After reading Part 2 of this series, you might be thinking, well, to err is human after all. Maybe TPM composed that English hymn without giving much thought into it. You might even excuse that as a one-off (It actually isn’t, as there are numerous songs that worship TPM pastors that can be found in TPM hymnbooks). Surely TPM doesn’t teach they bear our sins? Surely they don’t claim the title of “High Priest” and “The Interceder” which rightly belongs to Jesus alone? We’re writing this article to show you that the heretical teachings of TPM has deeper roots than you think. The teachings that are found in that English hymn are found in TPM magazines right from the time of its inception. We wish to bring to light these heretical teachings that are the foundation of TPM’s theology.

The greatest truths in the bible is that Jesus bore ALL our sins (1 Peter 2:24, 1 John 2:2) and then He rose again (1 Corinthians 15:4). Jesus is in heaven right now as our perfect High Priest (Hebrews 4:14-16). As the only one qualified according to Hebrews 7:26 (“holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens”), He is in the presence of the Father interceding and mediating for us. We can rest in the fact that Jesus, a perfect man and the perfect God, is our High Priest.

If it were left to us to bear our sins, we could never do it. For scripture says the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). No other human being can bear our sins either. Only Jesus could, and so He came down from heaven in the form of a man (yet fully God), to die in our place to pay the price for our sins.

In this article, we wish to highlight the heresies taught by TPM regarding the perfect sacrifice of Christ. Though TPM does lip service to the fact that Jesus died for our sins, in reality they teach heresy. As a TPM believer, it is easy to get caught up in the smooth talk and the self-glorification of TPM ministers. They like to present themselves to be as holy as Jesus. Many TPM believers subconsciously believe that TPM ministers don’t commit sins and live sinlessly just like Jesus. When we are under this deception, it is easy for heresies to fly under our radar.

So, don’t take our word for it. The below excerpts are straight from the horse’s mouth!

TPM Usurps Jesus As The High Priest

Below is a quotation from Voice of Pentecost, December 1979

“In the New Testament we (servants of God) are high priests ‘for ever’ after the order of Melchisedec. Every day we have to minister in the Most Holy Place and our standard has to be kept up accordingly. When we consider the high priest he is one who is completely separated from the people, separated for God alone He is answerable to God for everything that happens in the whole camp. He bears the iniquity of the entire campIt is only a servant of God who can unite the people of God and preserve them. He has to be a father and mother to them (I Thess. 2:2-11).” (Voice of Pentecost, December 1979)


TPM ministers are preaching heresy of the highest order when they claim to be the High Priest. Consider the below scriptures that speaks about Jesus as our only High Priest.

But now Jesus, our High Priest, has been given a ministry that is far superior to the old priesthood, for he is the one who mediates for us a far better covenant with God, based on better promises.” (Hebrews 8:6)

We have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.” (Hebrews 4:14,15)

He holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them. For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself. For the law appoints men in their weakness as high priests, but the word of the oath, which came later than the law, appoints a Son who has been made perfect forever.” (Hebrews 7:24-28)

Ask yourself. Are TPM ministers qualified to call themselves the High Priest? Can you read the above scripture and still accept TPM ministers as your High Priest? Is your “High Priest” holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens? Is your High Priest tempted in every way and without sin? If you accept TPM’s teaching that they are the High Priest, it is impossible to answer the above questions in the affirmative.

