SECRET RECORDING FOUND: William Branham's Secret Version of Serpent's Seed

When speaking to some audiences, William Branham's stage persona aligned with the white supremacy views concerning the origin of people with dark skin, supported segregation, and strongly opposed the integration of black and white.[1] Branham had a switch installed at the Branham Tabernacle that allowed him to discuss topics such as this without the tape recording (and now transcripts) capturing it.

1961: And I got a little switch here, supposed to be somewhere, that it censor—censor what I didn't want. Oh, here we are. This is it. What I want on tape, and what you don't want on tape. So, brethren, if your tape is a little messed up, well, don't…You can cut that part out. Now, but in there, that way, so many taking, when Brother Mercier and them had the only ones who, could take tapes, why, I'd have them to censor them out there before I let them go out. But in this, anybody can take them now, you see, anybody that wants to take them can take them. And so I—I have to censor them myself, from this switch right here, what I don't want to say, or, let go out over the tapes.[2]

1963: This tape is on? [Brother Neville says, 'That's the light switch there.'—Ed.] Oh, light switch. I see.[3]
Theologically, Branham's "Serpent's Seed" and "Hybreeding" doctrines were based upon the Christian Identity doctrines of Wesley A. Swift. According to Swift, the original sin in the garden of Eden was a sexual union between Eve and the Serpent.[4] The result of this, according to Swift, was Cain.

Swift:
The significance of this is:....that when Lucifer seduced Eve and then Cain was born, then Yahweh said to Adam and Eve....now women shall bring forth in their conception in pain and sorrow.[5]
Branham:
And she said, 'The serpent give me an apple'? All right, preacher, get next to yourself. 166 She said, 'The serpent beguiled me.' Do you know what beguile means? Means 'defiled.' The…she…the s-…devil never give her an apple. 'The serpent has beguiled me.' And then the curse came. He said, 'Because you listened to the serpent in the stead of your husband, you took Life from the world. And you'll—you'll multiply your sorrows; and your conception shall be to your husband,' and so forth.[6]
The racist Christian identity doctrine was strongly opposed by ministers of the era. One of the main arguments against Swift's doctrine was that the Bible states that angels are without gender,[7] and therefore could not produce offspring. Swift and Branham countered this argument by quoting an obscure Old Testament passage from the book of Genesis and a New Testament passage from the book of Jude. "When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown."[8]

Swift:
Today there are many, many ministers who disallow that there is any possibility that there is any progeny of Lucifer. That there is any capacity for Lucifer or fallen Angels to have any progeny because Angels were without sex or gender. I don't know where they hatched this concept for there is no value to this. Besides it doesn't make any difference anyhow because the Angels didn't keep their first estate according to the Book of Jude.[9]
Branham:
Another thing, "The sons of God took daughters of men." And did you know, the Bible never denotes sex in angels? See? There's no denoting of sex in angels. And there's no place in the Bible where there's a woman angel. Because, a woman is a by-product of a man. It'd all be the same, like Adam was both Adam and Eve, to begin with. See? She was taken from his side. So it--it disqualifies their argument, that this was fallen angels.[10]
Though Branham openly promoted Swift's doctrine in various sermons throughout his ministry, Branham rarely connected the "evil race" Swift claimed to have been produced by Cain to people with black skin during the same sermon in public. Instead, Branham divided Swift's theology into separate doctrines on "Serpent's Seed", "Hybreeding", and "Segregation". Using his "Hybreeding" doctrine, Branham established the separation of the two bloodlines and the punishment for mixing them. According to Swift and Branham, mixing races produced a "bastard child", and the result produced evil that required over ten generations to "breed out". Both referenced the Old Testament passages concerning the child born out of wedlock.

