REMINISCENCE...

17 Feb. 2005

Some time, last year, a brother suggested that I should put down in writing, on this website - a journal of sorts - things that I would encounter and experience during my missionary trips. Keeping a diary of my journeys (or even of the ministry) is not my cup of tea.

After some thoughts I decided to have a webpage where I could look back and reminisce the many joyful and rewarding experiences that I had over the many years of my ministry and trips overseas. Of course, I could not forget the times of disappointment and frustration encountered during the ministry -- especially with insincere preachers and false brethren.

So, whenever time permits I will script some of the events and experiences - good and bad - here.  I believe that as much as the happenings have been a blessing of sorts to me they will also be to you, at least, as exhortation to walk circumspectly as a true believer and admonition to heed the Original Word.  Yes, stay on the Word, no matter what man may say.

"parousia"

Just a few days ago, I picked up a brochure, a "Circular Letter", that was sent to me. Like the many other past "Circular Letter" brochures that I have read, this one was no different. Almost every time the preacher would testify of the same "glory" he possessed − "I had a direct commission from the Lord. Bro. Branham said to me, 'You are called to be a missionary'"; "There are some 260 countries in the world. I have been to almost all of them".

What if Saint Paul would harp about his "greatness" in the work of God in all his 14 epistles? Wouldn't that be overly prideful, something that a believer shouldn't exhibit? Wouldn't it be full of Paul (not the Lord's Christ) in all his epistles? Truly, one can boast in the Lord but certainly not in almost every brochure published, especially on the same things.

In this latest issue, he brought out the error of those who teach that Christ has already come. Yes, there are those who believe that Christ has come, saying that the Rapture has already taken place and that they are in the Millennium. This is certainly a false teaching.  But the writer has often dismissed the teaching on the coming of Christ whenever the word "parousia" is used by stressing that the word "parousia" means the literal personal body presence (or coming) of the Lord. He quoted these two verses:

1CO 16:17:  I am glad of the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus:
2CO 7:6:  Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus;

If the word "parousia" means the literal body presence, why then did Paul add the word "soma" to "parousia" -- soma parousia in this verse?:

2CO 10:10:  For his letters, say they, are weighty and powerful; but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible.

Think about it.

Back in the 1960s, a pastor who had only heard of Bro. Branham may said to another, "I thank God for his parousia, coming."  The other pastor may say, "I thank God I met him sometime ago in a church. His soma parousia, bodily presence, was a blessing to me."

It is unfortunate that some ministers have jumped the gun on certain doctrines just because of the many organized churches which falsely taught it from the beginning.

The writer of the brochure has in the past propagated "polygamous marriage". Now he is propagating that Revelation chapter 10 is not for the Bride but for the Jews. This is something for the foolish ones to chew on.

Shalom.

19 Feb. 2005

earthquakes

This morning's news of another two earthquakes striking east of Sumatra, Indonesia, did not come as a surprise to me. After the recent Tsunami disaster on 24 Dec. 2004, I did a little study and I read an article where seismologists has predicted that within the next 5 years there will be another major earthquake. However, I feel that the major earthquake that will strike California as prophesied by Bro. Branham is already imminent. A few Sundays later I told my assembly that within the next 6 months, we might see significant earthquakes striking places east of Sumatra, possibly beginning east of the Philippines, then somewhere south of China, perhaps Japan and round about. From there, maybe earthquakes somewhere in the region of the Bering Straits and Alaska, and then the northern part of California. What I am seeing is that the Pacific plate will be pushed eastward towards the US continent, thus tightening the earthquake fault line on the west coast of America which will bring about the big one. It will be a big earthquake that will take southern California into the ocean and a big tsunami that will flood many islands and coastlines of nations that face the Pacific Ocean.

Well, a few days later a major earthquake hit the Celebes Sea with a 7.1 on the Richter scale. Another hit southern Mindanao.

True, there are perhaps hundreds of earthquakes every day all over this earth of ours. But I believe we are going to see more significant quakes around the Pacific plate. [See 8 Oct. 2009]

A lot of brethren agree with me...i have over 500 members at my yahoo group... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bibletruths_forbelievers/
and many of them are believers. Several of them have said they question your doctrines and teachings at your website. Ask them if you want to.

And this is my reply to him:

Certainly, you can have 500 or 1000 or whatever number in agreement with you.  Why shouldn't they?

I can also show you a great number of those who would disagree with you.

Is number a BIG DEAL?  If so, consider the number of Roman Catholics and those in the denominations who disagree with Bro. Branham.

How childish!  Think, how many did Jesus have?

I will no more reply your email, seeing that you feel that you have spiritual understanding and are trying to correct me (which is good, if you have the revelation of the truth) but you really are a novice, childish. What you wrote in this email is a good example.  It shows what you are.

Do not try to over step your boundary and try to be someone that you are not, into doing something that you are not called to do.

I am not trying to be harsh with you.