TPM Claims To Bear Your Sins

Below is a quotation from Voice of Pentecost, September 1990

Sin Offering: “A bullock was brought as a sin offering (Lev. 8:14-17). By laying their hands on the bullock, Aaron and his sons cast on it the iniquity of their priesthood. The bullock was then slain, its blood was put on the horns of the altar round about and the remaining blood was poured at the bottom of the altar. This denotes a servant of God surrendering himself completely to spend and to be spent in the Lord’s ministry. Burning the fat and the other parts of the animal on the altar reveals a servant of God living an overcoming life. He is one who is totally dead to sin and the world indeed. The flesh of the bullock was burnt without the camp. ‘Without the camp’ shows a servant of God bearing sufferings and reproaches with Christ. The flesh of the animal being burnt to ashes denotes how a servant of God, who bears the iniquity of others, is sanctified thereby.” (Voice of Pentecost, September 1990)

Burnt Offering: A ram was brought for the burnt offering (Lev. 8:18-21). It was cut into pieces and wholly burnt on the altar as a burnt offering. This shows a servant of God being filled with the Holy Spirit and offering all his members as a sacrifice unto the Lord. The ashes taken from the altar are put beside the altar at first, and then taken without the camp unto a clean place (Lev. 6:10,11). This reveals a life of testimony of a servant of God who has been cleansed by the fire of the Holy Spirit.” (Voice of Pentecost, September 1990)

TPM pastors often teach that there is sickness among the pastors because of sins of the congregation.

Apparently, according to TPM, the sacrifices of the Old Testament were not fulfilled by Jesus in the 1st Century AD, but are fulfilled today by TPM ministers. TPM searches through the OT to see for places they can insert themselves into. This is intended for their glorification.

According to TPM, sin offering in the OT denotes their “sacrifice” and “overcoming life” of TPM’s “consecrated servants if God. They claim “burnt offering” of the OT is fulfilled in the NT by the “sacrificial life” of TPM ministers.

Scripture says

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” (Matthew 5:17)

For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.” (Ephesians 2:14-16)

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.” (Romans 10:4)

When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.” (John 19:30)

Instead of teaching the TRUTH that Jesus fulfilled those at the cross, TPM distorts the truth and teaches heresy to glorify themselves. How can a Church that claims to be Christian teach such false doctrines? If you are a TPM believer and think TPM teaches the truth, I encourage you to challenge your beliefs with the word of God. Either the bible is right or TPM doctrines are right. Both cannot be right as the Bible contradicts TPM theology. Scripture says “It is finished”, TPM says the opposite. The implication is that the sacrifice of Jesus and his ministry is incomplete.


TPM Claims To Be Interceding By Taking The Role Of The High Priest

The below is an excerpt from  Voice of Pentecost, October 1981 and Voice of Pentecost, December 1979

“Jesus Christ as a true animal of sacrifice – sacrificed His life. A servant of God too must labour for the sake of the people and sacrifice himself. In the sin offering the bullock has to bear the sin and die. Even so a servant of God must labour in the body for the Church of God until they are delivered from their sinful life. In the burnt offering the animal is wholly burnt which in the New Testament means a complete surrender to an entire sanctification by the Holy Spirit. A servant of God must labour and die till the Church is thoroughly cleansed from sin and sanctified by the Holy Spirit. The wealth of the Church is such true consecrated servants of God who always intercede on behalf of the Church in the presence of God. “(Voice of Pentecost, December 1979)

“Only when the servants of God bear the Church in the right way will the Church reach New Jerusalem. (Voice of Pentecost, October 1981)


In the above excerpt, we can clearly see the teaching of TPM which says “servants of God” must bear the sin and die just like bullock of the Sin Offering. They say a “servant of God” must sacrifice himself until the church is delivered from their sinful life. They also say they minister in the Holy Place and with the role as the High Priest they intercede for the church. Make no mistake, when TPM says they “intercede”, it isn’t a general intercessory prayer where every Christians lift each other up and pray for one another. This is a SPECIFIC kind of intercession which is the job of Jesus alone according to the Bible. They have taken the role of “High Priest” from Jesus (or at least partly taken it, as TPM has admitted in other places that Jesus too is a High Priest just like them). This is a heretical teaching. No human can take the role of the mediator and intercessor on the behalf of the body of Christ. It is Christ alone that does it. Consider the below scriptures.