Swift:
Well, let me explain to you just what a bastard is. This is a Hebrew word you are talking about. In Hebrew a bastard was one who was begotten by mingling with another race. It had to be adulteration, co-mingling with another race. Today a child born out of wedlock, or whose parentage is unknown is called a bastard, but this might not effect the bloodline of that individual child, not at all. He might still have good posterity, and seed, and only the absence of a formula said or not said as far as lineage is concerned or the title of fatherhood. This was not what was involved in this case. Here:...a bastard cannot enter the congregation for ten generations, thus a child conceived out of another race is what we are talking about. And ten generations is not to long to wait, for we don't want them back at all.[11]

Because some of Hams descendants could have been absorbed by the colored of India. But these descendants are cut off from the race as soon as absorbed and never after counted. The moment they mutate or mongrelize they are no longer counted. This is the way for the race to keep itself pure for its intellect, to retain its vision so that it can build the Kingdom of God, throw over the kingdom of Darkness, and bring Peace and Knowledge.[12]
Branham:
And they'd intermarry, among one another. The Bible said they would. And look at them today. Your boy go with a Catholic girl; when they go to get married, they have to promise to raise their children Catholic; see, vice versa. See, it's to break the power of the other. But what is it? The Bible claims the whole thing's a prostitute. Now what are you going to do? That's right. And how the sins of the people will be visited…We went back in Deuteronomy, and showed that a illegitimate child, bastard child, could not even enter the congregation of the Lord for fourteen generations. That was under the law. And Christ come to magnify the law. How much more is it now?[13]

You know that a hybrid is what comes of two species mixing. The result is no longer pure like the original. It is mongrel. Well, when Eve allowed the beast to mingle his seed with hers she produced a creature called Cain that wasn't pure human. He was of the WICKED ONE. Notice how different he was from Abel. Notice how different he was from Seth.[14]
William Branham referred to Swift's two-bloodline doctrine as a "mystery"[15] when speaking in public or when recording a sermon. He installed a switch on the pulpit in his Branham Tabernacle that allowed him to pause the tape recorders,[16] and apparently re-recorded segments of his sermons without the public being aware.[17] In private, however, William Branham worked with "sister churches"[18] to establish Swift's white supremacist doctrines. Through leaders in those churches, Branham privately spread Swift's doctrines concerning the "Sin of Ham". According to Swift, the black race was the result of the Biblical "Sin of Ham", and the "mongrelization" (black race) was associated with Nimrod through the curse of Ham from Genesis 9:24-27. Branham taught the same theology, often splitting concepts across multiple sermons to disguise the white supremacy.

Swift:
Now; as far as the sons of Ham---we find them moving along with the sons of Seth and Shem and some of them went down to Africa like Kush then his seed became somewhat absorbed down there. But at the time of Nimrod he was a Hamite but the mongrelization was starting to come because the Baal Priests begin calling him a god and bringing in people from all parts of the world. But at that time Nimrod and his sons were white, but now he started taking into his harem these Asiatic women, and here in this kingdom was Terah the Prime Minister for Nimrod.[19]
Branham:
Now, Noah and his sons, which come out, Ham, Shem, and Japheth, come out in the righteous line. How did the [serpent's] seed ever get over? The [serpent's] seed come over in the ark, just like it did in the beginning, through the woman, their wives. They carried the seed of Satan, through the ark, just as Eve packed the seed of Satan, to give birth to Cain, through the woman. ... Notice this now. And out of there, then, come Ham, Ham with his wife, and them. He had a curse put on him.[20]

For instance, all down through the Scripture, we think of Babylon. When Babylon first appeared, look at it down through the Bible. Babylon appeared back there. You know, Nimrod built Babylon. First Babylon was called the 'Gates of Heaven.' Then it was called 'confusion.' And there's where idolatry first started. Nimrod was a son of Ham, which come on back from a son of Cain. Watch them seeds as they come up.[21]
In the "sister churches", however, Swift's white supremacy doctrines were more openly stated. Rev. Raymond "Junior" Jackson, for example, preached sermons on the "Sin of Ham" which resulted in the "curse of black people".