May the Lord help you see.
RGan

I really feel sorry for this man and many like him, who argued that they are trying to help me (for which I am very thankful). But have they really take a good look at themselves in the Scriptures? Are they qualified, are they called, to do the job?  Or is it because they have a great knowledge of the words of the sermons of Bro. Branham that they feel they are qualified?  My Bible is my Roadmap, not the words of mortal man. If only they do what Bro. Branham said:

In these sharp, cutting Messages, if I have intentionally tried to hurt somebody, God forgive me. I wouldn't do that, for nothing. But yet I'm a prisoner to this Word, see, I--I must stay right with It. I don't speak hard things to make people feel bad. I speak things sharp, sometimes, to make people look, see, an exclamatory, "Oh, look!"  See, to make them look at it, to see. Then if you get them, maybe sometimes it provokes them. And about nine times out of ten, if they get a little bit provoked, they'll go to searching the Scriptures, and God does the rest of it then. You see?   [WILLIAM BRANHAM. CALLING JESUS ON THE SCENE. CHICAGO. IL V-21 N-8 63-0804E]

Will it provoke them to go searching the Scriptures?  I doubt so for they do not believe in the SUFFICIENCY OF SCRIPTURES. They need the QUOTES of Branham (which is okay) but they made the QUOTES as they are the ABSOLUTE, placing them above the Scriptures. When they do not go searching the Scriptures God could not do anything for them, for God lives in His Own Word.

9 Apr. 2005

I know the Author real well...

I remember reading in several messages of Bro. Branham where he made this comment: "I might not know the Bible well... but I know the Author real well."

Many believers have taken this statement that it is not important to know the Word as it is to know God well.  Another statement of the prophet has also often been mis-represented by those who show no interest in the Word or who refuse to accept the authority of the Scriptures: "I rather have the right spirit than the right doctrines."  How deceived they are.

Could anyone know God really well outside the Word of God (the Scriptures)?  God lives in His Own Word.  Without the Scriptures one cannot really know Yahweh well.  Christ (the Word) is the Mediator between God and man.  The Written Word is what reveals Him to us.  God may call a man to His work but to know Him well the God-called man has to indulge Himself in the understanding of the Written Word of God.  God reveals Himself in and through the Word.

Therefore, to know God real well you need to know Him in His own Word where He dwells.  And if you have the wrong doctrines but have a right spirit, just shut your mouth, and go search the Scriptures.

19 May, 2005

"Why did God create a sexual organ for Adam and Eve?"

The last several weeks brought in several notes of discussions to my email box that are worthy of note.  I could only think of the foolishness of the ministers/believers in what they wrote and what they believed.

There was one with the question: "Why did God create a sexual organ for Adam and Eve?"  Now, that sure is a question from a Branhamite, I told myself, when I read it.  True enough, the person was trying to show that the sexual organs were created by God as a means to test Adam and Eve in their propagation of children, whether they would use the spoken words or their sexual organs.  How silly!  What this person was saying is that both Adam and Eve would have no sexual organs if God had no intention to give them a choice, but that they could only use the spoken word, speaking to the dust to bring forth children.

How hilarious is such an idea!  I wonder how Adam and Eve would rid their waste water from their bodies.  Were they only to possess a cloaca like the birds and the amphibians? And would Eve have breasts or would she be flat-chested like a man?

Many years ago, a German minister told me that the sexual organs were created as a secondary means for the propagation of children.  If that is true, it means God created them as a "backup" just in case the first means (by way of spoken words) fails.  If this minister's opinion is correct, it would mean God is not omnipotent and not omniscient.  What kind of God is Yahweh then?  Is Jesus Christ, the Saviour,  a "backup" to save fallen man?  Or is He the very plan of God from the very beginning before the foundation of the earth was laid?  Does God need a backup plan?

These are just two opinionated preachers (if they be preachers) among many in the Endtime message movement who are literally taking Bro. Branham's words concerning his statement of speaking children out of the dust of the ground.

We have many self-made Bible teachers who are no Bible teachers at all.  They don't have the Word of Truth. What they have are plenty of opinions − unbiblical opinions without even a verse of Scriptural Truth for support, much less providing two.  In not understanding the utterances of the prophet, Branham, they are trying (very smartly) to prove the statements of the prophet to be true with their opinions instead of with the Scriptures.  In so doing, they are bringing reproach to God's Message of Truth.

May God have mercy on them.

30 May, 2005

Why can't they see?

This is a question often asked by many of us Bible believers pertaining to teachings that we embrace that other Christians could not accept.

When I first came into Pentecostalism, back in the 1960s, I was really thrilled about being a member of an Assembly of God church so much so that I waved its flag everywhere I went for I greatly embraced its doctrines and teachings.  Propagation of "tongue-speaking" as the evidence of the Holy Spirit Baptism was a part of my Christian witnessing.  So when other denominational Christian could not accept the teaching, I wondered "why can't they see what I was seeing".  On the other hand, they might also be wondering "why are Pentecostalists so foolish".  I was indoctrinated by a religious system.  And so were they (the other denominational Christians).

Now that I have come to embrace the very Truth of the Word of Life that is given to the Bride of Christ to make her ready for the translation, I still do think, sometimes, "why can't the others see" the Truth for this last days.

Try hard as we might to get others to see, if the Almighty does not open their eyes to see, they will not see.  Period.  Flesh and blood have nothing to contribute to the revelation of God that we received.  It is the Heavenly father Who gives the faith to those whom He chooses to show graciousness.  Blessed be His Holy Name!

08 June, 2005

Cultic spirit...

Some 15 years ago, a very religious, very self-righteous Presbyterian man tried to "expose" me to the public via the press as a cult leader, an evil one, perhaps.

It started one day at a small Christian book fair where this particular man was displaying his store of books, majority of which were about the Glorious Days of the Reformation.  When two other believers (from W. Malaysia) and I went and checked out what he had for sale, he was warm and chatty.  A while later, one of the two believers asked him for a list of his books he had in store for sale.  The Presbyterian said he had none with him but that he would send a copy of the list if he would provide his name and address. As there was not a single piece of paper available, I took out a piece of my name cards on which the believer could write his name and address on the back of it.  When it was handed to the Presbyterian, he became quiet.

