the giants were born into the world as a result of the action taken by the sons of God: “There were giants in the earth in those days… when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them…”

It is a lie to teach that giants were already in existence even before there were mixed marriages.  The self-appointed “Lead Apostle” wants you to believe that Cain fathered some giants.  These were his words from his teaching on the Mark of Cain:

Moreover, it is the law of reproduction, that every seed brings forth after his kind. Precisely! Then we must now ask, knowing we have to look only at one lineage, the lineage of Cain: How can Cain produce giants, if he was not a giant? Church of the living God, there is only one way for him to produce giants, before the mixed marriages started, which also produced giants, due to the genetic imbalance it created. As such, God had to touch him, and transformed him into a giant. Precisely! That is the only way Cain could have fathered giants, as verse 1 and 4A reveal.

Of course, every seed brings forth after its kind.  But just because God increased Cain’s size does not mean that he had giantism blood gene in him.  God did not alter his genes.  Cain’s gene contained only the mix of the Serpent and Eve.  So how could he bring forth giants?  As long as his seed bred among themselves, they remained a normal Serpent seed race of people for generations, with little or no variation in their make-up except that they were carnal, astute minded and possessed great intelligence.  But when the Sethic seeds mixed with the Serpent seeds, the mixed genes in the seeds became agitated.  Though the affinity was there, protein-wise they were not compatible; hence dynamic mutation occurred.  Over a few generations of continual mixing, the mutated genes passed down would result in the birth of different human defects, as in giants (with six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot) or, as in dwarfs.  Hence, such mutated flaws embedded themselves in the genes in the seed.  As mankind multiplied, they migrated.  The chemical composition in the food of the land, plus skin exposure to the ultraviolet radiation of the sun (especially around the hot equatorial regions) where different people had lived over a long period of time, contributed to changes, not only in the melanin of their skin and physical features but also in some portions of their DNA.  Whatever changes there were was the handiwork of God designed for mankind to adapt to their environment.  On the other hand, mankind is dying, both spiritually and physically, from crossbreeding and from the bombardment of chemicals and harmful rays to the body over generations of time.  It took more than 2000 years till man finally reached his God-given lifespan of around 120 years.  Yet, we see few people ever attending that age.  After many hundreds of generations of crossbreeding, every human body contains mutated cells (cancerous cells) but most of them do not amass to post a danger to the body.

Recap.  Even though his size was increased, the giantism gene was not in Cain as it was not passed down to him from his father, the Serpent, unless you believe that the Serpent had such a gene.  (The Serpent was definitely stronger and bigger than Adam, but did he have giantism gene?)  Science proved that acquired mutations in somatic cells (cells other than sperm and egg cells) cannot be passed on to the next generation.  God increased Cain’s physical size for his protection and not for him to produce giants.  That’s the biblical truth.

However, let us examine the Word very carefully.  If Cain had fathered giants in his days, the genealogical record would have an indication of it somehow.  But there is none.  From his son Enoch down to Lamech’s children, whose names were even mentioned, there is no Scriptural hint of any being a giant.  Was the “Lead Apostle” insinuating that some of the other descendents were giants?  If so, in how many generations from Enos’ time would giants have appeared?  Remember Moses wrote that Cain built a city and named it after his son, Enoch.  But when was the city built?  Did Cain build it by himself before there was even a population of people?  Did he build it after his son was born?  Did he build it only after he had a good number of sons and grandsons of adult age?  Of course, most likely so, only when there were enough men to begin to build a small city.  The time period would have been, say, about 100 years after Enoch was born and with a son or daughter born yearly to Cain.  Now, if Cain had fathered giant sons, or his first few sons bore him giant grandsons, would he have been able to build a city?  Obviously not!  Why not?  He would be a dead man because of the curse God put on the ground for murdering his half brother, Abel; his descendents would kill him for lack of yield to their crops.  If there were just three of those sons and grandsons among his children, who possessed his size, they could have easily overpowered him and killed him, if he did not run away.  And, if he ran away, how then would the city be built?  Think!  None of his descendents was a giant.  No, not one!  In that way, Cain was able to build the city with the help of his children and possibly grandchildren.  He would be a fugitive and a vagabond only when population increased and a bigger group of men sought to kill him.  When that happened, he would take his wife, and perhaps, several grandchildren and great grandchildren to another area and maybe built another city.  The name of his firstborn grandson had the name Irad, a combined and contracted words of “city, return, witness, testimony, fugitive, rebound”.  Irad means “Testimony of a City”, “Fugitive on the Rebound”.  As time progressed, more cities were built and more people moved to live in the cities, there would be less farmers working out on the fields.  As such, the thought of men killing Cain would have dissipated.

Once again, to say this: Just because Cain was made a giant does not mean he had giantism blood in him.  He was not born a giant; he had no such gene in him. God did not mutate his genes; He just gave Cain an increase in somatic mass.

Let me illustrate.  A normal teenager, born of an average parents, father weighing 70 kg and mother weighing 55kg, desires the profession of a sumo-wrestler. He weighs in at 60kg (132lbs) but through a course of trainings that stresses on exercising and eating, he soon put on weight. After a few years of stretching his muscle and fat cells, through eating and exercising, his weight balloons to more than 200kg (440lbs) and continues to climb as he eats as much as 8-10 bowls of stew (meat of all sorts), 6-8 bowls of rice, 100-130 pieces of sushi and 20-25 portions of barbecued beef at one sitting; on average, 10,000 calories a day.  Soon he weighs 250kg (550lbs) and reaches his status as a sumo-wrestler.  Sometime later, he marries a woman of less than 55kg in weight and has several children, would any of the children grow up to be as big as him, some 250kg, without going through the same regime as he did?  Obviously not, even though they are his “flesh and blood”.  Why?  Because the increase of his size is stimulated and built up; it is not a part of his DNA in his sperm cell.  See?  Just because your Daddy pumped iron to be like Mister Universe does not mean you will also be like Mister Universe when you grow up.  When a man makes himself to be bigger or smaller, it does not alter his gene such that his seeds will be born so, unless his wife possesses such a gene and passes it to his children.  Therefore, when God increased Cain’s physical size, he did not alter his genes.  He just made his size bigger, that’s all.

No matter how hard he would try to prove his “revelation” (and was quick to run me down), to show that he is the CEO of ministers, the self-proclaimed “Lead Apostle” only exposes his foolishness and pride like his “Chief Apostle”.  That’s biblically the truth.  “Seest thou a man that is hasty in his words? There is more hope of a fool than of him” (Prov.29:20).

Now, let’s go back to Enos.  “Enos” means “frail, sickly, mortal”.  It was in his generation that the “men”, the Cainites, began to profane the Name of Yahweh in their worship, using images of wood and stones.  Indeed, they were spiritually a sick people for doing what they did by invoking God’s Name upon their images.  Idol worship began with Cain’s people in the generation of Enos as polygamy was in the generation of Cainic Lamech, who was the first to take two wives.  I have already shown and proven the fact of the verse: “And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD” (Gen.4:26).  The verse is not about the sons of God segregating themselves as a people of God by calling on Yahweh, as both the so-called “Chief Apostle” and the self-appointed “Lead Apostle” would want you to believe.  The sons of God were already true worshippers from Adam to Seth to Enos, calling upon the Name of Yahweh in true worship.  Cain knew about worshipping God, but he had no revelation of the BLOOD.  His children then descended further away from the little he had into worshipping images of wood and stone, which was initiated and taught by his firstborn son, Enoch They blasphemed the Name of Yahweh when they called His Name upon their idols.  That’s the Bible Truth.



The integration of the two races of people was becoming greatly mixed in Sethic Enoch’s day that he prophesied against it (Jude 1:14-15).  But when did the intermingling of the two people begin?  Looking closely at the genealogies of the two lineages, we read Jared named his son Enoch.  Was it not because he saw how his people had degraded themselves with the Cainic race, and that by a revelation, he named his son Enoch, by whom the Lord would discipline His people?  Prophet Enoch was given to discipline the Sethites.  The degradation of the pure Sethic blood, caused by mixed marriages, started some time before the generation of Enoch, before Enoch was born.  (Note: There was an oversight in the earlier printing (1984) and also in the revised printing of my book on THE MARK OF THE WICKED ONES that stated the mixed marriages “began round about the generation of Enoch”.  The error was noted and corrected in the 2003 revision.)  As Enoch grew up to teach his people, the sin of yoking with unbelieving Serpent race did not abate.  Soon he started to prophesy against them and of the impending judgment to come.  To prove that his words were true, he named his son Methuselah, which means “man of a dart or javelin; when he is dead, it shall be sent”; simply, as commonly translated, “when he is gone, it shall come”.  The dart or javelin was that Great Deluge.  When the man was gone, the dart was released upon the earth.