For there is one God, and there is ONE MEDIATOR between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,” (1 Timothy 2:5)

Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.” (Hebrews 7:25)

Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us.” (Romans 8:34)

My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” (1 John 2:1)

Scripture clearly teaches that Jesus alone is the mediator who intercedes for us before the Father. To intercede (as the High Priest), one must be at the right hand of the Father. The advocate is with the Father. How can TPM claim to intercede in the role as the High Priest? Seeking to glorify their ministry and their consecration, TPM has crossed all lines and are in a dangerous place.

What Are Children Taught In TPM Sunday Schools?

The below screenshot is from the Sunday School syllabus of 11th Standard. Look at the way innocent children who should be taught about God’s love, are being indoctrinated into worshipping the ministers of TPM. Right from the very young age, kids are taught to not question the doctrines and accept it just as it is. Parents send their kids to “Sunday School” thinking it’s a good thing. Unfortunately, the Sunday School is “Indoctrination Central”. They’re taught more about glorifying the ministers, their consecration and TPM doctrines than they are taught about God.

The Incomplete Sacrifice and Ministry of Christ

Above is a typical example of poor biblical exegesis. Even though the NT is crystal clear that Jesus fulfilled the law, TPM tries to resurrect the law so that they can become priests and High Priest. When the NT speaks about the High Priest, it clearly says Jesus alone is the High Priest. We have quoted ample verses earlier to show what the Bible teaches. When it speaks priests, it says all believers are priests to God.

But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;” (1 Peter 2:9)


Dear readers. We cannot claim to be saved by believing our sins are shared by Jesus and fallible men like TPM “servants of God”. We cannot be saved by believing mere humans are our high priests. If that were the case, Jesus didn’t have to come down and die the most gruesome death. What hope can you have when you place your trust in the “intercession” of TPM “high priests” instead of Jesus, the one and only eternal High Priest? Every time TPM preaches heresy like this, they are undermining the holiness and sacrifice of God.  We are to point to God alone and glorify God alone. May God give us grace to see the truth amidst all of the confusion and heretical teachings in TPM.


  1. I was tutored by Pastor Joeldass to always include a tribute in my testimony
    “I am what I am only by the grace/mercy of God through the prayers of the servants of God”

    Apparently, he was also coached/coerced into such repetitions.

    He was a sincere man of God, as most TPM workers are/were- but too much indoctrination made grace seem futile.

    I remember him confiscating the specs of a worker and forcing him to trust in God. Reason- that bro was yet less than 3 years old in the mission.
    I don’t want to mention his name because I know he is following this website posts.

    • If I analyse the tribute, it means that the Grace and Mercy of God comes to us THROUGH THE PRAYERS OF THE SERVANTS OF GOD.

      What a Heresy? Lord Jesus Help us.

      • What is the heresy here? 2 Corinthians 4:15 ” that the abundant grace might through the thanksgiving of many redound to the glory of God.”
        Grace can abound through the thanksgiving of others. Only when Job prayed for his friends, the Lord forgave them even though those friends only spoke on God’s behalf.
        You people are bent on finding fault with every thing and you think you have more authority than the Bible. Grace is not made futile as you affirm.

        James 4:14
        14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
        15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.

        The “ELDERS” whether pastors or believers can pray for the sick – Mutual prayers can bring healing, grace and what else…

        16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

        Confessing faults one to another is also on the authority of the Bible.

        • Brother, I completely agree with the verses you have quoted.

          This works best in a fellowship where fellow brethren pray for each other and no one is superior/senior/infallible.

          Even Paul and Barnabbas were rebuked by a junior Paul, when they erred and it verily could have been the reverse if the need warranted.

          If you see closely between grey and white, you will realise that the devil does not ask you for worship, he sets up a king/hero/leader and he instigates you to hero worship.
          This is true with all socialist communist states and also many failed democracies where sentiments blinds reason.

          I agree wholeheartedly with the verses you quote- I see no heresy at all.
          Heresy lies in the handling of the sincere milk of the word by handlers/agents.