On the following day, the two believers went back to the book fair to check on the other stores' displays.  One of them decided to pay another visit to the Presbyterian man.  However, an unpleasant surprise greeted him when the man responded to his greetings with a "Don't call me 'brother'.  I'm not your brother.  You're a cult."

A month passed and I received a phone call from a news reporter.  The first thing he said was, "I was told that you are a leader of a cult, that you follow a cult leader named William Branham.  I would like to have an interview with you."

Of course, he refused to tell me where he got his information.  However, I got to find out later that the Presbyterian man was an editor in the same press company where the reporter worked.  And I had also found out that this Presbyterian man had been going about cult hunting.

Speaking to the reporter, I told him I would be glad to have him write about me provided that he first let me see his finished script for my endorsement before he was to send it to the press.  I told him that in order for him to really write about me he had to first read some of my writings and books of William Branham.  He agreed and he collected them through a messenger boy.

About two weeks later, he had the books returned.  He called again and we had a chat on the phone.  He apparently did not read the books, just flipped through them, perhaps.  His conversation was again on the subject of cults and that he again told me that he was given the knowledge that William Branham was the man who created Branhamism, and Branhamism was a cult.  I asked him whether he was a Christian.  He said, "Yes. A Methodist."

I asked, "How do you define a cult?"

He defined, "A cult is a group of people who deviates from the mainstream religions to follow a charismatic leader."

I replied, "By such a definition, defined by traditional churches, do not that make Jesus Christ and his disciples a cult?  His group was not of the mainstreams; they had nothing to do with the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Herodians and a few others that were well established.  And, as a Methodist you would have known that when John Wesley started his work, there were already mainstream denominational churches.  Perhaps, the group of people who followed Wesley was called a cult by the mainstream religious people, don't you think?  But today, the Methodist organization has become a part of the mainstream.  When a group is small and its faith contradicts the big mainstream groups, it is called a cult.  But when it becomes established and accepted by the mainstream religious movement, it is no longer called a cult."

He answered, "Well, I never thought of that."

I said further, "A cult should be defined as a religious group of people who believe in and follow a certain person, or  teachings, practices, etc.  Therefore Methodism is a cult, Methodist cult; Presbyterianism is a cult, Presbyterian cult; Mormonism is a cult, Mormon cult; Roman Catholicism is a cult, Roman Catholic cult; etc.  As for me, I am not in Branhamism because Branham is not my leader and neither did he create Branhamism.  That you may know, let me say that Wesley did not create Methodism, it was started later by some men.  For me, Jesus Christ is my Leader.  I am following His Word, the Bible, not some traditions.  So you can call me and my group a Jesus cult or a Bible cult."

The reporter did not say much after that.  I asked if he still wanted to write an article about me and my faith and my "cultic" group.  He said that "there's really nothing to write about."

Well now, that did not really end the story.  A month later, I was called up by the law and was interviewed.  Once more, it was that self-righteous Presbyterian man who anonymously made use of certain "force" to try and silence me and my ministry.  That did not work either.  The law was more interested to know if I have cheated, molested, deceived, politically and socially undermined any people at all.

That said, what kind of persons ought we to be as believers of the Word of God?  Does the Spirit of God give us the liberty to foolishly run around and be cult hunters?  It is one thing to expose false doctrines and evil men but another thing to seek to destroy a man.  Just leave him alone.

Gamaliel had good advice for us:

ACT 5:38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
39 But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

Amen.

29 July, 2005

strong delusion

In my recent trip to the USA (from 23 June to 20 July, 2005), I got to hearing about a false teaching that is profusely being spread around among churches and believers.  The teaching is that William Branham will resurrect to minister one more time before the Lord comes to take His Bride.  This teaching is termed as "The Return Ministry".  I have heard of this so-called revelation (believed to have been started by two preachers in Arizona) many years ago and since that time it has deceived quite a large following of people in the USA.  Generally those that are deceived are the Branhamites for they are the ones who hold strongly to the words of Bro. Branham as THE ABSOLUTE, one way or another.

A strong delusion has come upon these people that they should believe the lie that William Branham will rise again in the flesh, or whatever form of body they believe him to take, and that he will once more go around the world ministering the Word of God before Christ's return.  This teaching is based ENTIRELY on the opinionated interpretations of some foolish preachers on some statements and dreams and visions of Bro. Branham.  In deceiving themselves these preachers are deceiving their own congregations.  Deception. O deception!

Where is wisdom − the wisdom of the preachers and the wisdom of the hearers?  Are they true Bible believers?  If they are, why are they not like those wise Christians in Berea who "were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so" (Acts 17:11)?  And should not they take heed to these words of Paul in 2 Timothy 3:16-17?

2TI 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Some of these foolish preachers even dare to pronounce judgment on those who do not believe their teaching as blasphemers.  How foolishly clever!  Either they are creating a fear to hold their congregation or they are truly blind as not to see their very own blaspheming act against the Word of the Lord.

They are lifting a servant of God to be THE ABSOLUTE.  Are they any different from this man (S. Thomas) who claimed William Branham as the Lord Branham Christ?  [http://christbranham.com]  Isn't that scary, devilish? 

Click to read: Branhamism in the very extreme

If the Sacred Scripture of God is not a believer's ABSOLUTE and AUTHORITY of faith, I can assure you that he is still living in darkness.  And the devil is his father for he is the father of lies and he has lied to him.