The intermarriage of the two lineages could not have taken place in the days of Enos as the “Lead Apostle” claimed:

Mixed marriages started with Enos. That is, it started in his days! MIXED MARRIAGES STARTED PRECISELY IN THE DAYS OF ENOS. …It started precisely in Enos’ hour! It started that early! How do I know that? Church, Enos means Mortal Man!

See how confused he was.  Just because “Enos” means “mortal man” does not mean that the Sethites had gone over to the Cainites and got themselves wives.  He tried to prove further by saying:

God, in Genesis chapter 6, no longer referred to them as Sons of God. No! God Himself now called them “man”! That is, mere mortals! Carnal men! Verse 3 declares that! “My Spirit shall not always strive with man!” Which Man? The Sons of God! Why? “For that he ALSO (just like the Cainites) is flesh!” That is, he is also fleshly, or carnal! …That is the state the Sons of God had fallen into! And God was now using the terminology, “Man”, which He used for the Cainites, for His own seeds, thereby removing the distinction between the two seeds! Exactly! …But here in Genesis chapter 6, verse 6, where it is written, “And it repented the LORD that He had made MAN on the earth, and it grieved Him at His heart”, refers strictly to the lineage of Seth, the Sons of God line! Absolutely! That was why He was grieved! He was grieved on account of His own children! Precisely!

“Exactly!... Absolutely!... Precisely!”  Is it really?  No, not at all!  It is plain nonsense!  By such twisted reasoning, this “Lead Apostle” tried to force Genesis 6 into Genesis 4:26 to make his doctrine come out right.  In one place he taught that giants appeared before the Flood in two different periods: 1) “in those days” of Cain’s time (that is, Cain fathered giants); and 2) “and also after that” which, according to him, was in Enos’ time (that is, when the “sons of God” married the “daughters of men”).  Now, how many years apart were there between these two periods?  It was about 4-5 decades apart (assuming that Cain took a daughter of Adam for wife on her 30th birthday).  Does it make sense to say two periods of time when one came right after the first ― the first period of time: Cain fathered giants among his children, and the second period of time: when his children fathered giants among his grandchildren, and so on down his descendents?  Think.

Let’s look carefully at the following words: Man, Men, and Mortal(s) as used in the Bible.  Remember the Sacred Scripture is in-breathed of God.

In the Bible, the word “man” is translated from different Hebrew words.  These different words relate the individual or group mentioned to a certain something in their life.  When God created man, the word used is Man (אדם) meaning Mankind, the Hebrew word Adam being his name.  But the Hebrew word points him out as being from the dust of the earth; hence Earthling.  Eve who was fashioned from the side of Adam is called Woman, she being taken out of Man; and between them, she (woman) is 'ishshâh (באשׁתו) and he (man) is 'îysh (אישׁ).  The Serpent vicariously fathered a son through the Woman, who was a part of the Man.  Cain and his people were neither aliens nor animal-kind.  Though they were not “sons of God”, still they were under the umbrella of MANKIND (אדם), but they were called by a separate term, “men” (“sons of men”, “daughters of men”, “children of men”) and not “man” (though they were part of mankind).  The words “man” and “men” are clearly two different words in Hebrew; one is singular (באדם) and the other is plural (האדם).  The singular form is used for either the man or mankind.  The plural form is used often to single out mortal men who were devoted to sins, ruin and destruction of their own life.  Read these two examples:

Gen. 11:4:  And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.
5:  And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.

Pro. 15:10:  Correction is grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: and he that hateth reproof shall die.
11:  Hell and destruction are before the LORD: how much more then the hearts of the children of men?

Mortal man is 'ĕnôsh (אנושׁ), translated as “Enos” or “Enosh”, a word that basically means “frail, desperate, sick, woeful”.  Seth named his son Enos purely to state the fact that MANKIND is woeful, sick, desperate, frail, because of the blasphemous worship committed by the Cainic people.  Whether Sethites (“sons of God”) or Cainites (“sons of men”), all were mortals, all were flesh, but not all were carnal ― certainly not the Sethites.  So it did not matter what race a person was, be he a Sethite, a Cainite, a hybrid, he was flesh, he was mortal, and he was man, a part of mankind, for he was an earthling.

Therefore, for the so-called “Lead Apostle” to simply interchange the two words “man” and “men” in these four verses of Genesis 6 – just so to suit his teachings – is truly unforgiveable:

3:  And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
5:  And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6:  And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
7:  And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

These four verses are not about the sons of God It is about MANKIND as a whole.  Simply read the verses and substitute the word “man” for “mankind” or “earthlings”.  God never took away the terminology “sons of God”, used for the Sethites, and called them “men”.  Not at all!  He never took the terminology sons of men”, used for the Cainites, and put it on the Sethites who were “sons of God”.  Never!  “Sons of God” were “man”“Sons of men” were “man”, too.  They were all mankind.  God does not confuse people’s mind by changing His words and meanings.  Only desperate and false preachers do.  Remember this.  They will just grasp at any possible words and verses of the Bible that “look right” and try to stick them to their “revelation” to “make it right”.  And their hearers, undiscerning, would believe that the teaching is right because the teaching “sounds good, sounds right”, especially when the preachers brainstorm them with plenty of positive exclamations, such as “Precisely! Absolutely! Exactly!” that fuel awe about them as being “great” anointed men of God.



Mankind was corrupt as a whole because of the intermingling of the two seeds.  Cain would have had a good number of children, perhaps grandchildren, by the time Enos was born.  Remember that he was older than Seth by 130 years.  That generation saw the Cainites going into idol worship and blaspheming Yahweh Elohim as they summoned His Holy Name upon their idols.  Enoch, the son of Cain, initiated such worship, and taught the people his religion.  Perhaps it started with a golden calf, and later other vain images.  (The descendents of Canaan, who were spread out all over the Land of Canaan, worshipped Molech, Chemosh, Ashoreth, and Baalim.  Such worships were patterned from those before the Flood and stirred up by the dark side in Canaan, who was a bastard son, born out of an unholy wedlock between Ham and his own mother.  It was a result of the serpentine spirit that was predominant in him.)  Cain was so proud of his religious firstborn son, Enoch, that he named the city he built after him.

By the generation of Irad, another city or two would have been built by the people.  As the Cainites dwelled in cities, their lifestyle changed and sophistication grew.  Their carnal mind became filled with vain thoughts that promoted satisfactions only for their flesh.  The womenfolk were drawn towards the use of makeup and herbal concoction to beautify and maintain their bodies.  Remember also that there were still no giants on the earth, not even one was born to Cain, Enoch, or Irad, or any of their “flesh and blood”.  It was around this particular time that the Sethic men were seduced by the “fair” Cainic women that they went and took them wives.  This generation would be the generation of Cainan, firstborn of Enos.  This was the days when mixed marriages really started.  As years passed by, more and more Sethic men visited the cities and took Cainic women home for wives.  But as time continued on, the Sethic men would not only marry the Cainic women, they would settle down also with them in the cities.  By the second generation of inbreeding with Cainic blood, giants appeared.  That would be the generation after Mahalaleel, the generation of Jared.  How do I know?  Just this: true science will always prove the Scripture.  The study of genes shows it.  Mendel's law states that “every individual is the sum total of the characteristics, recessive or dominant, in its two immediate progenitors. There is nothing in any individual that was not in the father or mother of that person, and everything that was in the father and mother is in the offspring.” “A gene may be recessive and, in the presence of a dominant gene, it becomes latent, not causing the formation of its trait. In a later generation it may occur, not accompanied by its dominant partner and so produce its characteristic trait.”  That was discovered in the second half of the 19th Century.  But some 50 years later, in the 20th Century, the science of genetics further shows that genes do not always come in simply two different versions, one dominant and one recessive.  Mutations can create many different versions of the same gene (known as alleles).  This proved the Word of God to be true as seen in the selective breeding of sheep by Jacob in the story recorded in Genesis 30:25-43.

