Talk:The Message of the Hour

the message of the hour
should not be merged  with  branhamism as the later gives a deliberate bias  to what branham said and deliberate ignore some of  the things  he said  which agrees perfectly with scriptures but denoucces  the false dogmas that denominational churches  believe and cherish( for instance, myself being a stonch presbeterian find the teachings of this person very illuminating)


 * I agree. Branhamism is delivered as a outside look at the branham movement as a group it's adherents. This article is more about the doctrines. They should remain separateCool10191 (talk) 16:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

re-write
Hey, I am done a big re-write on the article. Mostly grammatical. I am making it more readable. I have made some changes though. Notably I have changed alot of "Branham Taught"s to "The Message Followers Believe". There is already an article for William Branham. There is an article for an abstract, outside view of his followers branhamism, and this I think is meant to be the inside view of the movement and about his followers and their beliefs. It was reading alot like a religious tract, but i think my re-write has taken alot of that tone out of it. The article also needs alot of references, of course, as branham's followers all know there is no shortage of that. I know how much many of them love to quote Branham, so maybe you point to the sermons for some of the views. Also as I try to rework the article as a whole these are going to be my guidelines, (and you can destroy it or whatever when i am done) 1. i am going to try and write this so someone outside of the message can read it and comprehend, alot of these doctrines are foreign to most people. 2. I admit that branham was the defining man in the movement, but simply quoting him does not prove that other believe it.. I need to link to sources of others in the movement to show how they interpret branham. a bunch of quotes do not make a good article, I intend to summarize and then reference branham. 3. I am not going to write this as though all followers of the message beleive exactly the same thing. some things vary throughout the movement, i am going to be truthful where needed. 4.this article is going to be about The Message of The Hour: to me that title says that is about the doctrines and maybe something about it's adherents.

i am going to start working on this now so, if you have any input please do so.Cool10191 (talk) 19:25, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok the largest part of the re-write is done. Alot of it is not referenced. That is the next thing I am going to work on. Now I know it won't be long and someone is going to come and try to add things back that I have removed. But please read this first! Please do not clutter this article up with quotes and 20 points for each doctrine, etc. If i have put the beliefs wrong, then please just summarize what is correct, do not preach a sermon. In one or two paragraphs SUMMARIZE the doctrine and then reference the Branham sermon or whatever else. Then if the reader is interested in why it is believed they can follow the reference and read the sermon. Branham is kinda hard to follow in some of his quotes, so please understand, just summarize what he is saying in good grammar and reference him. And remember this article is not about what branham said, it is about what THE MESSAGE is, what his followers interpret it to mean. It is about what they believe in their own words.. So if you are tellign someone outside you are not going to tell them what branham believed, you are going to tell them what you believe. I think that is the best way to keep this article readable.Cool10191 (talk) 18:03, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Article Tone
There are no specifics on this page to say what is not liked about the tone of the article. Although I can guess. I am removing the tag. When the administrator, or wikipolice, who added the tag has time, please add the tag back with the reason and I will work to correct it. ThanksCool10191 (talk) 20:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)