3 Aug. 2005

lying wonders

Fiction is always stranger than fact.  Too often have I heard of "wonderful supernatural happenings" that took place in the lives of some preachers.  It is not that I do not believe in the supernatural, I do, but the claims made by these preachers are so farfetched that any spiritual man would be a fool to believe them.  However, that is the chief reason why "wonders" are fabricated by some preachers − to fool the listeners, the congregations, to deceive them.  Of course, there are ulterior motives for creating "lying wonders".

Here is a good one that I have heard:

This pastor once testified that he was in his car and driving to a certain place.  However he said that the Holy Spirit came and he experienced the supernatural.  He said he was given the power to command the car to drive by itself to his destination.  Now, do I believe his story?  This same pastor had also, on another occasion, testified that while he was waiting in the terminal of an airport for a flight to a city he was miraculously teleported there by the power of God instead.  Can I also believe that?  Can you?

Some have asked me: "If you can believe that Bro. Branham spoke squirrels to life, why can't you believe what this pastor said?"  Well, simply because William Branham was a SINCERE man but this pastor isn't.  If any man is spiritual, let him discern the spirit and the testimony of a preacher in the light of the Scripture.  Everything that God had done or spoken has a purpose.  So did the words of this particular pastor.  His purpose?  It was to either draw people to himself or to draw away the attention of his congregation from his wrongdoing of mis-appropriating money that did not belong to him.  Like those Charismatic preachers who are ever looking at, and for money, this pastor and others like him have fallen into the trap of serving God for filthy lucre.  "Bread gained by deceit is sweet to a man, but afterward his mouth will be filled with gravel" (Prov.20:17).  Like those false prophets who prophesied to Israel, "a false vision, divination, a worthless thing, and the deceit of their heart" (Jer.14:14), so did this pastor and others that I have encountered during my ministry.  They have no integrity.  In deceiving themselves, they are deceiving others.

Take heed what you hear.  Be wise.  Discern the spirit.  Not all preachers are preachers of the Lord God.

7 Oct. 2005

seeking to correct and judge

Just last month I received an email from someone who thought he had the truth on the subject of the Nephilim (Giants) and sought to correct me.  He wrote (bold emphasis in his email are mine):

Hi,

I have been reading your work on "the serpent seed".  Although you make a number of interesting points, I want to inform you on your errors in the supposed "line of Cain and how evil it was" tact.

You say that Cain's descendants were evil and Seth's were pure.   I draw your attention to your following paragraph...

5.     After Enos was born to Seth "then began men to call upon the name of the Lord" (Gen.4:26). This verse has often been misinterpreted by most Bible readers. Ancient Jewish records rendered that they "began profanely to call upon the name of the Lord. This shows us that the Cainic people had drifted off from whatever little knowledge of the true spirit of worship, which they might have learned from their father Cain, into idolatrous worship. They invoked the Holy Name of Jehovah God in their idol worship. Idol worship is also traced back to that time.

If you read your bible accurately, you will see that this applies to Seth's lineage - not Cain's.  And if Seth's lineage was so pure, why did God destroy the earth with a flood?  I suggest you do your research on the Nephilim mentioned in Genesis 6 to give you insight into what happened before the flood.

I agree with you that Cain's descendants were probably evil.  But please do not twist scripture to support your view.  If your view is in contradiction with scripture, then ditch your view.

At the time of Enosh, the verse should read something like.. "men began to call themselves by the name of God".  Again I ask you to research the nephilim.  You will be surprised with what you find.

I am hoping to read a reply from you.  But most probably wont because what I have to say challenges your precious theory too much.  I would like to see you prove me wrong.

Regards
Simon

Well, when I read that, I felt that the man did not have a right spirit.  Here was a man who had already made up his mind what to believe and His questioning was not to seek the truth or clarification but merely to challenge.  Whatever answers I gave to his questions would lead to an argument and debate over the word "nephilim".  Therefore, I replied simply and factually:

Hi. As long as you hold to the fact that the nephilim are a result of fallen angels having sex with earthly women, then all your questions could not be answered.  And I won't bother to try.  (I once thought and almost held the same view as you.)

RGan

And just as I discerned, here came his reply.  Watch that spirit that came with it:

Richard,

You still haven't answered the question about the wrong lineage of Cain and Seth.  So answer that one first before you start sending pathetic replies.

As for angels having sex with humans, you need to realise that these particular angels "left their proper place".

I asked you specific questions and you in your arrogance started to defame my questions and motives.  Again I ask you to stop twisting scripture to match your theory.

Here was a man who would not rest until he had proven me wrong, if he could.  My simple and factual reply was instantly judged by him as pathetic and that I was defaming his questions and motive.  The second attempt to reason with his approach and answers to his questions only aggravated him.  This is a part of his reply:

You can say that I don’t act like a Christian.  But I don’t give a damn what you say because you are a false teacher... I have had enough of you Richard.  You go on and teach your rubbish teaching based on your ego and not on the word of God.

Further emails from him were blocked and deleted at the server.  I wouldn't want to waste my time on him.  Suffice to say that he is one of many who has a confronting spirit that seeks to challenge other Christians to prove them wrong in their doctrine.  These people are easily agitated and they will even curse and swear.

21 Nov. 2005

almost killed twice

1981 was the beginning of my coming into fulfilling the apostolic ministry.  I had begun my missionary journey to India in the month of April.  Barely 3 months later I could have died, twice, in California, USA.  Whenever I reminisce these events I shudder at what could have been.

