Branham's Bible Sources: Scripture, Translation, and Control

William Branham and Bible Translation

Although leaders within William Branham’s cult following commonly enforce a strict King James Version–only position, William Branham himself made use of multiple Bible translations and reference works when constructing and defending his teachings. In public sermons, Branham frequently relied on the Scofield Reference Bible, at times quoting directly from the interpretive notes authored by Cyrus I. Scofield. In other instances, Branham acknowledged consulting the Lamsa Bible, the Emphatic Diaglott, and the Moffatt Translation.

Branham expressed selective approval of these translations, sometimes criticizing individual renderings while affirming others. Despite occasional reservations about J. M. P. Moffatt’s phrasing, Branham repeatedly stated that he fully supported George M. Lamsa’s Syriac-based translation.

Let us read both the King James version and the translation by Dr. Lamsa. To our gratification we find the words in both amazingly the same so that there is no difference actually in content or doctrine.
Branham, Church Age Book

The Lamsa Translation and Christological Implications

Support for the Lamsa translation becomes theologically significant when examined alongside William Branham’s evolving Christological claims and his increasing tendency to redirect authority from Jesus Christ toward himself. Lamsa’s translation reflects the assumptions of Syriac primacy and, in several passages, softens or reframes texts traditionally used to affirm the deity and suffering of Christ.

King James Bible: Jesus cries, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”
Lamsa Bible: Jesus cries, “My God, my God, for this I was spared!”
Matthew 27:46

King James Bible: Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.
Lamsa Bible: Neither his father nor mother is recorded in the genealogies; neither the beginning of his days nor the end of his life; but like the Son of God, his priesthood abides forever.
Hebrews 7:3

While defenders of the Lamsa translation often frame such differences as interpretive rather than doctrinal, these renderings align more comfortably with Branham’s later teachings, which increasingly blurred the distinction between Christ’s unique personhood and Branham’s own claimed prophetic role.

The Emphatic Diaglott and Non-Trinitarian Influence

Even more significant was Branham’s use of the Emphatic Diaglott, a nineteenth-century Greek–English New Testament produced by Benjamin Wilson. Although the Diaglott predates the Watchtower Society, it was later adopted and promoted by Jehovah’s Witnesses due to its compatibility with non-Trinitarian theology.

Branham explicitly recommended the Diaglott to clergy, citing its perceived fidelity to the Greek text.

I was reading and teaching in my church sometime ago upon Pentecost, in a little revival I had. Now, I've got an old Emphatic Diaglott of the original Greek translation, and it's one of the most outstanding things. I'd advise it to any of the clergymen.
Branham, “Thirsting for Life,” March 4, 1960 (60-0304)

In some instances, Branham favored the Diaglott over the King James Version when doctrinal emphasis was at stake. One frequently cited example involves the phrasing of Revelation 17, where Branham argued that “blasphemous names” more accurately conveyed the Greek sense than the King James rendering “names of blasphemy.”

The Emphatic Diaglott from the old manuscript, Greek? … The King James Version says, “full of names of blasphemy.” But the original interpretation said, “full of blasphemous names.”
Branham, “Why I’m Against Organized Religion,” November 11, 1962 (62-1111E)

Such distinctions, while subtle, were often used by Branham to support broader interpretive frameworks that departed from historic Trinitarian orthodoxy.

King James Version Exclusivism in Branham’s Movement

Despite Branham’s documented reliance on multiple translations, later expressions of his stage persona emphasized unwavering loyalty to the King James Version. This emphasis became institutionalized among his followers, many of whom assert that the King James Version is the only legitimate English Bible.

Ironically, many within this movement also rely on the New King James Version, a modernized revision that incorporates textual updates and differs materially from the original 1611 printing. Notably, the 1611 King James Bible included the Apocrypha, a collection of intertestamental books later removed from most Protestant editions.