Jackson:
It was the descendants of Ham who first began to go out and really it is the descendants of Ham that began to want to build an empire for themselves. This was mainly characterized through Nimrod, Noah's grandson. Yet it's through Ham's lineage. Now. Nimrod he began to be a mighty one in the Earth. He was a mighty hunter. Before the Lord, wherefore it is said, even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord and the beginning of his Kingdom. It... he's the first one, after the flood, that even began to try to establish a man made kingdom, a dominion. And what little secular histories declare about him, he was a vicious, cruel, evil character. And what little history can and is able to compile about Nimrod, he is the first one to build a city after the flood. He is the first one that began to introduce idolatry after the flood. He is the one that introduces the very beginning of Baal worship. And this Baal worship and idolatry spirit becomes characterized throughout practically all of Ham's descendants in the various areas and territories where they go. This let's me know, brothers and sisters somewhere... It's why we're seeing a great breaking of the colored people today. From the old spiritual spirit back 100 years ago that they used to have and now brothers and sisters, they're taking on this modernistic spirit. 'cause I can see rising in the colored people today, that same spirit of Nimrod. Not too long ago, a certain magazine published and showed pictures of different antiques and things that belong to the colored kingdom of ancient times, and that had to be Nimrod Tower. It lets me know as the anti Christ spirit moves in to try to unify everybody into one great brotherhood. You can't, brothers and sisters, put all races in the same bed. God didn't put all races in the same bed when Jesus Christ came. But I'll tell you one thing, the love of God in your heart can respect each race in his proper respective calling. The sad part of it is we have too many races today trying to outlive beyond what really their race is to be in the great universal earthly sphere of God's plan for the earth.[22]

And he said, cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants, shall he be unto his brethren? Many people wonder even today or how come is it that the colored race has more or less always been a sort of a a laboring type people? It's because right there it is. It's right there, it's just as plain as the nose on your face and the modern world today is failing to recognize.[23]
While the "sister churches" spread Swift's "Sin of Ham" theology openly, Branham did so very subtly when in public or on recorded sermons. Branham continued to reference the "evil race" coming through the descendants of Ham[24] according to Swift's doctrinal teaching but was successful in either refraining from openly stating the white supremacy doctrines or pausing the recording. In one instance, however, Branham openly stated the white supremacy position against Martin Luther King and voiced his frustration against the integration of black and white. According to Branham, people with black skin "certainly don't want [God]".

Swift:
The theologians, their experts, know what the scripture says. But they just cover it up. Just like the World Council of Churches and the National Council of Churches. They know Martin Luther King was a communist. Everyone of them knows it.[25]
I think Martin Luther King's going to lead his people to a biggest slaughter, massacre, that they've ever been into. And they…You see, that ain't going to pull the world together. That ain't going to save us. We give THEM integration. Now it's worse than it ever was. See, that isn't the…that isn't the question. There's only one thing that can: that is God. And they certainly don't want It.[26]
References

[1] Branham, William. 1964, Dec 27. Who Do You Say This Is? "God is a segregationalist. I am too. Any Christian's a segregation. God segregates His people from all the rest of them. They're... They've always been a segregation. He chose a nation. He chooses a people. He is a segregationalist. He made all nations. But still, a real genuine Christian has to be a segregationalist. Separating himself from the things of the world and everything, and come into one purpose, Jesus Christ. But they holler that. I've tried to tell them, "That's not the thing that's going to save our nation. That's only a political scheme. It's a--it's a thing of communistic background." I think Martin Luther King's going to lead his people to a biggest slaughter, and massacre, that they've ever been into. And they... You see, that ain't going to pull the world together. That ain't going to save us. We give them integration. Now it's worse than it ever was."

[2] Branham, William. 1961, December 10. Paradox (61-1210).

[3] Branham, William. 1963, September 1. Desperations (63-0901E).

[4] Swift, Wesley A. 1957, Aug. Crushing The Serpent. Accessed 2022, May 15 from https://swift.christogenea.org/articles/crushing-serpent-8-0-57. "Then altho He placed His sons and daughters--into vessels of posterity in these physical bodies, of a household, as the book of Hebrews and as the book of Genesis declared, we watched the attempt of Satan to subordinate and destroy that race. The seduction of Eve, the infiltration and the promised attempt to capture the household of the Kingdom of God. "

[5] Swift, Wesley A. 1965 Oct 13. 10-13-65 Bible Study Q&A. Accessed 2022, May 15 from https://swift.christogenea.org/articles/10-13-65-bible-study-qa

[6] Branham, William. 1958, September 28. The Serpent's Seed (58-0928E).

[7] Are Angels Male or Female? Accessed 2022, May 15 from https://www.gotquestions.org/angels-male-female.html. "The question of whether angels are male or female is likely moot. Angels are spirit beings (Hebrews 1:14), and therefore assigning them a gender is pointless. The most we can say is that Scripture depicts angels as if they were male."