I believe that Satan had tried to prevent me from fulfilling my ministry by threatening physical harm upon me and my family. The first time that Satan sought to do that was when my family of four took a trip to Disneyland, in Los Angeles. It happened on our way home after a summer convention in Jeffersonville, Indiana.  After checking into a hotel room we took a coach to Disneyland.  The day soon passed and after the sun had set and street lights had been turned on, we took a bus back to a bus terminal which was just a few blocks near the hotel. There we boarded a taxi for the hotel.  When the driver approached the hotel, he could not get near to the main entrance as there were several cars parked there.  So the driver pulled up about 40 or 50 feet away by the side of the hotel building.  I paid the driver and got out the right side of the taxi. I had my bag with me, slung on my right shoulder. Just as I bent to pick up my son, who was asleep on the seat, I suddenly found myself skidding, face up on the sidewalk, away from the taxi.  What happened was two white-dressed 6-feet tall black guys had grabbed and thrown me to the ground. For a brief moment I was in a daze, wondering why I was on the ground flat on my back. Only when I saw two black men standing over me with one pulling at my bag, which I refused to let go, and the other kicking at me  had it occurred to me what happened.

Instinctively, I fought back while lying on the ground. I kicked back, aiming for the groin of the one who did most of the kicking at me. I almost hit his vital spot. The next moment he reacted. I could see he was really angry. He plunged his huge right foot hard onto my face. Laying flat on the ground I saw that gigantic foot coming at my face. I turned my face to the right and not a split second too soon for I felt the shoe of his foot grazed the side of my left ear as it slammed hard onto the ground. In a flash, I realized I was up against hoodlums whose only thought was to get what they wanted without any regard for the life of their victims. They might also have had knives or guns on them. I let go my bag and watched out for more kicks from them but both men ran down the sidewalk just as the taxi driver came out with his crowbar. Both of us chased them down a dark area with me yelling at them to give back the passports in my bag. Of course, it was fruitless. Why would muggers heed the victim's request when they are hard at their work? So, they got away in a getaway car, driven by a black man too. My bag contained nothing much of value, save for our passports, some Hong Kong dollars and a Yashica camera.

I ran back quickly to my wife and found her standing near the taxi with our daughter in her hands, and my son still asleep in the car.  Across the road was a restaurant that was filled with customers.  They simply sat, ate and observed the mugging as it took place.

After the police came and left, we went to our hotel room. We prayed and thanked God for keeping us, especially myself, safe. I would shudder each time I think of the incident. I could have been killed by that angry foot coming down hard onto my face if it wasn't for the Lord's hand on me.

With no passports we could not exit the country. We needed help. We called a Bible believing family who we knew were living in a suburb near Oakland, at the bottom of a mountainous area. We told them what had happened to us. They graciously extended their hands to put us up in their home while we sought and waited for the necessary documents for the family to go home. It was during this period of extended stay, for some 3 weeks, that death threatened me once again.

I love to go horse riding, whenever I get a chance. The family who lodged us had a horse. One day, about a week later, one of the daughters in the family asked if I would like to saddle up and ride up to the mountain.  I did not hesitate to say yes.  Soon I was introduced to the horse. She was a standard brown full grown mare.  Her name was Abigail. Because I was a stranger to her, we had to get acquainted. After talking and patting the mare, I had her eating some carrot bits and sugar cubes out of my hand as the sister saddled her up.

Soon I was on horseback. To get up to the top I had to negotiate a path which was on the side of the mountain. The cliff was pretty steep but the path up was fairly wide.  When I got to the top, I had an exhilarating view of the San Francisco Bay and the cities around. It was a beautiful day. I trotted leisurely in a circular leftward direction and took the view in for as long as I could until it was time to head back down the mountain.

The path down the mountain was not the same one that was used to go up.  This one was half as wide - only about 6 feet. The cliff drop was some few hundred feet below. Abigail, the horse, had been well behaved and obedient so far until just after she started walking down the path did she, all of a sudden, bolt. I tried to hold her back and called out her name but her head was stiffly fixed forward. I knew I was in trouble. But horse sense (pun intended) got a hold of me to ride it out. For that few brief seconds as she ran off down the dirt path, I glanced up and saw a branch of a tree ahead of me. It was rooted to the side of the cliff and stretched completely across the path. I was approaching it at neck level on a runaway horse!

Once more the Lord's hand was upon me. Reacting instantly, I bent my body to the left and as low as possible and making sure that I was tightly glued to the saddle and stirrups.  It was not a moment too soon. I felt the many smaller branches of leaves brushing against the right side of my face and shoulder as I passed under the tree.

Heaving a sigh of relief, I righted myself on the saddle and let Abigail run down the rest of the path till where the path sloped slightly upward to join the broader one that we came up on. It was then that I tugged and pulled the reins back as I yelled at her, "Abigail! Whoa! Whoa!" that she finally stopped. I patted her and talked to her to calm her down before we continued downwards. As I calmed Abigail I looked back at the dirt path which was about 150 yards long. It was 150 yards of my possible death.  I shuddered. I could have been killed either by smashing my throat or chest right against the tree branch and hung there, or have fallen off the horse and down the cliff.

Two near death events within a week.  O how gracious is the Lord to watch over me and all His own everywhere. The world belongs to the evil one and usually he hates the presence of God's saints. But the righteous work of God will prevail until our Lord returns to claim His own and His Kingdom.  Blessed be the Name of the Lord.