The Word says to bring forth seeds of its own kind.  All seeds will reproduce their own kinds.  To illustrate simply, white with white will produce white; black with black will produce black.  Any crossbreeding of seeds will cause discrepancies in the genes of the seed.  Mendel’s experiment shows that the first generation of crossbreeding produces seeds that carry 50% of the genes of both parent seeds, either dominant or recessive, but not necessarily beyond that.  Mixing white with black will produce grey, a result of 50% white and 50% black.  Mixing the same grey with grey again may see no variations or some variations, depending on the dominant gene; but taking a grey and mixing it with more black will obviously further agitate the gene engendering seeds with strange and varied results.

In those days when mixed marriages started, it was started by the “sons of God” who took the “daughters of men”.  Later, as the two lineages were drawn closer, the “sons of men” also took to wives the “daughters of God”, evidenced by Lamech, son of Methusael, whose first wife was a Sethite.  Now, the first generation hybrid offspring were not giants.  If a hybrid offspring possessing a dominant “son of God” gene married another hybrid “son of God”, genetically there would be little or no variations.  (With other dynamics drawn in, such as ultraviolet radiation from the sun and chemical effect over generations, greater variations will occur.)  However, with a dominant “son of men” evil gene, genetically there would be a difference as the evil gene dominates to suppress the Godly attributes in the offspring, it might just produce a giant out of several offspring, more so if the marriage was with another pure Cainic woman.

Now, the offspring of (Sethic) Noah and (Cainic) Naamah were normal hybrid offspring ― Japheth, Ham and Shem, each possessed 50% of the genes of both parents.  (Was Ham born black?  More of that later.)  The descendents of these three sons could marry among themselves with little or no variations as the “son of God” gene was dominant in them as their grandfather was Sethic Noah.  Shem, Ham and Japheth did not father any giant.  (Yes, you heard me; I said, Ham did not father any giant.  Do not let the so-called “Lead Apostle” fool you.)  But should any of the three seeds of Noah cohabit with a pure Cainic woman, the offspring born would carry a gene filled with discrepancies; and it would be passed down to later descendents, as we see in the case of Ham’s incest with his own mother that birthed Canaan, an illicit child, an accursed seed.  Hence, being a bastard, an illegitimate child, Canaan possessed 50% of his mother Naamah’s serpentine gene plus that which was already inherent in his father Ham, a mixed seed.  Though the Scripture does not say that Canaan was a giant, we know that he was the father of the giants, this side of the Flood.  He was the father of the Sidonians, the Hittites, the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgasites, the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites, the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites.  (Read Genesis 10:15-19).  Among them, were giants born, as they interbred and spread themselves all over the Land of Canaan, till many were there in the days of Moses and Joshua.  The various sub-tribes of the Canaanites were notorious in the ancient world for their sexual proclivities.

There are two dynamics to take note about genes.  Every living thing is fueled by a life force.  When Satan infused his spirit through the Serpent into his seed, Cain’s behaviour was basically motivated by Satan to oppose God’s life and laws.  (Read John 8:37-47.)  That Cain was a big fellow like his father, the Serpent, was just one dynamic.  The other was how he reacted to the Word of life that flows from God, that life that should be.  Science cannot explain the spiritual side of genes.  People have often been told that homosexuals cannot help being homosexual “because it is in their genes”, because they have such “strong urge” to “only cohabit with another of the same gender”.  By saying this, they are saying that it is not abnormal but acceptable as it is part of nature.  Hogwash!  If that be so, what about, say, a kleptomaniac, a liar, a child molester, a fornicator, and even a murderer ― should they be considered acceptable also, just because of the “strong urge” they possess, and they “could not help doing” what they do?

Yes, we are all born in sin.  “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Psa.51:5).  The serpentine nature in mankind is the dark and evil side of life force that seeks to destroy man by drawing him away from the light, and true and holy side of life that is found in the Word of God.  This is what the Apostle Paul explained:

Rom. 7:14:  For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15:  For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do.
16:  If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good.
17:  But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.
18:  For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find.
19:  For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice.
20:  Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.
21:  I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good.
22:  For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man.
23:  But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24:  O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?
25:  I thank God - through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.

Satan will tempt every man and woman to destroy them:

Jam. 1:14:  But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15:  Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.



If the answer we have is Biblically true, then we would have a consistency regarding the doctrine of the Serpent Seed and its trail.  Simply quoting Bro. Branham to say that the Serpent seed got over the Flood through the women is not enough.  Few preachers could ever explain what Branham meant; and so they simply believe what he said without a revelation.  [Note: It is this foolishness in many preachers who, after the death of Branham, brought a reproach to the Message he brought.  They have made his verbal words their creeds and their Absolute.  Some have added all his sermons to the Sacred Scripture as if they are in-breathed of God as the Sacred Scripture is.]  There is this one presumptuous idea to explain what Branham meant in his statement: that is, that one or several of the four wives had fornicated with Cainic men and were pregnant with their seeds before they entered the ark.  When questioned as to why, after more than a year living in the ark, only eight souls came out of it, they said that the Serpent seeds hid themselves in the ark, and hence, no mention was made of them in the Scripture.  How convenient!  What vain imagination!  May God have mercy on such twisted minds that are set on presumptuous sinning against the Word of Truth.

First of all, we need to remember that literal physical Serpent seed no longer exists, this side of the Flood, as many believe they do.  Scripture does not lie.  It tells us that after the Flood the whole world was populated by the three sons of Noah (cf.Gen.9:19).  And since the three sons possessed the blood of Noah and his wife, Naamah, where then is the remote possibility of even one single literal physical Serpent seed on earth?  The answer is NO, not one.  But the serpentine nature in the three sons was obtained from their mother.  It is this evil nature in man that Satan used to continue his evil work against the Creator and His Word over this side of the Flood.  He used it to create more religions that oppose God and His Word, just as he did with the religion of Cain that he had created by him.  Over in John 8:37-47, in His conversation with the religious Jews, who claimed that Abraham was their father, Jesus disagreed with them and told them that they were born of the devil because they were doing what the devil desired them.  The devil was a murderer from the beginning, seeking to destroy God’s Word and those who are righteous.

John 8:37:  "I know that you are Abraham's descendants, but you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you.
38:  "I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with your father."
39:  They answered and said to Him, "Abraham is our father." Jesus said to them, "If you were Abraham's children, you would do the works of Abraham.
40:  "But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this.
41:  "You do the deeds of your father." Then they said to Him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father - God."
42:  Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me.
43:  "Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word.
44:  "You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.
45:  "But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me.
46:  "Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe Me?
  "He who is of God hears God's words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God."

Therefore, those who said they believe Yahweh and His Word but have their own religions that oppose Him and His Word are religious Serpent seeds. Indeed, they are!



Now we come to ask ourselves the question: Who was Canaan?

As the doctrine of the Serpent Seed is hard for the denominational Christians to chew, so is the doctrine of Ham’s incestuous sin for the Endtime Message believers to chew.  The so-called “Chief Apostle” was against the revelation and even now his follower, who claimed to be the “Leading Apostle” of God, is simply following his footsteps, preaching against the truth.  The “Lead Apostle”, a Nigerian preacher, is following a religion that he and his “Chief Apostle”, an American preacher, have created, and he is out to deceive others into lining up, not with the WORD of God, but with the words of his “Chief Apostle” whom he believed to be as absolute as could be.  He teaches his people to check with his “Chief Apostle’s” revelations and the Prophet’s teachings.  And where does the IN-BREATHED WORD OF GOD stands in their “RELIGO”?  May God have mercy.

Now, even before I came to the message of Branham, I knew of the truth of the doctrine of Ham’s incestuous sin that I hold today.  Back in the year of 1981, during the visit of the said American preacher (the so-called “Chief Apostle”) to Singapore, and because he was one quite close to Bro. Branham, I decided to ask him a question regarding the sin of Ham.  As I believe Bro. Branham to be who he was, he would certainly know the sin of Ham since he knew the revelation of the Serpent Seed and its trail.  But seeing that nothing about it was ever mentioned in any of his sermons, I asked the American preacher this question:

“Brother ___, regarding the sin of Ham, I have not read anywhere in Bro. Branham’s messages, as to what he believed. Have you by any chance ever heard him mention about it, in or out of the pulpit, and was never recorded?”

He turned and replied, “Well, yes, Bro. Gan. As a matter of fact, I did.  Once Bro. Branham and I were both going into a restaurant when he turned to me and simply said: ‘Brother ___, I believe the sin of Ham was incest with his mother’.”

