7 CHURCH AGE BOOK - HEReSIES INJECTED

>DR. LEE VAYLE’S & Kocourek’s heresies exposed<

CHAPTER ONE

SEVEN CHURCH AGE REVELATION

Except the revelation of the seven seals, the exposition of the seven church ages is the greatest revelation that was ever preached by the prophet, William Marrion Branham – W.M.B. in 1960. It exposed the antichrist in a manner as was never in human history. It paved the way for the greater exposition of the antichrist by the loosing of the seven seals in 1963. The Prophet having this knowledge desired to have the seven church age messages documented in a book that would include most major doctrines of his message, as the Laodicean messenger. (Revelation 3: 14, 10: 7).

Dr. vayle chosen editor

A good friend and associate of the prophet was chosen for this most noble task. He was a Baptist minister whom Brother Branham commended as a scholar, theologian and a teacher. Dr. Vayle was not very acquainted with the end time message, and did not even understand the need to be rebaptized until after the seals in 1963. In contrast, he worked on the book, not being baptized in Christian baptism according to Acts 2: 38 for about two years.

Quote W.M.B.: "Brother Lee Vayle was just here today. I baptized him today in the baptismal service here today." (Paul a prisoner 17/7/63).

Book published 1965

Brother Branham said that Dr. Vayle and his wife worked together in the grammarizing of the book, after he sent the seven church age messages to them. He said the book took about four years. In August of 1965, and even up to November 1965, the prophet was still talking about the book coming very soon. How many of the books were in circulation before the prophet’s death in December of 1965, I am not sure. However, the church age tapes were in circulation since they were preached in 1960.

DR. VAYLE ARGUED WITH W.M.B.

Dr. Vayle had his own opinion on the scripture and he argued on different occasions on various subjects with the prophet, before and even during his grammarizing of the seven church age messages. This can be clearly seen by the following statement of the prophet.

Quote W.M.B.: E-55 One of the managers, Dr. Vayle and I was arguing that for an hour and a half the other day. He tried to say hope and faith is the same thing. I said, "No, hope is what you're looking for, and faith is what you got by hoping." That's right. Certainly. It's not a hope any longer when you've got it. It's yours. It's in possession; you got it just as happy as you can be, for it is the substance of things hoped for. (Sirs We Would See Jesus 57-1211.)

Quote: 194 Brother Lee Vayle, if you get ahold of this, here it is. That's the only question we disagree on; he believes the church will go through the judgment. I don't see it. I don't believe it. (Oneness 62-0211).

Here is Dr. Vayle’s own testimony concerning what the prophet said about him that he don’t see eye to eye with him:

Quote Dr. Lee Vayle: Our own daughter being a woman; divorced and remarried. What am I going to say to somebody in this church?... I was dead set against it, and Brother Branham said, “Carol, don’t talk to your dad about this because we don’t even see eye to eye.” He said, “I’ll deal with it.” Evidently that is what he told her because he dealt with it with me... (Lee Vayle – Questions & Answers #10 Pastors #10 - Marriage and divorce).

Please note that this incident could have only happened after God forgave the people for their marital problems, through Brother Branham’s experience on the mountain (Marriage And Divorce).

Not asked for opinion

The service of Dr. Vayle was solicited by the prophet to grammarize the seven church age tapes. Dr. Vayle was not asked to inject his opinion or correct doctrines, nor take away from the revelation of the seven church ages preached by Brother Branham. He made it clear on several statements that he was to only correct grammar, and he even illustrated the items that should be cut off. It amounted to his Kentuckian slangs, example: “tote”, “fetch”, “haint”, “yonder” etc. By the consent of the prophet, certain doctrines were added to the book, which were not on the original messages. They harmonized without inconsistency with the message as a whole.

CONTRARY DOCTRINES INJECTED INTO C.A.B. MADE PUBLIC

Dr. Vayle did a most marvelous work in formatting and grammarizing the seven church age messages. He was instructed by the prophet personally on important doctrinal issues. The work of Dr. Vayle is unique and scripturally right. Nevertheless, Dr. Vayle did contrary to the wishes of the prophet and injected into the book several major doctrines which are inconsistent, incorrect and contrary to the teachings on the seven church age tapes and the message of the prophet. They are pertinent to salvation and include: the new birth, baptism of the Holy Ghost, seven thunders and the rapture. Thus their true identities are “heresies” injected into the true teachings of the prophet, documented in the grammarized version of the seven church age messages. Our subject of “Heresies injected into the grammarized version of the seven church age book-C.A.B.”, is isolated to such heresies injected into the C.A.B. by Dr. Lee Vayle and not the original messages preached by Brother Branham.