15 July, 2006

Judgers and VIPreachers

Here are several letters that I would like to share with you readers.  (Some letters are shown truncated.) They speak for themselves as to the kind of spirit that possessed the writers. The first one is a handwritten, 4-page letter dated 15 September 1987 and it came from Kenya.  The writer was lifting up a man by the name of Daniel Nditu whom he believed possessed the Elijah's mantle of Bro. Branham.  The letter contains several events that he claimed were witnessed by believers in the church and they were supposedly supernatural events. He believed that they confirmed Daniel Nditu as being God's chosen one for the hour and that he was the 8th messenger.  The writer called my attention to the little photo (which he photocopied onto the top left hand of the letter) and pointed out to me the upside down "?" mark above the left side of the head of Nditu.  He said that the "?" mark appeared in the photo supernaturally and, in another letter, he wrote to indicate that the "?" was asking "who is this man?" As I did not agree with his belief I was told to repent for my unbelieving spirit and to follow the real truth.

Seven years later, I received a long letter from Zambia in which the man tried to correct my teaching on Polygamy.  Of course, the man believed that God authorized polygamy.  He wrote that when a virgin is raped by a man she is considered married to him and cannot marry another.  Then about another year later the same man wrote me and the late Bro. Raymond Jackson in which he tried to get us to recognize him as a man of God who has been given the revelation of the Seventh Seal.  He had a huge manuscript of 670 pages on the revelation.  That's quite a "revelation" if you can believe it.

The year 2000 brought me a letter from a man in Uganda.  His 3-page letter was to correct me that if my teachings do not line up with his, then I must be in error.  Should I not heed his admonition, I am in danger of God taking my life.  What a judger and a VIP!

Last but not the least of all such letters that I have received is this one from Ghana.  The writer also sent a similar copy to Bro. Jackson of Faith Assembly, USA.  The subject on the letter is "AN URGENT LORD'S INVITATION INTO THE MINISTRY OF THE 2 WITNESSES, ELIJAH & MOSES".  The writer has the name "- Elijah" after his name on the top left corner of his letter.  Most probably, he must be referring to himself as the Elijah.

One thing clearly stands out in all these letters and that is, men who are not called of God to a ministry will always try to project themselves as some VERY IMPORTANT PREACHERS that other preachers must take heed and follow.  They will not only judge other preachers' doctrines but they will also warn the preachers by passing judgment.  They act as if they are God Himself.  The bad side of such men is the unwarranted claim of being the 8th messenger, an Elisha, or one of the Two Witnesses. If such men believe that they are called of God with a very special gift, then they should be humble like Bro. Branham.  God is the One to do the vindication. 

05 April, 2009

coffee, tea and beard

While sipping my coffee, I could not help but recall an incident from the late 1970s.  On two different occasions, I was visited by ministers from USA and New Zealand. 

The two American ministers sat with me during the casual meet and brought out a question as to whether I drank coffee and tea.  I replied affirmatively of which they responded saying, "You shouldn't be drinking coffee and tea as caffeine is addictive." They elaborated on the point that, like alcohol and nicotine which destroy the body, so does caffeine. They encouraged me to drink distilled water because Bro. Branham drank distilled water.  Well, I was all ears but not all heart to swallow such a foolish notion. A few weeks later, I met a few believers from another assembly. They saw me drinking a cup of tea said, "You shouldn't be drinking tea." Apparently, these believers had been paid a visit by those two ministers and was conveyed the same "doctrine".

In the second occasion, two ministers came from New Zealand one evening. Both sported a beard. No sooner had we set down was I told that I should grow a beard. Asking them why I should grow one, they replied that all saintly men in Bible days had beards. I asked that they prove it. Their reply was, "It's a revelation." I smiled, thinking how most Chinese young men would look like having a beard — Billy goats.

What those ministers have given me was something of personal opinion but not the Word.

08 Oct. 2009

This article appears in a Singapore newspaper on 3rd October after the recent earthquakes in Samoa and Sumatra It discusses the issue of plate tectonics. It calls my attention to what the Lord showed me back then in February 2005 regarding the shifting plates towards the San Andreas fault in California. [See 19 Feb. 2005.]
Please read it first before reading this news article.

Read the boxed paragraphs. Certainly, we are not far from the final hour of the BIG one.
 

Related link: Sound the alarm, more quakes are due

05 Oct. 2011

While going through my window folders and emails, I came across some emails dated back to 2006. These emails are a correspondence from a pastor of a traditional church. This correspondence is one of many since the website was set up in 1999. The approach seen in this pastor's correspondence is a very common one. Nevertheless this pastor showed some humility but there were many correspondences from other preachers and believers who were very pharisaical. They showed no constraint in their blasphemous accusations, twisting and turning their words to suit their purposes and doctrines. They were very much like those religious Jews in Jesus' days. They could not accept that the traditions of their elders (of their churches) were ever wrong.

From emails…2006

Have you ever thought about why you believe the same thing many white supremacists believe, just with a different twist? Of course in their twisted doctrine you as a non-European or a non blusher are not of the line of Adam but rather of the seed of the serpent. I did have one question: Didn't Eve hand the fruit to Adam and he also ate? Does this mean that you believe that Adam had homosexual sex with Satan? You are being deceived because of your rejection of spiritual authority. May God have mercy on you and at least enable you to escape the flames. Deception is like a strong grip of Satan that is deeply imbedded in the soul. It would reject the truth if Christ Himself was to come down to correct the error. It does not produce Christian unity but rather factions that the scripture warned against. No one in scripture taught your foolishness, isn't this enough, or did they secretly teach it also? Your doctrine refutes the whole of scripture in every way. There is no race or "seed" with any inherent goodness in them! There is no seed of satan in the earth physically, yet everyone is born as a child of the devil because of their spiritual nature being that of sin and darkness and "doing what there father does". I realize that arguing with you will not accomplish anything because now your whole identity is caught up in this foolishness. I just had to respond once to such deep deception. I will not strive with you and I pray you be saved.
From
J---D---