The preacher said nothing further and neither did I.  He could have kept mum about that particular occasion he had with Bro. Branham and not related those words of Bro. Branham to me, and I would have never known what the messenger of God believed regarding the sin of Ham.  Even then, that would not keep me from teaching the Truth.  But I have often wondered why Bro. Branham never once mentioned about the incestuous act of Ham in all his sermons, yet spoke of it to only this one preacher.  Was the sin of Ham a teaching that is offensive to believers’ ears because it is about a sexual affair between a son and his mother?  Was Branham expecting the preacher he spoke to, to teach it?  All the same, this “Chief Apostle” did not believe it because he could not see the revelation of it.

Now, concerning Canaan, let us look carefully into the record provided us in Genesis 9:18-25.  Remember, to interpret every statement in the Bible literally only shows the ignorance of the person concerning God’s Wisdom.  Firstly, God hides the Truth while revealing it. He reveals to those who would learn. Secondly, to heighten its importance, certain particular expressions are compounded, which I shall expound, but consider this particular expression of Jesus that we are acquainted with: “unless you eat My flesh and drink My blood, you have no life in you” Thirdly, Scripture interprets Scripture, a little here and a little there in the volume of books, with keyword(s) provided.

Gen. 9:18:  And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan.
19:  These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the whole earth overspread.
20:  And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:
21:  And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.
22:  And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.
23:  And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.
24:  And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.
25:  And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
26:  And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
27:  God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

Observe and learn.  Firstly, notice that the first of the ten verses begins with “And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth:” with an emphasis placed on Ham being the father of Canaan, “and Ham is the father of Canaan Why such an emphasis?  The same emphasis is repeated in the fifth statement (verse 22).  Why?  To call your attention!  Two is the number of witness.  Moses wanted you to be aware that Canaan was born of Ham as a result of the events that took place in those ten verses of Scripture he recorded.

Secondly, why did Noah curse Canaan?  Why not Ham’s three other sons ― Cush, Mizraim or Phut?  If the sin of Ham was not incest, does it justify Noah to curse Canaan if Canaan was the seed of Ham and his wife (Mrs. Ham)?  Should not Ham be the one cursed instead?  For a curse to be justifiable, Noah should either 1) have cursed Ham's eyes because he ogled at his nakedness (naked body), or 2) cursed his brain (mental faculty) for he made light of his nakedness (naked body).  And, if Ham had forced himself upon Noah when Noah was drunk, as some preachers believe, then a curse upon Ham's reproductive organ would be justified.  Remember the Word says: "And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe" (Exod.21:23-25).  Isn’t that right?  So why was Canaan cursed?

God calls to our attention that Canaan was a really bad seed produced out of Ham's shameful act of sin, for Ham had uncovered and saw the nakedness of his father ― a sin of an unholy union, not a homosexual act with his drunken father or seeing and ridiculing his naked state, but an incestuous act with his motherCanaan was a seed not of Ham and his wife (Mrs. Ham) but of Ham and his mother (Mrs. Noah)The incestuous act brought forth Canaan ― an accursed seed.  And Canaan brought forth GIANTS, this side of the flood (Gen.10:15-19).  Truly, he was an accursed seed, just as Cain was a bad seed.  Hence, Noah was justified in cursing Canaan.  It could not be any plainer.  This shows that Ham's sin was not something else, like ogling at his father’s naked body or making light of Noah's nakedness.  (Notice that Mrs. Noah did not bear any more children for Noah after her incestuous act with Ham which resulted in the birth of Canaan.)

The laws of immoral relations were given to Israel in the Book of Leviticus (chapter 18).  There are two keywords used to express illicit relations.  They are “uncover” and “nakedness”.  Together the two words conjugate to describe immoral relations.  In unbelief, the “Chief Apostle” tried to prove that the words and phraseology used in the Book of Leviticus were different from those used in the Book of Genesis.  But who wrote those books and when?  Was it not Moses?  Were they not written in the same period of time when he and the children of Israel were out there wandering in the wilderness?  So how could the semantics be different?  When a man refuses to see because of pride, he will grasps at anything to justify his position.  But to a discerning Bible believer, the two words “uncover” and “nakedness” substantiates the Truth that the sin of Ham was an incestuous act.

There is one other verse in Scripture that carries the same meaning (as detailed in the laws on immoral relations in Leviticus 18) but used figuratively.  It is in the 47th chapter of Isaiah.  Read the whole chapter and see how Isaiah lamented for Babylon.  He prophesied that Babylon was to be ravaged, brought down to a disgrace.  Notice these verses, especially in verse 3, the semantics of the two words “uncover” and “nakedness”, coupled with the phrase “thy shame shall be seen”.

Isa. 47:2:  Take the millstones, and grind meal: uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers.
3:  Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen: I will take vengeance, and I will not meet thee as a man.

Trying to justify his reason that Ham’s sin was not an incestuous act, the “Lead Apostle” quoted Habakkuk 2:15-16 and stated that the verses referred to, simply seeing the nakedness of another person.

Hab. 2:15:  Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour drink, that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken also, that thou mayest look on their nakedness!
16:  Thou art filled with shame for glory: drink thou also, and let thy foreskin be uncovered: the cup of the LORD'S right hand shall be turned unto thee, and shameful spewing shall be on thy glory.

Now, that is the truth that the two verses of Habakkuk referred to exactly what he stated. However, he was a desperate man trying hard to look for a text or two of Scripture to justify his teaching, but exposing only his foolishness.  These two phrases: “look on their nakedness” and “let thy foreskin be uncovered” have no similarity to the expressions found in the account of the sin of Ham in Genesis 9.  Habakkuk was speaking of the shame of causing one’s neighbour to be drunk so that one may see their nakedness, that is, their pudenda.  The Hebrew word used here for “nakedness” is maw-ore', used strictly for the exposure of one’s pudenda.  But the word “nakedness” in Genesis 9 is er-vaw', a word that is more than just the naked body and the pudenda.  It conveys something literally, or figuratively, unclean: a disgrace or a blemishIts root word is `arah, to demolish.  When someone’s er-vaw' (nakedness) has been uncovered, he or she has been demolished, damaged, blemished, ravaged, disgraced.  And Noah’s wife was blemished, and he was a destroyed man.



Here are the words of the “Lead Apostle”.

The entire scenario had nothing to do with incest! I know in Leviticus chapter 18, verses 6-8, to “uncover nakedness” means incest. But that text in Leviticus has no application to the simple and straight forward account in Genesis chapter 9, where Ham only “saw the nakedness of his father”, but did not uncover the nakedness of his father! Exactly! Read the text! Noah was already uncovered in his tent in verse 21, before Ham saw him! Absolutely! Thus saith the Lord in Verses 21 & 22! …And fortunately, it is a simple and most straight forward account, which therefore needs no special interpretation, as to give room for the application of Leviticus 18! It does not!

As usual, instead of reading the whole account to understand the thoughts or meanings being conveyed, he merely separated the statements as if there was no connection between the two phraseologies.  Of course it’s “Thus saith the Lord in Verses 21 & 22!”  But what does the Lord actually say?  Is it really “a simple and most straight forward account, which therefore needs no special interpretation”?  The way he said it, is the way traditional preachers normally would say it to defend their traditional doctrines. Take for example this passage of Scripture:

Gen. 2:21:  And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22:  And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
23:  And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

The traditional preachers would say, “See! God took a rib of Adam and made a woman!  Thus saith the Lord in verses 21 to 23!  And fortunately, it is a simple and most straight forward account, which therefore needs no special interpretation!”  But was it really true that Eve came from a piece of human rib of Adam?  Foolish people would believe that because of the way they read the Bible.  What was really taken out of MAN?  Was it a RIB or a WOMAN?  The answer is found in the last half of verse 23. The phraseology “Woman, because SHE was taken out of Man” is coupled to “he took one of his ribs” Revelation therefore proves, that SHE, a WOMAN, and not a rib, was taken out of Adam.  It was the feminine attribute of Adam’s spirit that was taken out of Adam and presented back to him in the form of a physical Woman.

Continued in his teaching, the “Lead Apostle” said:

Moreover, Mrs. Noah was not once mentioned in the entire chapter! And Mrs. Noah was not in the picture either! She never was! Mrs. Noah was not at all in the entire picture! …You have to read between the lines! He began to ridicule and mock his dad! …Verse 22 tells us that! It is like saying: “Brother Shem! Brother Japheth! Wonders will never cease. Daddy is dead drunk and naked in his tents! Yak! Yak! Yak!”