First time made public

This work is to expose such heresies, by the written Word and teachings of God’s prophet, William Branham, Malachi 4: 5-6. We embark upon this most controversial subject and feel fully equipped to face any opposition against the facts that we are obliged to bring to the public for the first time, though these heresies were thoroughly exposed in 1989 and kept amongst ourselves at Bethel “the House of God” and sister churches. Because of a recent discourse with Dr. Vayle’s representative, Pastor Brian Kocourek, it has become necessary to bring to the attention of all message believers this most important subject. Message ministers and believers must be informed of such erroneous teachings that are cunningly injected into the teachings of the prophet, contained in the seven church age book. Many have accepted and established those heresies in their churches, since it is the prophet’s book, edited for him by Dr. Lee Vayle.

NICOLAITANISM

It is amazing to comprehend and understand that the very spirit of nicolaitanism that was exposed by the prophet in this very revelation of the seven church age, made its way into his book by the heresies of Dr. Vayle. That spirit has conquered many souls by making them believe that they are ready for the rapture when they are not. This work aims at bringing deliverance to such souls, internationally.

I challenge any man

I emphatically state here that all the teachings of the prophet on the subject of the seven church age are “Thus saith the Lord.” All such teachings which are included in the grammarized version of the seven church age book holds the same credibility. Thus I am not saying that the entire book is full of heresies, erroneous and to be rejected. However, I state in a clear manner, without respect to the person of men, that Dr. Vayle injected errors and heresies into the church age book. I stand ready to defend this work, and further challenge any man to prove otherwise, as I have challenged Dr. Lee Vayle and his student: Pastor Brian Kocourek.

C.A.B. PERIODS OF CHURCH AGES ALTERED

adding trend

Dr. Vayle is about 94 years of age. His trend of adding his own opinion to the revelation of the church age messages of the prophet has not changed. He has altered the period of time of several of the church ages, after the church age book was published with the periods of time for each church age, as inspired by God to the prophet. He has also made an issue on the seven thunders, saying that the revelation of it is the rapture sermon of Brother Branham of 1965, the rapture has started, the rapture is in a threefold manner, the seventh seal is a part of the thunders or a thunder, the revelation of Melchesidec was part or one of the seven thunders, the last part of the seventh seal was broken to the public in 1965, the ushering in of the millennium is now etc. More on this later in this work, and also other heresies.

Church AGE periods altered

Brother Branham’s Church Age Periods: Then after the Ephesian Church Age, from A.D. 53 until A.D. 170, then started in the Smyrna Church Age which lasted from A.D. 170 until A.D. 312. Then come in the Pergamos Church Age, and the Pergamos Church Age begin at 312 and lasted till A.D. 606. Then come in the Thyatira Church Age, and the church age of Thyatira begin at 606 and went to 1520, the dark ages. And then the Sardis Church Age begin at 1520 and lasted till 1750, the Lutheran age. Then from 1750, the next age come in was the Philadelphian, Wesley age; that begin at 1750 and lasted till 1906. And at 1906 the Laodicean church age set in, and I don't know when it'll end, but I predict it'll be done by 1977. I predict, not the Lord told me. (Ephesian Church Age 60-1205).

Dr. Vayle change the periods for the Sardisean age, Thyatirean age and the Smynaean age, and said that an exact date cannot be set for the ending of the Ephesian age.

Dr. Vayle’s Church Age Periods: Paul was both the Messenger to the Ephesian Age… We cannot set an exact date as to when this age ended. there is not need for an exact date, as the Ages, like all other of God's eras of time seem to overlap…Judging by the actual wane of power this age was not longer than about 170 A.D. Continuing to fix the Church Ages by referring to Scripture and history… Sardis…This Age is well known to have existed from about 1550 to around 1750… the Fourth Age… The darkest of all the Ages…This age lasted from about the turn of the sixth century to the middle of the sixteenth… the Third Age… the Church at Pergamos… It last from the turn of the fourth century to the beginning of the seventh… the Smyrnean Age lasted from 200 to 300 A.D. (Twentieth Century Prophet. The Messenger To The Laodicean Church Age - Fixing the Church Ages Historically).