          Bro, if you do not mind- let me give you a simple analogy. I hope you take this well.

          Assume there is a baby who has a mother and a nurse.
          The mother has a primary role and the nurse has a role based on the will/permission of the mother.
          If the mother asks the nurse to feed the child with milk, she will say yes ma’am and give the babe a feed of bottled milk. Her role ends there.
          If in the mother’s absence, the nurse is trying to make herself a mother-figure it is wrong.
          If the babe is not aware of the mother, the nurse should not say- I am your representative- without me you will not survive- Until your mom returns, I have been given an elite role in making you perfectly healthy. If you do not listen or make a request, You will never see your mother again. I am the only nurse capable of feeding you- All other nurses have no special revelation or calling to feed you.
          Do you think the babe will become better with these kind of nurses.
          The Church has become a creche because the babes refuse to drink of the milk directly from the word, but prefer lactose products instead.

        • //Even Paul and Barnabbas were rebuked by a junior Paul, when they erred and it verily could have been the reverse if the need warranted.//

          Typo- It should read Peter and Barnabas.

          VOP & PJ and many sermons state that God rejected Barnabas because we see him having no ministry after the dissent.

          This view, in my opinion is also wrong as in the 1st century, there were no nailed down doctrines- The only doctrine they had was to give up their lives confessing that Jesus was Lord.
          The only reason why there were semi structures in the early church was to negate false apostles and preachers teaching unsound half-truths.
          Had there been no wide spread persecution, the church would have been a gathering of like-minded Christians who would gather together primarily to remember the death and resurrection and the promised coming of the messiah.
          They would have been as a team in the body of Christ, fulfilling the offices and ministries internally, spiritually and not merely as a public office.
          In other words, Timothy and then Onesimus became Bishops of Ephesus not as a promotion, but as a responsibility to ensure that the original be preserved.
          Why? Paganism co-existed & ignorant masses would not be able to discern between gnostics and True christians.

        • Bro Thomas, In the Roman Catholic church, Mary is seen as a “mediatrix” and the “dispenser of all graces”. Meaning, grace for believers is given by God via Mary. We pray to Mary and she in turn goes to Jesus and dispenses grace to us.

          What I see here is , Mary of the RCC is replaced with “consecrated servants” of TPM. Those who know TPM’s theology well, will understand what is meant by Grace and Mercy of God comes to us THROUGH THE PRAYERS OF THE SERVANTS OF GOD.. If you have read the article you can see the kind of things TPM claims to be. In TPM, believers are one class and the ministers are a different class. There is a notion that they stand between man and God and get grace needed for believers on a daily basis. Paul in 2 Cor 4 says there will be thanksgiving to God. “I am what I am only by the grace/mercy of God through the prayers of the servants of God” is partly a thanksgiving to men.

          Yes, I completely agree that elders (according to the word of God are married, Titus 1:5-9) can pray for the sick and that we can confess our sins one to another (not to the elders). But please, consider this statement again “I am what I am only by the grace/mercy of God through the prayers of the servants of God”. This is intended to partly glorify the ministers along with God. Consider what Paul said.

          “What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Ministering servants [not heads of parties] through whom you believed, even as the Lord appointed to each his task: I planted, Apollos watered, but God [all the while] was making it grow and [He] gave the increase. So neither he who plants is anything nor he who waters, but [only] God Who makes it grow and become greater.” (1 Cor 3:5-7).

        • For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this is not from yourselves(Or some other individuals), it is the gift of God– Ephesians 2:8

          Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 1 Peter 1:3

          The issue is why do you want to hijack the credit from where it is Due? Grace(through Faith) and Mercy(through Jesus) is FROM GOD.
          There is NO CATEGORY CALLED SERVANTS OF GOD above the Christian. Till you do not understand this, you will remain confused. We all are ONE. THERE IS NO CLERGY with GOD.

        • I hope you don’t mind if in specifically addressing one point in your comment, I also use this comment space to make a few general observations.