If every event from creation to Christ were to be scripted in detail, there would not be room in a believer’s house to contain the great volume of Sacred Books.  Also, there would not be a need to send preachers to teach the Truth as anyone reading it can understand the simple and most straight forward account of all historical events.  Isn’t it?  Think.

Now, why should Mrs. Noah be mentioned?  If God choose to hide a truth from the wise and prudent men (such as all self-appointed “super apostles”), who can fault Him for doing so?  Anyway, let’s look into the following example that has a conflicting effect to the minds of many in the Endtime Message.

Gen. 3:6:  And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

Tradition has it that the passage is a simple and most straight forward account of what happened in the Garden of Eden.  The Serpent tempted Eve with a fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.  Eve took a bite of the fruit and then gave the rest of it to Adam who was standing beside her.  And Adam ate of it.  Well, that’s “Thus saith the Lord in Genesis 3:6!”  So, how, do you, as a believer of William Branham explain the passage, especially when a traditional Christian comes to you and say, “You believe that it was not a fruit that Eve partook but sexual intercourse with the Serpent.  Accordingly to you, the Bible is saying that Eve partook of sex with the Serpent, with Adam watching the goings-on.  Then after Eve had her act, Adam took his turn with the Serpent because he ate the same fruit.  Or, is it that Eve, after having sex with the Serpent, turned to Adam to offer herself to him? Every which way, it sounds like an orgy.”

Friends, do not be so taken in by smart-talking intellectual charismatic preachers such as the self-styled “Lead Apostle”.  “You have to read between the lines!”  He said.  It is easy to utter such a statement, but try telling that to the traditional Christians and try explaining Genesis 3:6.  Remember the verse states “her husband with her”.  Explain it, if you have the gift.  Was the husband with her watching her fornicating with the Serpent?

As pointed out afore, the original Scripture had no punctuation marks.  Undiscerning readers will easily miss the truth.  Another fact is that certain portions of the Scripture were penned by the Spirit of God mysteriously to hide the Truth yet revealing it.  The truth may be carried in the form of a dual statement or a compounded statement, or even in the form of a parable.  The account of the sin of Ham given in Genesis 9 carries a compounded truth.  Genesis 9:20 makes emphatically clear that Noah became a husbandman and planted a vineyard from which he made wine ― “And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard, and he drank of the wine.”  This statement calls your attention to the blight of Noah for his heavy indulgence in wine making and wine drinking.  (Noah’s interest in wine could only have come by what his eyes had observed and his lips had tasted in those days of mixed community of the two lineages of people, before the Flood, in which the Cainic lifestyle dominated the whole populace.)  A day came when he had drank too much of the wine he made that he became totally intoxicated and stripped himself naked – that is, he uncovered himselfin his own tent.  (The nomadic tent is not like a Red Indian teepee or a camping tent.)  Noah’s wife was in the tent.  (Now, read between the lines if you can.  If you can’t, then observe and learn.  Question: Was Mrs. Noah waiting for her husband and longing to have some time together with him?  It’s very likely.  Remember that she was a descendent of the Serpent race.  Question: Had Noah been too busy with the cares of his vineyard and the making and drinking of wine that he had no time for his wife since the day they left the ark?  Truly, for no less than four years, his indulgence of alcohol had numbed his senses, even the sense of passion for sexual love with his wife.  Can you see what’s between the lines?)  Along came Ham into the tent.  He saw his father dead drunk and lying naked.  Ham saw his mother there.  What transpired at that moment of time was an opportunity for Satan to stir up the passion of both mother and son.

Gen. 9:21:  And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.
22:  And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.

Observe how Moses worded the words in Genesis 9:21.  Concerning the state of Noah, the words written did not state that “he uncovered himself”.  Rather, the words stated that “he was uncovered”.  Notice the play of words?  That’s right, “he was uncovered” in his tent ― by someone Who was it?  “Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father.”  That is, Ham uncovered his father’s nakedness “None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD… The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness” (Lev.18:6-8).  Ham committed incest with his mother within the tent of Noah ― Ham uncovered the nakedness of his father within the tent of Noah.  He uncovered what belonged to his father.  He had uncovered and saw what was ― his father’s nakedness.  Genesis 9:21-22 should be clear enough to have us understand that Noah’s nakedness was uncovered by Ham Ham had uncovered the nakedness of his father’s wife and saw the nakedness of his father.



After his incestuous affair with his mother, Ham must have felt remorseful momentarily enough to tell what he had committed to his two brothers.  Imagine the shock of his brothers when he told them plainly what he had done.  That’s right, he merely told his two brothers what he had committed.  There’s no “Brother Shem! Brother Japheth! Wonders will never cease. Daddy is dead drunk and naked in his tents! Yak! Yak! Yak!”  How did a preacher read between the lines to come up with such a crazy imagination?  All I know is that he merely parroted what his “Chief Apostle” said.  No sane man or woman would ogle at his or her parents’ naked body or speak ill in any manner about it.  Was Ham mentally unsound that he behaved like an idiot?  If one really knows to read between the lines, one will see that the illicit affair between mother and son was a poignant one that affected not just Shem and Japheth.  It must have affected Ham and his mother too.  Ham was held responsible over his mother for his lack of self-control.  He had shamelessly taken advantage of that moment when his father was in a despicable drunken state.  Yes, Noah shamed himself for lost of self-control over his wine drinking.  Ham shamed himself for shaming his father’s shame.  Shame, O shame!

What did Shem and Japheth do when they heard what was told to them?  According to the Scripture, they took a garment, put it upon both their shoulders, walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father.

Gen. 9:23:  And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.

This is what the “Lead Apostle” said:

Note that! Shem held one edge of the cloth, whilst Japheth held the other end, and they went into the tent backward, not wanting to see something, and covered their father’s nakedness. Mr. Gan, I ask you: Who was covered up? Noah or Mrs. Noah? Just how would it occur to these two brothers to use a piece of cloth to cover incest, if it was incest Ham committed with his mum?! How can you cover incest with a piece of cloth?! It does not make sense! …Mrs. Noah was not covered up; and she would have been the one to be covered, if Ham had reported a case of incest! Precisely! Yet, Richard Gan consistently says it was incest Ham committed with his mother, and will not be corrected. My foot! That is not a revelation! That is a wild projection, and it therefore absolute nonsense! It is the teaching of a desperate man, wanting to show that he has something when he has nothing! It is a desperate man that sees something where there is nothing! Exactly! You cannot manufacture revelation!

This is what comes to mind just reading that verse of Scripture.  Well, the “Lead Apostle” is one desperate man.  If he could only see himself, how desperate he has been in trying to make himself the Leader of all apostles that he has to resort to running me down, and manufacturing his own revelations.  We just read what he asked his congregation to note, that “Shem held one edge of the cloth, whilst Japheth held the other end, and they went into the tent backward, not wanting to see something, and covered their father’s nakedness.”  Please, please, please, for your own sake, read carefully what Moses wrote!  Hold your Bible with your hand; hold It the right way with its upside up and not upside down, and read the verse slowly and carefully.  Does the verse say “Shem held one edge of the cloth, whilst Japheth held the other end”?  For one to claim he has a calling and assume to say what the Bible does not say is bad enough, what more for one who claims to be the CEO of all apostles to assume what the Bible does not say!  Friends, a failure to say what the Bible says is a failure to understand what It means.  Period!

The mystery of the event of Genesis 9:20-27 is scripted in a compounded expression.  Yes, Shem and Japheth did cover their father’s naked body.  However, what Moses intended to convey about the truth of the matter is shown by his use of certain particular expressions.  Notice the absurdity in the statement when taken literally, the way the two brothers went about a simple task of covering their father with a garment.  Firstly, note that it was not just any piece of cloth that was used to cover Noah.  It was a garment, a mantle, an outer covering worn by a man.  Yes, a mantle is tailored to cover (up) one’s body.  A cloth (be it a table cloth, a bed sheet) is not.  Secondly, note how the mantle was held by Shem and Japheth ― they “laid it upon both their shoulders”.  They did not each hold one end of a cloth as insinuated by the self-appointed “Lead Apostle”.  They laid the garment upon both their shoulders; that is, they had to stand shoulder to shoulder, almost touching each other, with a part of the garment over each of their shoulders.  Why did they do that, if that was what they did?  And not only that, why did they “went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward” Did they literally walk backward with a garment between them on their shoulders?  Is not such an approach awkward and impractical to a simple task of covering a naked man?  Would not a single person have easily performed such a simple task?  Is seeing one’s father’s naked body a sin?  If so, that would mean that no children could ever personally care for their own terminally ill parents.