Quoting your two statements:
    * Didn't Eve hand the fruit to Adam and he also ate?  Does this mean that you believe that Adam had homosexual sex with Satan?
    * There is no race or "seed" with any inherent goodness in them! There is no seed of satan in the earth physically, yet everyone is born as a child of the devil because of their spiritual nature being that of sin and darkness and "doing what there father does".
It seems to me that you believe that I am teaching that there is: 1) a race of people with inherent goodness in them, and 2) a race of people out of Satan (seed of Satan), and 3) that Adam had homosexual sex with Satan?
If that's what you understood out of reading my article, please read it again.  I believe, like many who are holding to traditional view and who are prideful, you did not read my article properly.  Most likely you simply gleaned through and picked up passages here and there that you found offensive.  If you think that I believe that there is a superior race of people on earth, then you have misread.
Thank you for your view but do not misread my article(s).
RGan

> 
That is the easy way out; accuse me of pride. Could you answer any of my questions? Make it the simple one. Didn't the scriptures say that Eve handed the fruit to Adam and he ate? If the fruit was representative of having sex with Satan, then did Adam have sex with the devil also? I did read your entire article but I only responded to the points that are in blatant error. Pride is normally recognized when someone assumes they are right and most everyone else is wrong. Factions come from "revelations" that are contrary to the scriptures. Those who receive these "deeper truths" entrench themselves in them and become too prideful in their "knowledge" to accept reality. These "revelations" always work towards division and the separation from the church and they certainly do not accomplish the will of God in the earth. I am a pastor that believes in digging in the scriptures and bringing out the deeper meaning but I also recognize that there is nothing new under the sun and the most in depth knowledge in the scriptures is in plain view when we have the mind of Christ (a mind spiritually submissive to God). You have broken one of the main rules of biblical interpretation: Always take the scriptures literally unless there is sufficient evidence to assume some other form of writing is being used such as hyperboles, prophetic pictures, allegorical statements, etc, etc. Just because you do not understand why God would use literal trees to represent the nature of self verses His nature and life does not mean that it means something deeper. Also it appears you make the same mistake many people do in assuming that God was not pleased with Cain's offering because it was not a blood sacrifice. You will find this nowhere in scripture, or even hinted at. This was read into the scriptures many years ago and has been propelled by it being taught in our bible colleges. The New Testament makes it very plain why Cain's offering was rejected and why Abel's was accepted. Abel brought his firstlings in faith. He gave the first portion and the fat thereof. Cain brought some but not the first or the fat portion of his crops. This is a simple illustration of giving in faith. God has always required the first part and still does. He does not require animals from agriculture workers and he does not require agriculture from animal raisers. I assume you are sincere and therefore may our Lord help you and be merciful too you. Just believe what the Word says and you will not create any strange factions. Also, I had to learn a hard lesson in ministry. Just because God anoints someone and speaks through them it does not mean they are correct in everything that they say or even that they are truly submitted to God. The Lord spoke a sobering word to me one day when He said, "do not mistake my anointing for my approval." Many will come in that day saying didn't I prophesy in your name and work miracles in your name and He will tell them to depart from him because He never knew them; another sobering word.
Blessings,
J---D---

Accusing you of pride?   You came to me with an email that shows your judgement with a prideful conclusion:
    "I realize that arguing with you will not accomplish anything because now your whole identity is caught up in this foolishness. I just had to respond once to such deep deception. I will not strive with you and I pray you be saved."
If that's not pride, then somebody's blind.
You are aware of what you believe concerning the FRUIT and I am aware of what I believe concerning the fruit, too.  If you want to prove your doctrines right and others wrong, then you should seek out those FORUM sites and post your arguments.  And I can guarantee you that you will find yourself blue in the face in debating.  You may have your:
    "The Lord spoke a sobering word to me one day when He said, "do not mistake my anointing for my approval."
That is true, and no doubt the same could be said by any other to another.  The WWW is full of them.  But I do not go out there, read what I dislike and start writing self-righteous email to every web master/preacher and tell them: "I realize that arguing with you will not accomplish anything because now your whole identity is caught up in this foolishness. I just had to respond once to such deep deception. I will not strive with you and I pray you be saved."
Sincerely,
RGan

>
Are we talking about pride? Insinuating you knew more than "traditional" or "denominational" Christians and their pastors, you said all of the following:
"The average denominational Christians generally lack spiritual interest in looking into GOD'S WORD. They are contented with just being "a Christian" attached to some denominational churches or Christian organizations and, therefore, lack the spiritual insight of the Word of God."
"Traditional and denominational-minded preachers have made people to believe..."
"as the denominational churches would have you believe?"
"Most Christians, in spiritualizing Genesis 3:15, can only see that "her seed" prophetically refers to the "seed of the woman" - Jesus Christ born of the Virgin Mary, and that Christ would crush and defeat Satan who could only bring temporary suffering to Him."
Brother, if anyone is "spiritualizing" scripture it is you. Us "traditional" folks are simply believing what it says. For example you write of Gen 3:15 not refering to just the seed of Christ. Take a look at Gal 3:16.
Galations 3:16 "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ."
It is only Christ and of course those who would become a part of His body that the scriptures refered to in Gal 3:15.
Your writing is full of put downs to other believers to exalt your greater knowledge and more in depth understanding and your only defense to someone who calls you on it is that they are prideful?
It appears that your revelations are backwards reasoning; assuming something extra biblical is true and then attempting to match the scriptures to it. It works just like evolution which assumes we evolved from tadpoles and then sets out to prove it and some have even tried to show it in the scriptures. They have actually convinced many poor souls that they are teaching facts.
To give you credit, I did read alot of your materials and many of them are good and well written. You seem to be sincere and wanting God and His truth. The Lord bless you.
J---D---