          The specific point would be regarding there is no clergy with God. That seems wrong on so many levels, and I’m not sure why no one else is pointing that out. “We are labourers together with God: ye are God’s husbandry, ye are God’s building.” Throughout his writings, and the writings of Peter, and John, it’s obvious that there are those who are given rule over the church, those who watch for your souls, those that rule the house of God well. You can argue if you wish that the TPM designation of minister is invalid, but ruling out clergy altogether seems to be against the teachings of the New Testament, unless I’m misunderstanding what you have written.

          As far as general comments on the article, I think this site does make some valid points in general in rendering criticism, and I hope those who have influence in the church are able to address some things mentioned here. Sometimes, however, the articles here seem to make a straw man, and then beat it vigorously to make a point. The line of argument used for this particular article could have also been directed at St. Paul for suggesting that he was a drink offering, and especially for his horrific suggestion that the sacrifice of Christ was lacking, and that he wanted to make up the difference. Of course, we understand what he meant in context: we understand his heart, and therefore we don’t misinterpret it. But taking his words out of context would make him equally “guilty” as the authors of the quotes mentioned in the article.

          A third very general comment, directed towards the website as a whole. I think there are some people would good intentions, good motives, etc. here. But there is also a lot of bitterness spewed here, and just from a general Christian standpoint, that’s defiling. There have been times where people called out in the comments, wanting someone to share basically some dirt on the church, etc. Any institution that has human beings will have the problems that human beings bring. Beautiful organizations like Focus on the Family, Voice of the Martyrs, have had their share of scandals–even Jesus had some wayward disciples, with Peter attempting murder less than two months before preaching at Pentecost, and Judas committing suicide. I’m not advocating covering sin, or anything like that: but there seems to be, by some, a bitterness in speaking about TPM that just seems unhealthy for a Christian.

          (just a few thoughts…)

        • Brother, the first portion of your query is already addressed in the following article

          Please let us know if the above article does not address your specific concerns.

          As far as the second point is concerned, it is a perspective which we respect. However, the writers are at liberty to write what they feel is necessary.

          For the Third part, we have taken special care not to go for witch hunting.However, to prove a point that these allegations are not just unfounded, we may have to cite some example. This becomes important with TPM because TPM keeps harping on their extra holiness and larger than life picture which we know it is hollow. Therefore, it sometimes becomes necessary to do that. Thanks for pointing it out. We will be extra vigilant.

        • Thank you for your responses. Although there are hotheads in every organization, I feel like the discussions would go better here if cooler heads prevail.

          Regarding the first point I raised, my point was not specifically about “those who rule over,” as the indicated article addresses, but specifically regarding the claim that there is no more clergy in the church (made in your comment, which I originally replied to). Even the article for suggested reading does not assert that there are no leaders for the church, but only that they should not be domineering leadership.

          Of course there are ministers for the church. Are you truly suggesting that God does not call out different ones to become ministers to the church? It’s one thing to argue with the way TPM has set up their ministry, but it’s another thing to say that there is no ministry. That is the quote in your comment that I am referring to (and since your name is “admin,” I’m assuming your views reflect the views of the site in general).

          Regarding the second point, I think it was misunderstood by other commenters but I will respond to them directly.

          With regards to the third point, yes, I have appreciated that the site as a whole has not simply been a place to gossip about sordid affairs. There have been those in the comments section who have asked for details to be brought out, but I have hardly seen people comply with those requests.

          Again, thank you for the opportunity to discuss things with respect.