KOCOUREK

Challenged book 12 – dr. vayle’s article

In August 2008, I received a letter from Pastor Brian Kocourek in opposition to a very humble statement that we published about an article of the seven church age book, page 327, concerning the revealing of the seven thunders (E.O.D.H. Book 12 page 89). This started a discourse between me and Pastor Kocourek, who is hailed as the one replacing Dr. Vayle and his ministry.

Kocourek’s testimony

This is a brief testimony of Pastor Brian Kocourek: He pastors Grace Fellowship Tabernacle 2380 Jefferson Street highland Heights, Ky 41076. He came to the message in 1974; played football while under the message; heard Dr. Vayle preach in 1976; got convicted of playing football. He has a website: MESSAGEDOCTRINE.NET where he publishes his and Dr. Vayle’s sermons. He has a worldwide ministry that has gone into 183 countries. He has travelled to all inhabited continents of the world and instructs hundreds of ministers worldwide on doctrine. He said that Dr. Vayle has been his mentor for many years, and therefore, feels a commitment to help present the truth concerning Vayle’s teachings. Dr. Vayle authorized him to answer ministers’ questions because of his confidence in him knowing the message as good as any other man.

Vayle contacted jack

E.O.D.H contacted Dr. Vayle around 2002 on one of the errors injected into the grammarized version of the seven church age book, and he referred us to Brother Kocourek. Many quotations were sent to him of W.M.B., which states that the new birth and the baptism of the Holy Ghost are not the same. He later responded by a telephone call to one of our Editors, Brother Ronald Jack. He advised him to stay with the grammarized version of the seven church ages. However, he admitted that the prophet taught differently to what he documented on the subject of the new birth in relation to the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and said that the seals were to correct all errors, but he does not know of any where that the prophet corrected his teaching that the new birth and the baptism of the Holy Ghost are not the same. Dr. Vayle was very honest, polite, respectful, loving, kind, verbal in his speech, and spoke sensibly. He commanded our respect by his attitude and humble personality. We were able to separate the man from his errors, especially now that he is 94 years of age. Hence, in all our writings, we have never expressed any disrespect to the aged elder.

THREE MAJOR HERESIES

This work addresses three major heresies that were injected into the grammarized version of the seven church age book (C.A.B.):

1. (C.A.B. page 104); subject: Marriage and divorce, that a man cannot take back his wife, but must put her away if she commits adultery. This was the sin of Adam.

2. (C.A.B. page 139- 148); subject: The New Birth and the Baptism of the Holy Ghost are one and the same, with various other related subjects - heresies.

3. (C.A.B. page 327); subject: Seven thunders to be revealed by Malachi 4: 5-6.

Upon the above subjects, I engaged Pastor Brian Kocourek and indirectly, Dr. Lee Vayle, in a friendly discourse.

Arrogant response

The response of Pastor Kocourek was shocking to me, since we had a pleasant relationship for several years. It was full of arrogance, anger, pride, sarcasm, disrespect and full of lies, since he was unable to disprove the exposition of Dr. Vayle’s heresies. It was without any scriptural proof or a single quotation of Brother William Branham to disprove my refutations of the errors injected into the C.A.B. However, he applied carnal weapons of war. He formulated a lie as his defense, saying that I am anti-message and anti-Branham, attacking the teachings of the prophet, saying that the C.A.B. is full of heresies. He was fully aware that I declared myself as a believer of the C.A.B., but my discourse was based upon three major errors injected into the C.A.B. His dishonesty caught me by surprise, as I expected that a man who is replacing the great Dr. Vayle would certainly have an outstanding character and personality, with superior integrity that compels the honour and respect of all men.

My letter to kocourek

Dear Brother and Pastor Kocourek, Greetings in Jesus’ name. Thank you for your response to my discourse Nos. one and two. I also received your first response to the subject of the seventh seal/seven thunders. I have answered both letters and am sending them to you. You are free to reply as we are about to close this discourse.