The absurdity of the language should cause us to realize that Moses intended his readers to look beyond the mere act of covering the naked body of Noah.  If you can understand the following two verses of Scripture you would be able to understand the usage of the expression, “laid it upon both their shoulders”.

Isa. 9:6:  For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Isa. 22:22:  And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.

The use of the expression took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders speaks of “taking the responsibility (duty, burden) upon themselves to cover up a secret”; in this case, both Shem and Japheth bore the responsibility of hiding (covering up) the sin of Ham’s act from their father.  And the words “and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness” emphasizes that both Shem and Japheth were unlike their brother, Ham, who was hot headed (that’s what his name basically means) and went forward in sinning against their father.

However, it was not long before Noah came to realize what Ham had done to him.



Gen. 9:24:  And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.
25:  And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
26:  And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
27:  God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

Let’s see how the self-proclaimed “Lead Apostle” interprets those Scripture verses.

Noah eventually got out of his drunken stupor. And when he came out of it, church, he knew exactly what Ham had done to him! He knew! He had it by a divine revelation! How do we know that? Because he pronounced a curse, as a result, by inspiration! How do I know he was inspired? He cursed Canaan who was not yet born! Canaan would later be the fourth son of Ham! Yet, when Noah pronounced the curse, Canaan was not yet born! Yet, he picked his name and cursed him: “Cursed be Canaan.” How could he do so without divine inspiration?

How foolish an interpretation!  This is an example of carnal minded men’s understanding when it comes to the Scripture.  They read the Bible as if It is a novel, not understanding that the events recorded are compactly written, and details are not given.  The spaces of time in the events are not specified, but the keys to understanding them are provided elsewhere in the Holy Book.

The “Lead Apostle” claimed to have divine revelation of the truth contained in those verses of Scripture.  On the contrary, he has nothing but presumption; a desperate man who must fuel his ego to justify his claim of being the CEO of Apostles with so-called revelations.  1) Did Noah, after he got out of his drunken stupor, really wake up to a sudden divine revelation that Ham had shamed him?  2) And he then cursed Canaan, a name he picked for the fourth son who was yet to be born to Ham?  3) “Canaan would later be the fourth son of Ham!” ― Were the other three sons of Ham yet unborn at the time of Noah’s revelation?

Questions: What had Canaan committed to warrant Noah’s curse?  Should not Noah have cursed Ham instead?  Is God righteous in His judgment?  If so, why did He allow Noah to pass such a harsh judgmental curse on Ham’s son?  If “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe, life for life” be God’s law, should not then Ham be the one cursed?  Should not Noah have cursed Ham’s eyes for ogling at his naked body and his mouth for ridiculing him?  Who really was Canaan that Noah should curse him?



After the water of the Great Flood had subsided, the eight souls and the animals left the ark.  As the ark was on a mountain of Ararat, Noah and his family had to go down to where the living condition would be less harsh.  They most likely found a place somewhere near a valley.  There, they began to build their habitat, and the Bible stated that “Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent”.  This was written to emphatically show the change in the life of Noah and the curse of his indulgence in wine drinking.  Noah was much influenced by what he had witnessed in those days before the rain fell.  Obviously, he had tasted wine then, after seeing the effect it had upon those among the mixed populace who drank it.  What a nice feeling he must have felt!  Lightheadedness!  Carefree!

Does the “Lead Apostle” believe that Noah got drunk in the first year before any of his three sons had a child?  To believe that Noah cursed Canaan, the fourth son of Ham, even before the first son, Cush, was born, is to believe that Noah was drunk in the first year after leaving the ark.  Could that have been possible?  Obviously, not!  Why not?  It takes two years for grapes to grow and for them to be edible.  But it takes three years for successful winery grapes to be grown for wine-making.  So, at least about four years must have passed since the Flood before Noah had his first sip of his own wine.  How many grandchildren would Noah have had from each of his three sons by then?  If Ham had a son every year, he would have had Cush, Mizraim and Phut.  But if he had a daughter in between his first and second sons, he would not have had Phut as yet.



No longer a herder but a husbandman, Noah’s craving for wine must have caused him to spend his everyday life in his vineyard to care for his grapevines (Gen.9:20-21).  He must have a cool place, a cave perhaps, where he could produce and store his wine and there he would daily drink of it.  His wife, Naamah, would see him go out to his vineyard in the morning and come home in the evening.  He might have been tipsy and a little drunk at times when he got home to his tent.  There was no longer any passion in Noah to spend time with Naamah.  Remember that Naamah was a Cainite, and sexual passion was more pronounced among the Cainites than the Sethites, and that Cainic Lamech was the first to have two wives.

Then one day, Noah came home very drunk so much so that he uncovered himself (that is, he stripped himself) and lay naked in his own tent.  Naamah was in the tent.  Along came Ham, he saw his father lying naked on the floor, completely intoxicated and just a few feet away sat his poor mother.  Whatever went through both their minds in such a situation was an opportunity for Satan to fuel sexual passion within them.  Ham then approached his mother and thus, he saw his father’s nakedness (Gen.9:21-22 cf. Lev.18:8).  Noah’s nakedness was uncovered by Ham inside his own tent.  That’s the truth and nothing but the truth.

Having committed an incestuous act with his mother, Ham walked out of the tent.  Whatever was on his mind, whatever were his feelings, we were not told.  But this we do know, he went and told his two brothers of his sin.  He did not laugh; he did not ridicule his father.  He merely told his brothers what he had done, that he had uncovered the nakedness of their father, that he had committed incest with their mother.  That must have been a distressing moment for Shem and Japheth.  They went to their father’s tent.  Entering in, they saw their father still lying naked on the floor and their mother sitting in one area of the tent, undaunted and unconcerned.  What a distressing sight.  They took a garment, a mantle that was lying around and covered Noah.  Then both Shem and Japheth decided to cover up the whole affair of Ham’s incestuous act from their father.

“And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.”  This does not mean that upon waking up from his intoxication, Noah, somehow, had an understanding of what had taken place when he was out cold.  We need to ask ourselves the question: How did Noah know what Ham did to him?  It is easy to say that he knew it by divine inspiration.  But is it really so; is it really true?

The word “knew” is a word that means “ascertained by seeing”.  No doubt, like other times, after he had become clear-headed from his intoxication, Noah would just go about his chores.  Nothing unusual appeared round about him that day, nothing called his attention that a shame had befallen him when he was drunk.  But as days passed, he noticed his wife was getting heavy in the “tummy”, and, perhaps, his inquiries to the “how, where and when” of it were haunting him.  However, Shem and Japheth kept tight-lipped.  As time passed, things and events became clearer and Noah knew that the child within his wife was not his.  Noah’s observation soon gave him a “wake-up” call; he finally awoke from his winea call to keep off wine.  The lust of the flesh for wine was the cause of his humiliation.  Of all the three sons, there was only one whom Noah knew, who could have humiliated him, to have seen his nakedness, and that was Ham. Ham must have been a “hot” child at a young age, and in his growing up, exhibited some wayward behaviour.  The Cainic genes were more dominant in him.  So, as the time approached for the birth of the child, members of Noah’s family, perhaps, were getting edgy.  Finally the child was born and one look at the child’s exceptional features proved to Noah that Ham was obviously the father.

Calling his family together, he forced the truth out of them.  Ham admitted to his guilt.  Because of the variance, it gave Noah the right to name the son.  He called him “a lowly person”, that is, “Canaan”, and he then pronounced a curse upon Canaan.  [Note: Ham could have named his own son, but to name him thus is quite unlikely.]  To Shem and Japheth, Noah pronounced a blessing on them both, apparently for their fine moral fiber.  Noah was justified in cursing Canaan for Canaan was an ACCURSED SEED.  If Canaan was not an accursed seed, the curse would have no effect (cf.Prov.26:2).  Cursing Canaan affected Ham.  It declared that Ham himself was a rogue, and that in him, in his descendents, there were to be troubles and sorrows.