        • Dear Warren,
          From your response, I understand that we both have a differing definition of the word “CLERGY”.
          From a simple Google Search I get the below definition for Clergy
          “the body of all people ordained for religious duties, especially in the Christian Church.”
          We see that there is a class division within the church with the formation of the CLERGY. Was it how Jesus Established his Church? Did he put in a Class above the rest?
          The Class difference is an import from other religious structures.
          In Matthew 23:8 Jesus Abolishes such a classification. But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers.
          The Body of Christ is an organic one and not an inorganic one. That is made very clear in 1 Corinthians 12:12,26.
          Today’s Clergy is a separate Ruling Class that runs the show.This was not how it was in the original.
          In the early Christian Churches, we see a group of ELDERS in each individual church. Remember, it’s Plural. And these elders are not the ones that we see in Modern TPM Clergy System. They are experienced and matured members of the Body in the Church, unlike today where they are the ones that enter the clergy system and progresses in the Ruling Class.
          Moreover, the seniors/Elders are the Ones Who Serves and not the Ones who dominates and are served. They are the ones in the forefront for the administration ONLY Because of their experience. Check out how Peter mentions about the Elders and the Youngers in 1 Peter 5:1-5.

          However, when it comes to a fellowship, we do not see an ONE-MAN-SHOW as we see in today’s Churches and TPM.
          According to 1 Cor 14:26, clearly the Holy Spirit is the Boss.
          How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

          We have reached this present decadent state because our worship service is not at all a sweet fellowship where the Holy Spirit works in each individual to minister to the rest. In today’s system the Clergy is the one that does everything and the others are spectators. The Boring sermon we hear in each service is a testimony that God has withdrawn from the fellowship. It is a ONE MAN SHOW. For that matter, there is nothing called Sermon in a true Christian Church. But I will keep that for a later discussion.

          According to today’s system, the Holy Spirit has to work Through the official Clergy. The laity has the Job of the audience and not of an active participant.
          What if the Holy Spirit has given a word of Revelation to one member of your laity who sits in the last pew? He cannot come forward and tell it. He is restricted by your system.
          What if the so-called Clergy is bringing in an erroneous doctrine? Will the Holy Spirit be able to rebuke him through a little child in the congregation? NO.
          If a lady is inspired to sing a song, can she do it? No there is an official clergy choir. The Holy Spirit is limited

          Psalm 78:41 Yea, they turned back and tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel.
          The Clergy is above all. The laity has to come, sit, hear, clap and go. Do you get me?
          Please do not expect God to change and adjust with your system. Abolish your babylonian system and get back to the original one if you have to see the 1st century church again.

          I hope you got my point. Please do let me know if you still are not clear.

          Please do watch this youtube video if you get time.

        • With all due respect, your answer is still unclear to me. Perhaps my question is not clear: I’ll restate it.

          My question was based on this comment from your comment: “THERE IS NO CLERGY with GOD.”

          My question is not a TPM-based question. It is a general Christianity question. Are you suggesting that in the Church Christ is building, that there is no plan of God for ordained ministers?

        • Ok Brother…For a better angle, please show me clear biblical proof where you see a special class of GOD ORDAINED MINISTERS above the REST. That should make it better.

        • Dear Brother Warren,

          Good Morning!

          Your question is “Is there clergy with God”
          Your perspective- ‘General Christianity’ or the ‘body of Christ’.

          My answer is YES- There is clergy with God.
          The body of Christ is having only one ‘HEAD’ and that head is Jesus. It has been specifically written. So, Christians have no Christianity when they do not have direct relationship into this one body and also as members to the one head. Our clergy man is Jesus, in our relation with the kingdom of heaven.

          The Clergy system (as of today) is looking exactly like the red dragon with multiple heads and multiple crowns.
          The clergy system derives it imagination and authority from Mount Sinai and not Mount Zion. It appeals to the rabble-rousers in the Sanhedrin who Jesus condemned as having no authority.
          Was Jesus born as a clergy? No- He was hated by them – He exposed them- They were the Talmud promoting Edomite Jews whose aim was to do away with Hellenism, but ended up promoting an unscriptural hierarchy of man made designations and titles.