Our communications for the past years had been very pleasant. I looked up to you with admiration because of our fellowship and knowing your association with Dr. Vayle, whom I respect. Your response letter caught me by surprise as it displayed an opposite attitude that was very unpleasant. It has completely changed my impression of you as God’s servant.

Having introduced yourself as the qualified student of Dr. Lee Vayle, fully authorized to answer questions on his behalf, I expected you to be faithful to your published policy to answer my questions and refutations of Dr. Vayle’s erroneous teachings, by the written Word of God and the message of the prophet, William Marion Branham. Instead, you behaved like a stranger to your own boast on your website.

In your reply, you expressed gross arrogance, anger, threats and hideous lies, even as you lied against Sister Meda Branham, quoting her in a manner which she never spoke of Dr. Vayle. You expressed yourself and acted like a rogue and vagabond against me, who has not treated you or Dr. Vayle with scant courtesies, in my scriptural and message based discourses. By your hoggish, arrogant and proud attitude, I perceived that you are yet a footballer but on the evangelical field, dominated by a sports spirit. You have kicked the Word of God and quotations of the prophet, to score your goals for the devil.

You have not addressed my exposition and challenge to you and Dr. Vayle, by the Word and the message, but dodged the issue by your arrogance, foolish statements and lies. I am doubtful that you brought this discourse and exposition to the attention of Dr. Vayle. If you did, and he had responded, he would have expressed himself like a true writer and gentleman, keeping his discourse within the framework of the Word and message, as his understanding affords him, even if he is wrong in his doctrine. This is evident by the polite gentleness, loving, respectable manner in which he spoke to our editor by phone, which brought about the respectful way in which we handled Dr. Vayle on Book 12, page 89, with full respect, as a great brother who unintentionally inserted the wrong doctrines into the church age book. But your arrogant attitude has brought this to the public, with additional expositions, because you want to act like an elite of the message. You behaved like a grunting pig, unmannerly and unchristian-like. With that foolish attitude, you cannot get anybody to repent, if they are wrong on doctrine.

KOCOUREK TOOK PRIVATE DISCOURSE TO WEBSITE

Our discourse was in progress in a private manner but you took it to the world by preaching it from your pulpit and website, informing me to find your defense there. Your defense has two faces. Personally to me, your writing was like a rogue. On your website you acted like a priest full of love and compassion. I will address your public defense separately. All will see that you are a play-actor, when both of your defenses are compared.

You are the poorest example of the great and honorable writer, Dr. Lee Vayle. You cannot fill his shoe in answering a question, having a friendly discourse and standing in his room to represent him nor his ministry. This you have clearly demonstrated in your communication with me.

I perceive that you got it all up in your head that you have taken over the ministry of Dr. Vayle; you are overcome by your selfish pride and ambition. Instead of studying the Word to show yourself approved unto God, worthy of acceptation, rightly dividing the Word of God, you have buried your faith upon the prophet’s commendation of Dr. Vayle, ignoring and playing football with the Word and statements of the prophet. Seemingly, the only quotation you cherish is Brother Branham’s “we/us” quotation, and the lie you told about Sister Meda Branham’s statement about Dr. Vayle.

LIE OF KOCOUREK ON SISTER BRANHAM

Quote Pastor Kocourek: “Now, I have known Brother Vayle for 26 years and know exactly what he has taught. Further more, I know what Brother Branham said about him, and Sister Meda herself spoke to me a month before she died and confirmed that brother Branham said, "no man understands me or my message like Lee Vayle." (Testimony of Brian Kocourek).

Quote Pastor Kocourek: One month before Sister Branham died I asked her " did Brother Branham ever say, "there is no man that understand my ministry and the Message like Lee Vayle?'" And she replied, "Brother, since the car accident I've had a bad memory, but it sounds like something he would have said, because he had a lot of respect for Lee Vayle."

Evil to dr. vayle

Now, that same lying spirit is upon you, trying to lie to 183 countries, that I am attacking the prophet’s teaching of the seven church age book, after I made it abundantly clear that our discourses are based upon three major errors injected into the grammarized version of the seven church age book. You know that but choose to lie to the world. Since you have made this subject public on your website, you are responsible to God and Dr. Vayle for publishing his errors injected into the C.A.B. This I have kept from the full view of the public since 1972, and when I exposed them in 1989. I am sorry that you have done this to Dr. Vayle. I am obliged by your ignorant attitude, to identify the errors injected into the C.A.B. as heretical articles; and all the heresies of both you and Dr. Vayle because of your public lies advertised on your website. A number will be attached to each heresy. The following is the actual discourse between the author and Pastor Kocourek.