Gen. 6:4:  There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that,…

The event, back in those days, that caused God to send the dart of destruction was the sons of God intermarrying the daughters of men which resulted in the birth of giants (and evil men of renown).  After those days of the destruction of such gigantic and evil men, the world once again saw the birth of giants.  But where did these giants come from?  They came from Canaan, an inbreed of Ham and his Cainic mother.  As we have seen, the children born of a Sethite and a Cainite were not giants.  The three sons of Noah and Naamah were not giants, neither were the children of Shem, Japheth and Ham (except for some of his bastard son’s (Canaan’s) descendents) for their wives were only mixed seeds and not pure Cainic seeds.  Canaan, son of Ham, however, was a son born from an incestuous act of his father with his father’s mother who was a pure Cainite.  This inbreeding caused the evil serpentine genes to surface and become more dominant such that, in the next few generations of Canaan’s descendents, mutations were manifested more and giants were born.  By the time of Moses and Joshua, there were a great number of giants dwelling in different parts of the land named after Canaan.  The height of the tallest giant was Og.  He was believed to be about 13½ feet tall (cf.Deut.3:11).

To say that Cain was the father of the giants is incorrect.  However, to say that Cain’s genes affected the Sethic genes in the hybriding by intermarriage with them is correct, for the Scripture says that giants came about when the sons of God took the daughters of men and had children by them.  To say also that Ham fathered giants is also incorrect.  But to say that his bastard son, Canaan, fathered giants is correct.



A curse is put on the man and the woman who commits iniquity of an incestuous kind.  They shall be barren, destitute of children, after committing such a sin.  Moses wrote specifically:

Lev. 20:19:  And thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother's sister, nor of thy father's sister: for he uncovereth his near kin: they shall bear their iniquity.
20:  And if a man shall lie with his uncle's wife, he hath uncovered his uncle's nakedness: they shall bear their sin; they shall die childless [Heb:
ărîyrîy – bare, destitute (of children)].
21:  And if a man shall take his brother's wife, it is an unclean thing: he hath uncovered his brother's nakedness; they shall be childless [Heb:
ărîyrîy – bare, destitute (of children)].

Notice that Ham had no other children with his own wife after Canaan, the fruit of his incestuous act with his mother, Mrs. Noah, was born.  He became sterile.

Mrs. Noah had no other children by Noah other than Japheth, Ham and Shem.  Whether or not Noah had intimacy with her, the truth is she had become barren.



It has been taught by many that Ham was born black.  Well, that’s a lie.  Simply the name “Ham” means “hot, burning”.  We call certain people pure, for example, pure Chinese or pure Indian, because their ancestors, who have been living in their parts of the world, have never mixed with any of the other races in their marriages.  However, their very first forefathers who settled in those parts of the world were already a hybrid when they first migrated there.  The colour of our skin does not make a race superior or inferior in the eyes of God.  The difference lies in our attitudes, self-respect and the environment which we choose to live in.  That is the reason why we still have many “backward people” in many remote areas of the world.  Of course, there are also “backward people” living in “civilized” cities and nations!

Why, then, are there different coloured skins, and even the different body builds?  Simply this: the variation of features and colours lies in our DNA.  Different chemicals in the minerals of the soil and radiation of the sun affect certain genes.  Overtime those genes will be activated.  Each group of the descendants of Shem, Ham and Japheth who migrated to different parts of the earth would eat of the produce of their respective lands.  Because of the environment which they lived in and the things that they ate, their bodies gradually began to adapt and adjust genetically, generation to generation, until they became harmonized with their environments.  This might have taken them several generations or centuries.  We are what we eat and where we live.  A Chinese is yellow-skinned because his/her forefathers, who lived in China, ate of the land there.  And the land there is largely yellow.  That is why China has a river called the Hwang-Ho River (Yellow River).  The continents of Africa and India generally have black volcanic soil.  Hence, the colour of the people.  The early Red Indians of America were darkish red, obviously because they ate of the vast region of, or near the area of, the Colorado (Coloured Red) River and Mountains.  Their ancestors were the Eskimos who came across the Bering Straits from Mongolia through Siberia.

The accumulation of many changes over generations leads to striking modifications of the characteristics in every race.  Although all the races are different, yet all descended from ONE KIND — MANKIND!  Truly, our bodies are beautifully and wonderfully made (Psm.139:14).  Amen.



Now, these are the words declared by the so-called “Lead Apostle”:

A man can be ignorant, and do something in ignorance, but when correction by the Bible comes, not correction by a man, but correction strictly by the Word of God comes, if he truly in ignorance, he will repent and say, I am sorry, I was in error, and he will submit to truth. He will! He will swallow his pride, and acknowledge the truth! But when a man is not of God; when a man is a tare preacher, no matter how much Bible you show him, he will defy it!

True, I do agree with those statements.  Now, if he comes to the light of all which are here discussed, he will have to do what he declared.  Otherwise, he is not only just a liar but also a man full of pride.  Truly, “A man's pride shall bring him low: but honour shall uphold the humble in spirit” (Prov.29:23).  “Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up” (Jam.4:10).  May God have mercy upon all who learn to live His Way, His Truth and His Life.

“When the teacher be blind, the disciple is born blind;
when the blind leads the blind, both will fall into the ditch.”




LETTER – 17 September 1987

The following paragraphs are the second half of my letter in response to the so-called “Chief Apostle’s” attack and false accusation that he publicly made in his sermons (on magnetic tapes and on papers) which were circulated around the world.  The projection of himself being the one who had the absolute understanding of the Word, whom every other ministers must lined up their doctrines with, left a bitter taste in my mouth for several years.  His constant dispute over my teachings caused many churches to drift into a cultic behaviour.  Several preachers and believers from certain countries, especially the Philippines, Ghana and Malawi, openly assailed me in the same spirit as that of the “Chief Apostle”.  So, a four-page letter was written to clarify my teachings, and the lies and the falsehood made against me.  I was not defending my teaching.  It was the “Chief Apostle’s” cultic teachings that I was concerned with, as many believers in the Third World countries have a tendency to believe and accept all the words of a BIG Caucasian preacher at face value.  Only years later did some realize their folly.

The first two pages contained the subjects in the foregoing discussion; the last two pages are here given that touched the fact that God does not confuse people’s mind by changing His words and meanings.

In trying to make me look stupid, you brought out another subject which deals with the word and phraseology used in the 5 books of Moses.  I have stated, and will maintain, that the words, “saw the nakedness of…” in Leviticus carries the same meaning as is used in Genesis.  The meaning doesn’t change.  However, you came around and gave examples of DIFFERENT WORDS like, so-and-so “knew” his wife and how the word was changed later in time to “went into” and “laid with”.  NOTICE, I was talking about SAME WORDS, SAME MEANING. You were talking about DIFFERENT WORDS, SAME MEANING. You were talking about WORD CHANGES. You should be talking about MEANING CHANGES instead.

When Moses wrote “Adam KNEW his wife”, we know it means Adam had a sexual relationship with his wife. Later, Moses used other phrases like “went into” and “laid with”.  Now, tell me, would the meaning have changed if Moses wrote “Abraham KNEW his wife” instead of “Abraham WENT IN UNTO his wife”, or perhaps, in the other 4 Books, that “So-and-so KNEW his wife”?  Yes or no?  Would the word “KNEW” take one meaning in Gen.4:1, and another in the later writings of Moses?  Definitely not!  (If so, then you are the one jumping from pillar to post.)  Therefore, the words “saw the nakedness of…” as used in Genesis and Leviticus CANNOT HAVE DIFFERENT MEANINGS.  Prove to me otherwise.

I am not going to argue with you about your MISUNDERSTANDING on the statements that I made in “ELDER=PASTOR?” booklet. {*Note: This article has been enlarged under a new title, "OVERSEERSHIP".}  You have completely made a mountain out of a molehill, and insisted, upon your “interpretation” of them, that I said that Bro. Branham’s Message was an unclear light, and that when he died the light went out.  A WISE reader of that passage in question will disagree with you.  I have also already told you that that is not what I believe or teach, yet you EMPHATICALLY said that’s what I teach.  You are literally calling me a liar.  You are doing exactly the same thing that many others are doing with Bro. Branham’s messages when they go about misinterpreting his statements and said that he taught this or that, things that are not true.