          Look at this in a different light..
          In an organisation, do you have hierarchy? Yes
          In the human body, do you have hierarchy? Does the feet report to the chest, or the liver to the brain? No
          Why are we called to become the body of Christ- why can’t Jesus have multiple brides according to caste and creed?
          (When there is a decay in my tooth, I can even feel my nails crying)

          Why do we have hierarchies- Its the organisational aspect of any mission and it is not the mission statement or vision in itself. You need hierarchies- only to promote the mission statement.
          Today, the mission statement in many churches do not point to the person of Jesus, but to their own narrow objectives.

          Brother, I totally understand your specific question and your request for a specific answer.

          I want to explain this in greater lengths and with simple analogies and would be honoured to hear your thoughts, however diabolical it might seem to my views.

          The most important thing that today’s so called clergy teaches is ‘We are called’ and what they hide is ‘Every individual has a calling’
          They hide behind the Three ‘H’- High, Holy & Heavenly calling.
          A calling is an internal voice that keeps an apostle in tune with his prophetic vision- We ought not to see our calling from the clanging of designations and churchly bells.
          Did you know that Jeremiah ministered for 31 years, however for the first ten years, it was just him and the Lord in communion.

          This whole discussion is very interesting and I am happy to share my personal understanding and at the same time respect you, even if you hold a differing view.
          Please do come back and read more of my comments and reply- Happy to have a christian discourse.
          My train of thoughts are steaming towards ‘What is Calling’, ‘What is the offices in the Church’ etc.

          Reading matter: Ponder about Saul’s ordination, calling of the judges, Pauline epistles that give an essence of clergyland, but are not so… etc.

          Good day Brother- Thank you for the read.

        • Bro Denzel, this is good one,

          //The Clergy system (as of today) is looking exactly like the red dragon with multiple heads and multiple crowns.//

        • Brother Warren, I don’t think this article addresses anything on “drink offering”. Now that would be a straw-man. The article criticizes TPM for claiming to be our sin offering, burnt offering, intercessor and the High Priest. Which I’m sure you agree (if indeed they claim) would be heretical on TPM’s part to claim to be those things.

          Now, I don’t think the article is trying to put anything out of context. The article even mentions the magazine issue month and year for anyone to go and verify.

          Let me paste the whole section from the magazine concerning sin and burnt offering.

          (i) Sin Offering:
          A bullock was brought as a sin offering (Lev. 8:14-17). By laying their hands on the bullock, Aaron and his sons cast on it the iniquity of their priesthood. The bullock was then slain, its blood was put on the horns of the altar round about and the remaining blood was poured at the bottom of the altar. This denotes a servant of God surrendering himself completely to spend and to be spent in the Lord’s ministry. Burning the fat and the other parts of the animal on the altar reveals a servant of God living an overcoming life. He is one who is totally dead to sin and the world indeed. The flesh of the bullock was burnt without the camp. ‘Without the camp’ shows a servant of God bearing sufferings and reproaches with Christ. The flesh of the animal being burnt to ashes denotes how a servant of God, who bears the iniquity of others, is sanctified thereby. Aaron and his sons make atonement, not only for themselves, but for the congregation too. Through this kind of ministry alone, those who minister and those who are ministered unto are sanctified and made ready unto the coming of the Lord.

          (ii) Burnt Offering:
          A ram was brought for the burnt offering (Lev. 8:18-21). It was cut into pieces and wholly burnt on the altar as a burnt offering. This shows a servant of God being filled with the Holy Spirit and offering all his members as a sacrifice unto the Lord. The ashes taken from the altar are put beside the altar at first, and then taken without the camp unto a clean place (Lev. 6:10,11). This reveals a life of testimony of a servant of God who has been cleansed by the fire of the Holy Spirit. We must be witnesses first in the Church and then in the world outside. “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth”(Acts 1:8).

          This isn’t new information for a regular TPM believer. It is common knowledge that pastors claim to be the sin offering, burnt offering, High Priest and Intercessor. We haven’t taking anything out of context like you are suggesting.

          God Bless.

        • “It is common knowledge that pastors claim to be the sin offering, burnt offering, High Priest and Intercessor.”