DISCOURSE ON THE SEVEN CHURCH AGE BOOK

GRAMMARIZED VERSION BY DR. LEE VAYLE

ERRORS EXPOSED

I am delighted that you can represent Brother Lee Vayle in doctrinal issues concerning the 7 church age book (C.A.B.) in a friendly discourse between us both, as you indicated in your letter dated 02-08-08. This subject has been long outstanding amongst message believers and ministers. One of our editors contacted Dr. Vayle on the subject of the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and new birth, several years ago. His answer by telephone was vague and suggestive. He referred us to you as his representative, but we never pursued that option until this time when you sought to defend Dr. Vayle by my correction to his doctrine on the seventh seal/seven thunders. We also noticed on Q. & A. on your website that Dr. Vayle authorised you to answer all questions and to solicit his help if the need arises. I wish that you will contact Dr. Vayle on the issues that I would raise since he is the author of the - C.A.B.

Discourse: terms and conditionS

My humble request is that we both keep our discussion in the written Word of God, backed up by the message of Malachi 4:5-6, and also laying aside popular and personal opinions, even as you published on your website:

Kocourek’s PUBLISHED POLICY

Quote Pastor Kocourek: Therefore, all answers that I give will either come from Scripture or words from Brother Branham and I will not give you my own opinion unless that opinion can be backed up solidly by Scripture and God’s End-Time prophet William Branham.

To answer your questions correctly I can not have an opinion of my own. My opinion must be either what God said through His Son or through His servant William Branham. Now, if any listening to this tape have a problem with that, then that is your problem. I know that I will give an account to God for my Words, and I just hope you know that you will one day give an account to God for yours as well. (Questions And Answers no. 1 Why do so many misunderstand the Message?).

Well spoken Pastor Kocourek. I stand just the same on those principles. I trust that you will be faithful to your published policy.

Our communications for the past years has been one of a Christian-like spirit of love and respect. I endeavor to maintain this same spirit in our discourse as I do not get into arguments on doctrinal matters, though I stand very firm on the truth and exposition of heresies, reproving and rebuking with all longsuffering and doctrine (2 Timothy 4: 2).

I am addressing you and Dr. Vayle to defend my refutations on the above subjects, seeing that you are representing Dr. Vayle’s ministry by his authority.

Some have rejected the book as unscrupulous and not the authentic teachings of the prophet, and others believe all that were documented are the teachings of the prophet.

My position, as editor of E.O.D.H., is that certain major doctrinal issues are inconsistent with the teachings of the prophet, unscriptural and erroneous. This is the basis of our discourse.

DECLARATION: NOT CHALLENGING C.A.B. –

ONLY THREE ERRORS

I make myself absolutely clear that I am not challenging or correcting any error on the original church age teachings of Brother Branham, but defending his revelation of the message. My discourse is solemnly based upon the errors injected into the grammarized version of the C.A.B. by Dr. Lee Vayle. It will be a lie for anyone to say or believe that this discourse aims at correcting the prophet’s teaching.

I firmly declare that the revelation of the seven church age given to Malachi 4: 5-6 is “Thus saith the Lord”, but that does not include all the errors that are injected into the grammarized version of the seven church age book.

At this present time I will address three major, unscriptural doctrines which were injected into the C.A.B. by Dr. Vayle, based on the subjects of:

1) Marriage and divorce (C.A.B. page 104).

2) The New Birth and the Baptism of the Holy Ghost are one and the same (C.A.B. page 139- 148) with various related subjects.

3) Seven thunders to be revealed by Malachi 4: 5-6 (C.A.B. page 327).

MARRIAGE & DIVORCE - c.a.b. page 104

ERROR nUMBER ONE –

Heretical articles nos. 688 to 690

Quote Dr. Lee Vayle from Church Age Book: 104-1 ...people ask me, "If Eve fell that way, what did Adam do, for God lays the blame on Adam?"... Now the Word teaches us that if a woman leaves her husband and goes with another man she is an adultress and is no longer married and the husband is not to take her back. That Word was true in Eden as it was true when Moses wrote it in the law. The Word can't change. Adam took her back. He knew exactly what he was doing, but he did it any way. (Ephesian Church Age - Church Age Book Cpt.3).