Now, from what I understand, you are looking at the EVENING LIGHT as being from the SETTING SUN whereas I am referring to it as from the EVENING STAR.  The Evening Light Message is carried by the Evening Light Messenger who is a Star (star comes out in the evening time, not in the daytime).  The “Evening Star” is Bro. Branham.  The “Daystar” (Morning Star, Sun) is Christ the Word.  The Light of the Evening Star is a reflection of the Sun’s Glory.  It points back to the Sun.  Hence, the Light of the Evening Star is NOT the FULL LIGHT of the Sun.  Bro, Branham brought us LIGHT (Evening Light) and directed us to the DAYSTAR, Christ the WORD.  These are the terminologies that I used.  You may have yours.

I agree with you that there is no such thing as one member of the Five-fold ministry having 4 things right and 5 things wrong, and another having 3 things right and seven things wrong, etc.  All will eventually see God’s Truths as He reveals them to His Bride, just as when Paul first came along with things that the other disciples and believers did not quite see and understand, but they eventually did, whilst others wrestled with them ‘to their own damnation’.

You asked me which of the two is important to me, unity or Noah being a Pure Seed and Ham committed incest.  Let me ask you: Which of the two is important to you, unity or Enoch being the last Pure Seed and Ham committed homosexuality?  You answer it first; after all, you’d started the ball rolling.  Whatever answer you have will be the same that I’ll have.

You know that I have never attack you publicly in anyway.  But you did me when you think the whole world of your own teachings on those things, insomuch that you would break unity by strongly harping about them being THE truth.  You should have left them alone and be as what Bro. Branham once said, concerning the coming of Christ, that whether you believe Jesus is coming on white cloud or riding a white horse, the important thing is that you believe He’s coming again.

You said that I’m being tested and ugly thing would develop if I should overlook unity.  The fact is, you are the one who is tested and you have overlooked unity already.  Don’t fight someone publicly just because you think he is giving out “seeds” or “bones”, let the Lord take care of those things.  You just preach what you believe is true.  Most of all, show respect to the others.  Your mind may not stand confusion (so is my mind), but you don’t have to run around “killing” characters.  Let UNITY go God’s way, not yours.  It comes by the LOGOS (Greek), not yours.  The Spirit of the Lord will provide revelation.  I believe that, 100%.

I believe in Truth and I believe also in segregation from fanaticism.  But I don’t have to attack anyone just because he has some differences.  I don’t have to avoid him as if he is a cultist of sort to be avoided.  I just let God’s light clean up his errors, his mistakes, etc., by and by.  I believe God.  He’s the One Who will bring the Bride to perfection.  It’s not you or me or anyone who can do that.

God gave you a ministry to “so much”, He gave another to “that much”, and to another “this much”.  The revelation you have is to “so much” in your contribution to the Perfection of the Bride, and therefore in conveying “so much” to the people, you cannot say that you can go beyond that “so much” without committing little “mistakes” or “errors” of explanation to the people.  To err is human.  And you are human.

Yes, one of us is wrong on the few subjects discussed in the foregoing.  As according to your words, if people don’t see something, why debate?  Hence, I call the “debate” to a close.  Even though there are several other things you have said on the tape that really need clarification I’ll stop right here.  I will not write anymore, even if you should continue to “attack” me in your preaching or on ___ {name of his publication}.  I’ll let WISDOM see her way.

God bless.

Yours in Christ,
Richard Gan

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

EMAIL – 12 October, 2003

Here is an email written by a believer to the so-called “Chief Apostle” to remind him of his unethical manner in dealing with other ministers.  But the “Chief Apostle” would not listen to correct himself and his attitude.  O shame!  I wonder what would have become of Naaman if he (the BIG “I”) did not hearken to the words of his servant (the little “u”).  “If I did despise the cause of my manservant or of my maidservant, when they contended with me; What then shall I do when God riseth up? and when he visiteth, what shall I answer him?” (Job 31:13-14).

Greetings, Brother ___.

If I may, brother, I would like to share some observations with you concerning your dispute with Brother Gan. I share these in hope that it will benefit the unity of the Body of Christ. If I seem “blunt” it is not in any way meant to be disrespectful. I am not.

However, to draw out this letter with explanations and elaborations, to project humility and submission to you, is not the purpose of my writing. I am what I am. Thus with confidence I only wish to write to you my observations. Be they as they are. I only entreat you to consider what I say, and what God may quicken to you, if anything. I hope it will aid the Body of believers at this time.

“Cult hunters” take excerpts out of ministers’ sayings and make long dissertations to prove them “wrong” and insist they should not be listened to by their warnings and inferences. You took part of what Brother Gan said and drew your own conclusions without furthering the context of Gan's writings. It was the same as the Branhamites manifest when they take a quote from Brother Branham and do not endeavor to understand it within its full setting and meaning. You built your case over the basis of “one quote” (regarding the seals). This is the same thing the Anti-Branham cult hunters do and it is what the Branhamites do.

If the Unity of Christ is found by arguing quotes back and forth, then I suppose the Branhamites have it right. The admonition you received of the Lord, not to argue endless genealogies was not only telling you not to do it, but in reality, that verse was quickened to you because that is exactly what you have been doing. You've taking an excerpt out of a man’s writings and then proceeded to just mutilate his understanding by your lack of considering all he said. It is nothing more than forming a foolish argument, gender “strife” over secondary issues, such as Noah's genealogy, which you have argued over. You have done and continue to do what you have been admonished not to do.

If I take a quote of yours (any of which I choose) I could say you do not believe that the first horse rider went forth in the first century. You insisted that the Seals were not “opened” until 1963. We know that the manifestations of the events of the Seals have been going on
throughout history. How could the horse rider ride if the Seal was not broken? Thus, Brother ___, for you to insist that they were not opened until 1963 demands clarification and deliberation that expounds how they could be happening and not even open!

In truth, Brother Richard, in his book, attempts to address this question and put it into perspective. He clearly states in his overall teachings “THAT” there is an OPENING, a FULFILLING and a REVEALING of the Seals. You avoided his overall meaning to make a case against him, all the while establishing quotes of your own words that can make you look like you don't know what you are talking about. It would be easy to EXCERPT you and make you look like you are saddled backwards.

When you read a “quote” of Brother Richard and then began to judge him by that one quote I thought, Man ole man! After all the battles you have gone through to end up doing what you have fought so diligently against. What is going on?

The breaking of the Seals did not wait until 1963. As a Seal was broken the “event followed”, the horse rider went forth, etc. You cannot maintain they went forth before the seal was broken. There is no justification for such a position. The Bible plainly states when He broke a Seal, such and such happened. It does not say that the event happened AND THEN THE SEAL WAS OPENED later. That is a direct contradiction to the text. Thus, the book had to have been claimed and the Seals broken.

Are there considerations and clarifications that can be reached without the unity of the Spirit? Does forsaking patience and the forbearance of the Spirit for your opinions take precedence over the Covenant? We all must decrease now in the face of Wisdom and temperance for Unity’s sake. To maintain “A NUMBER ONE POSITION” on every thought and view while claiming you are the number one apostle, and no one can have even a partial revelatory understanding on a subject that brings more clarity than “YOU” simply is not the truth. We all appreciate your calling and apostleship, but you have a human side also. Anyone can excerpt someone to ARGUE them, brother ___. But seeking understanding and Unity of the Spirit is not based on such tactics. We are to keep the UNITY OF THE SPIRIT UNTIL WE ALL COME TO THE UNITY OF THE FAITH. The process is just about over, but the Bride will not be declared to be in Unity by us all dancing around one pulpit. The cart is never before the horse at any time. It is the Unity of the Spirit “FIRST” and then the Faith will follow.

The method of pulling out “quotes”, as you have done, is erroneous. Why? Because you defame a person while doing it! You break the Covenant over a non-essential to the Gospel itself. You could reason concepts and perspectives without defaming a man's person openly over issues. Some teachings and controversies demand clarification and patience to teach! Don't become anxious and forsake patience now at the end of the road. If you want to separate from some, fine, but, you need not by carnal mean, separate others.

You can take out a “quote” from anyone, but the “whole picture” cannot be denied by one quote. YOU said the SEALS were not opened until 1963! PERIOD. I have a “QUOTE” from you!  What? Have you gone the way of the denominations thinking the horse riders have not ridden yet? (Such a quote supports such a conclusion without considering anything else you say).

What you did to Brother Gan was not right, Brother. His teachings are more sound than you projected and your insistence to turn others from him will not serve the Unity of Christ.

S___ M___
[Arizona, USA]