[8] Genesis 6:1-4

[9] Swift, Wesley A. 1965, Jan 16. What the Father Hath Planted. Accessed 2022, May 15 from https://swift.christogenea.org/articles/what-father-hath-planted-1-16-65.

[10] Branham, William. 1962, May 31. The Conflict Between God and Satan

[11] Swift, Wesley A. 1964, Mar 25. Bible Study Q&A. Accessed 2022 May 15 from https://swift.christogenea.org/articles/03-25-64-bible-study-qa.

[12] Swift, Wesley A. 1964, Dec 16. Bible Study Q&A. Accessed 2022, May 15 from https://swift.christogenea.org/articles/12-16-64-bible-study-qa.

[13] Branham, William. 1958, Sept 28. The Serpent's Seed. 58-0928E

[14] Branham, William. An Exposition Of The Seven Church Ages

[15] Branham, William. 1963, August 18. The Uniting Time And Sign (63-0818). "What a day! What a time that we're living, this great mystery of God being finished; bringing in the Godhead, showing what It is; how these little isms, and went off and made Him this, and somebody made Him this, and somebody made Him that. But the Angel of the Lord come down and brought up all their isms, and pulled out that Truth out of it, and presented It. And there It is, just as perfect as It can be, no other way you could go. There It is, that's what He is. See, serpent seed, all—all these different things that's been so mysteriously amongst the people. See? What is it? He had…This is the sign to what? Unite!"

[16] Branham, William. 1963, Mar 24 - Questions And Answers On The Seals. "And I thought this thing here controlled those tapes, but it doesn’t, see. And this is a—a desk light. And I thought the tape controller used to be here. But I was told to just make motion to the brethren in the—in the room there, the recording room, and they would know when to stop tapes, and when not. See, the tapes has a worldwide ministry everywhere, see, everywhere. It goes into all kind of languages and everything. So there is things that we’d say right here, we wouldn’t say somewhere else, you see, and that’s the reason that we stop it."

[17] Editor, Voice of God Recordings. Sermon 63-0324E The Seventh Seal. "Brother Branham did not want this original recording released. The next day, Monday, March 25th, 1963, Brother Branham went to the motel room of Brother Fred Sothmann and Brother James Maguire who were at that time in charge of making the tapes. Brother Branham told these brothers, “I don’t want this message sent out the way it is.” After listening to the tape himself, he instructed the brothers to stop the tape at a certain point, and at that point (beginning of paragraph number 261) recorded a new portion of approximately twenty minutes in length (paragraph 377-415). This new portion was then used in place of the original ending (paragraph 261-375)."

[18] Branham, William. 1962, Dec 30. Is This The Sign of the End, Sir? "About a year ago. I was having services one night down at Brother Junior Jackson’s. Sitting right here, a Methodist minister that’s received the Holy Ghost, and been baptized into the Name of Jesus Christ, and is pastoring one of our sister churches. Just to show you how God deals with this people, I say this with all my heart. I don’t know of any congregation in the entire world, a congregation together any more, where I believe the Spirit of God is, than in this congregation. They got their differences. They’re sure not up to where they should be, none of us, but they’re as close as anybody else that I know of."

[19] Swift, Wesley A. 1968, Jan 28. Bible Study Q&A

[20] Branham, William. 1958, Sep 28. The Serpent's Seed

[21] Branham, William. 1953, June 14. Earnestly Contending For The Faith That Was Once Delivered To The Saints (53-0614A).

[22] Jackson, Raymond. 1975, Mar 20. The Sin of Ham

[23] Jackson, Raymond. 1975, Mar 20. The Sin of Ham

[24] William Branham, The Serpent's Seed, September 28, 1958. "Now, Noah and his sons, which come out, Ham, Shem, and Japheth, come out in the righteous line. How did the [serpent's] seed ever get over? The [serpent's] seed come over in the ark, just like it did in the beginning, through the woman, their wives. They carried the seed of Satan, through the ark, just as Eve packed the seed of Satan, to give birth to Cain, through the woman. ... Notice this now. And out of there, then, come Ham, Ham with his wife, and them. He had a curse put on him"

[25] Swift, Wesley A. 1968, Apr 24. Bible Study Q&A

[26] Branham, William. 1964, December 27. Who Do You Say This Is? (64-1227).