Brother Vayle is dealing with a very scriptural question. That is, if Eve committed adultery in the Garden of Eden, and that was the forbidden fruit then what was the sin of Adam? His indication is that Adam also committed adultery with his own wife.

I am saying that the teaching and explanation that he gave on the subject, cannot be supported by the Word of God. The scripture that he indicated to support his case does not support it. He dislocated, misplaced and misinterpreted the word of God which the prophet commanded us not to do. (Ref. Pgh. 72 Christ Revealed In His Own Word 65-0822m). I will address this error under 3 sections: A-B-C.

Heretical Article No. 688: An adulteress is no longer married.

A. If a woman leaves her husband and goes with another man she is an adulteress and is no longer married.

E.O.D.H. Answer: It is unscriptural and erroneous to say that a woman is no longer married to her husband if she commits adultery. Based upon Romans 7: 2 and I Corinthians 7: 39, she is bound to her husband as long as her husband liveth; not until she commits adultery.

Romans 7:2 <For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.>

I Corinthians 7:39 <The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.>

Dr. Vayle or Brother Kocourek, I demand that you quote one scripture to support this erroneous, false teaching. Also show one quotation of Brother Branham to support this error.

Heretical Article No. 689: “A Husband cannot be reunited with his wife if she committed adultery with another man.”

B. The husband is not to take her back.

E.O.D.H. Answer: It is unscriptural and erroneous to say that a man cannot take back his wife if she commits adultery. If that is so, that annuls the Lord’s teaching on forgiveness to our offenders. It will also prove that Brother Branham taught us falsely. He was right and you are wrong. Jesus told the adulterous woman: “…Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.” (John 8: 11). Not that you are no longer married and your husband cannot take you back.

Matthew 6:14-15 <For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:

But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

Matthew 12:31<Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.>

MY WIFE, I WOULD FORGIVE HER

Quote W.M.B. 711-109 I'm not true to my wife because I'm afraid she'd divorce me. I'm true to her because I love her. There's no other woman in the world but her... If I done a mistake and they thought I did something wrong, come to her, say, "Meda, honey, I didn't mean to do that." She'd forgive me for it; I know she would. I'd forgive her; I love her. But I'd forgive her; she'd forgive me. But I wouldn't do it for nothing; I love her too much to do it. (Questions And Answers 62-0527).

The prophet taught forgiveness and said that he would forgive his wife and a man is at liberty to do so. Dr. Vayle’s teaching is legalistic, unscriptural and contrary to the teaching of W.M. Branham.

Now, of course we know that was just a point the prophet of God was bringing. We did not have an adulterous prophet; he was sealed with the Holy Ghost and the devil could not break that seal.

IF YOUR HUSBAND CONTINUES TO WANT TO LIVE WITH YOU, THAT'S UP TO HIM

Quote W.M.B. 1014-86 You committed adultery against your husband. You went to your husband and cleared yourself to your husband; then you went to the man and the husband and cleared yourself there. You are clear. If your husband continues to want to live with you, that's up to him. He don't have to do it now, but if he wants to live with you and forgives you, then you be lady enough to never be guilty of such a thing again. (Questions and answers 64-0823E).

The messenger is saying that if a man finds his wife in a fault, he could forgive her and continue to let her be his wife, but he is not compelled to take her back, that is up to him, that is his business. He could forgive the woman, he could continue to live with her as a wife. Brother Branham said she should be lady enough never to do that again.

There is no such scripture in the Bible and William Branham never taught such erroneous doctrine, that if a woman commits adultery that a man must put her away in divorcement.

Heretical Article No. 690: Adam’s sin: He took back his Eve.

C. Dr. Vayle said that Adam took back his wife and knew her, contrary to Deuteronomy 24: 1-4.

E.O.D.H. Answer: It is unscriptural and erroneous to say that Adam’s sin was to take back his wife after she committed adultery, especially based upon Deuteronomy 24: 1-4.

Based upon this error, do you Brother Vayle and Brother Kocourek teach your followers to divorce their wives on that ground?