Hello.
You are again trying to judge me.  I have a right to write and teach what I believe.  My article was not address to you.  You won't get any answer from me when you come judging.  Jesus didn't always give the Pharisees any direct answer to their judgmental questioning but rather with rebukes.  So, why should I?
What do you know about Oriental expressions in Scriptures?  The Bible is not an Occidental book.  When the Roman Church organized they gave the Bible a western interpretation and hence we have paganism in church doctrines such as a HOLY TRINITY and the ORIGINAL SIN WAS CAUSED BY THE EATING OF A LITERAL FRUIT.
I won't answer your question.  Period.
Shalom.
RGan

>
It sems that you do not have any answers. I toned down my retoric and even complemented you sincerely. I am not a pharisee trying to trap you. I am simply asking you to explain your self. If you will not answer and submit to your brothers in Christ then you will not answer to Him either. All judgments aside teach me what you know; if you know something. Adam ate the fruit also; please explain. I truly desire to know your reasoning on this so I may represent your doctrine properly when I talk about it to my congregation. I have mentioned this doctrine and told them that to my knowledge there is no answer from your doctrine concerning this matter and if your doctrine is correct then Adam had homosexual sex with Satan. Is this correct or am I misrepresenting you?
Sincerely
Pastor JDH

Thank you.  I appreciate that now that you come this way.
I can now go to answer your one question about Adam eating the fruit.  First of all, the article on the ORIGINAL SIN was written many years back and have been edited with addition information for clarity whenever there's a need.  This part concerning Adam partaking of the fruit has yet to be added in.
Now, as already mentioned in the article, "to eat" is not just simply the partaking of something into the mouth.  Also, explanation is that the Serpent (not Satan) was the instrument or vessel by whom Satan used to bring about the Fall.  The Serpent seduced Eve into partaking something that was forbidden.  Hence a FRUIT was partaken.  (Let me, at this point give an eg. to the particular oriental expression in the Bible in modern term.  If there is a bottle of liquid that looks pleasant to the eye and appears to the taste bud but it can cause severe diarrhoea and I tell you that if you were to drink of it you will reap its fruit, what does that mean?  Simply, that when you partake (drink/eat) of it, you are partaking of the fruit (the result).
When Eve ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, she actually fornicated with the Serpent.  The result was, of course, death.  Eve was not seduced into fornication per se, but rather she was seduced into partaking the TREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL.  Perverted knowledge was what she partook and it came by way of an illicit sex act.  But Eve's eye was not opened to that as yet and had no realization of that wrong.  Having eaten of the forbidden fruit, she coerced Adam to eat of the same (not fornication/sexual act with the Serpent).  But what was it? Here is where the explanation is most difficult because many oriental expressions could not be so easily explained, esp. when Christians have been for centuries holding to a word for word translation of Bible text.
So, what then was it that Adam ate?  He partook of the same that Eve partook -- perverted knowledge.  Adam knew Eve had done wrong.  He knew that God would take her in death.  That would mean Adam would lose his mate, bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh.  And that would mean he would have no one else to spend his life with on the earth except having the animals, birds, etc. for companions.  What would Adam do?  Simple.  He had to do what His Heavenly Father expected him to do.  Like Christ Jesus, Adam had to SAVE HIS "BONE OF HIS BONES AND FLESH OF HIS FLESH".  So he had to IDENTIFY WITH HER SIN, brought about by partaking of the TREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL (Perverted Knowledge).  (Did not Jesus identify with our fallen state?)  Adam was NOT DECEIVED. Eve was DECEIVED.
In identifying with Eve's SIN, Adam had to have sex with her, of course. Not that having sex with his own woman is wrong but that Eve was already defiled by the Serpent and belonged to the Serpent.  That's why in judging Eve, God said, "thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee".  Her desire had been to someone else (ie the Serpent) other than her husband.  Eve had been deceived by another and Adam, in laying down with her, identified with her sin.  Adam took sin upon himself.  He took the fruit and brought death.
Adam's act was an act of STANDING IN THE GAP such that God could not judge Eve without first judging Adam.  And Adam knew that God knew that he knew that He would not destroy him (Adam) because he was a part of HIM.  Adam was a SON OF GOD, a direct creation, whereas Eve was a by product from his side.  (All animals were direct creation and created in pairs.)  Likewise Jesus came to identify with fallen man and took our sins upon Himself and brought LIFE.  He STANDS IN THE GAP so that God could not judge His (Christ's) Bride without first judging Him.  And also God could not destroy Christ as Christ is a part of HIM.  He was a THE SON OF GOD.  The first Adam, the last Adam, type and anti-type hold true.
J---, I am a 58 year old Chinese.  The Chinese language is a very old language, and I don't like it.  I am never good at it.  I hardly speak it.  In certain particular expression, a limited number of, say 4 or 5 words will have such profound meaning, and to explain them would take many many words.  The Hebrew also is such a language.  The Bible is not English and the transliteration (from Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek), though good, may not have captured the true expression.  Perhaps, you would like to look into this: http://www.wbschool.org/chinesecharacters.htm
==
Now, my questions to traditional teaching of the ORIGINAL SIN are many, but just this one that none can answer:  If the Original Sin came by eating a literal fruit, why is there a need for the shedding of BLOOD, SINLESS BLOOD, as payment for sin?
Shalom.
Regards,
RGan