If not, you don’t believe your Philosophy. If yes, you are doing such contrary to the message. Are all ministers under obligation to preach that doctrine, do you teach them so at your great gathering of ministers?

The C.A.B. has already circled the globe and established that error since its publication in 1965. If you do not believe that erroneous doctrine, practice it and preach it, then correct it with humble repentance. Dr. Vayle, how many family lives were destroyed by that error, only eternity will unfold. This is not a small matter but a destructive heresy. Who accounts to God for the woman’s tears of repentance rejected by her Husband; also the tears, pains, sorrow and life long damage of little children?

DR. VAYLE’S ERRONEOUS ANSWER DOES NOT FIT DEUTERONOMY 24:1-4.

A. Adam did not put away his wife Eve for uncleanness. In this case in the Garden of Eden, Eve went out and had only one act with the serpent.

B. Eve did not go out and become married to another man. The Serpent was not even a man.

C. The serpent did not put away Eve in divorcement.

D. Adam did not take back his wife in marriage, because she remained his wife after the act.

It was a case of Eve being deceived. It was a case of Eve having one act with the serpent and then a second act with Adam. It was not a case of Eve being married to another man. It was not a case of Eve getting a bill of divorcement. It was not a case of the second husband putting her away and she then returning to her first husband.

If this teaching is right then every man who follows this message, whose wife commits adultery, she must be put away by him beyond reconciliation; if not he repeats the same sin which caused Adam to fall. I am saying that this doctrine is wrong.

Now, the scripture means exactly what it says in Deuteronomy 24. You cannot apply it to Eve. The messenger said differently and opposite to Dr. Vayle and the church age book. A question was asked the prophet concerning how to straighten an adulterous matter and he answered as follow:

HUSBAND CAN FORGIVE HIS WIFE

Quote WMB: “Now, this person, if she's the one that's guilty, she has did it; she went to her husband. Now, you've cleared yourself, sister...You committed adultery against your husband. You went to your husband and cleared yourself to your husband; then you went to the man and the husband and cleared yourself there. You are clear. If your husband wants to live with you, that's up to him. He don't have to do it now, but if he wants to live with you and forgives you, then you be lady enough to never be guilty of such a thing again. But if he doesn't forgive you, then that's his own business. He can put you away. Exactly right.” (Questions And Answers 64-0823e)

Deuteronomy 24:1-4 <When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.

And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.

And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;

Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.>

The Bible is specifically making reference to a woman that was divorced and became the wife of another man by marriage. The second man that she married had to put her away and also give her a bill of divorcement and under those conditions she could not return to the first husband. If the first husband had taken her back it was an abomination in the sight of God. Dr. Vayle misinterpreted Deuteronomy 24: 1-4. It is in opposition to the message and the prophet. This is how the prophet applied the law.

DIVORCED, REMARRIED WOMAN – DON’T YOU GO BACK AND TAKE HER

Quote: 678-Q-159 159. Brother Branham, I was married to a woman that had been married before.

We divorced, and she has been married twice since. The Bible states that if we desire to marry... to turn to... first wife. Now, could I turn to her who has been married before or could I be free?

Well now, my brother, here's the only way that you could do it... Jesus said in Matthew 5, “...whosoever marries her that is put away liveth in adultery." So don't do that. No, you cannot go back to your first wife if she's been married again.

...No, sir. Get over in the Levitical laws. You go back to that woman, she's somebody else's property. You've defiled and made yourself worse off than ever. No, you should not take a wife back who's been married to somebody else...you don't go back again. No, sir. She's married to somebody else; stay away from her...Don't you go back and take that woman when she's been married two or three times since she married you. That's

wrong. (Questions And Answers COD 61-1015M).

I am anxious to see how you and Dr. Vayle would defend yourselves against the exposition of this gross error that was injected into the C.A.B. Perhaps you may choose to ask me in defence, what is the sin that Adam committed. That would not justify your erroneous teaching. It may help you to dodge the issue. I would prefer to hold my peace on that question until the right time. Because of the ignorance of Dr. Vayle on that question, he perverted Deuteronomy 24: 1-4 and formulated several heresies upon the subject of marriage and divorce.

It is very hard for internationally famous men to humble themselves when corrected by a little nobody. Your attitude to this exposition will reveal your respect to the Word and message of Brother Branham.

It will also prove your sincerity to your published policy in answering questions.