          I think that may be overstatement. I, just as you, have not attended this church’s meetings all over the world, so I can’t vouch for what is preached in every congregation. In the dozen or so countries I have personal knowledge of, across three continents, I don’t know of anything preached at that level: but again, I don’t claim total knowledge.

          I spoke of Paul’s reference to being a drink offering: and also to this statement: “Now I rejoice in what I am suffering for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church.” Paul’s suggestion that something is lacking in Christ’s affliction seems blasphemous. Paul asks those who are spiritual to bear the failings of the weak, to restore those who are in transgression (Rom 15:1; Gal 6:1). We are the body of Christ, and we do strengthen/edify one another, in these ministries of bearing, and restoring (things that one might attribute to Christ alone).

          Again, to blasphemously suggest to replace Christ in any of these things would be wrong. But there is a balance. Does TPM overstep in their writings? If they are suggesting, as stated here, that they are replacing Christ, then yes, that would be wrong.

          But as I stated at the beginning, in my personal encounters with the teaching, I do not understand it that way.

          I will be honest enough to say that I have heard people speak almost reverentially about the ministry, and that has not seemed healthy. I know there are issues of relying more on the ministry than a personal relationship with God, and those need to be corrected.

        • Brother Warren, concerning in your statement,

          //But as I stated at the beginning, in my personal encounters with the teaching, I do not understand it that way.//

          Please make understand what you understand when TPM teaches that they can bear sins and iniquity of men and thereby make them just and approved before God!!

        • Warren,

          //I think that may be overstatement. I, just as you, have not attended this church’s meetings all over the world,//

          This is why I have quoted from official documents of the church. I do not have to attend every branch of TPM to know what they teach. I’ve heard these teachings in Sunday School school as a kid and I’ve heard these preached in sermons I’ve heard. To back that up, I have proof of what they teach in the books that they write.

          //I spoke of Paul’s reference to being a drink offering: and also to this statement: “Now I rejoice in what I am suffering for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking….//

          Again Warren, Paul isn’t speaking about the atonement. He doesn’t claim to bear any sin. He doesn’t claim to be the High Priest. He is clearly saying he is suffering affliction to make the word of God known. So in context, what’s lacking in Christ’s affliction is the presentation to the entire world (since Christ died in a particular place with limited audience). TPM connects it with the atonement. That is what is heretical. They claim to be the eternal High Priest (You can read this even in their books “New Testament Ministry” Part 1 and Part 2). I’m not making this up. Also regarding Rom 15:1 and Gal 6:1, none of these claim we are to bear another’s sin. These are talking about helping those who are weak to get themselves onto the right path (Also notice, “WE”, he’s speaking to the congregation as a whole, not a special class of “consecrated servants” like TPM claims). In any case, those verses aren’t talking about men bearing another’s sins.

          //Again, to blasphemously suggest to replace Christ in any of these things would be wrong. But there is a balance. Does TPM overstep in their writings?…//

          But the truth is they are indeed replacing Christ, at least partly. When they say they are the high priest, they are replacing Christ (Scripture is crystal clear in the NT that Jesus alone is the High Priest). They are replacing Christ when they claim to be the Intercessor for the believers (Scripture is crystal clear that Jesus alone is the mediator and the intercessor). They belittling the sacrifice of Christ by suggesting they bear the sins of the congregation like the High Priests of the OT and by claiming to be the sin and burnt offering. TPM teaches this without scriptural basis. They read the OT and insert themselves into places they have no right to be.

          If you like more excerpts from TPM puslications, I’m happy to provide you with them.

        • Thank you for your response.

          I think you’re making valid points.

          Again, in my personal experience, I have never felt like my ministers replaced Christ, or that I needed them to. Am I happy that they pray for me? Absolutely! Do I feel like Jesus couldn’t get the job done in me without their help? No.

          Again, I have reread your reply here several times, and I will continue to do so. I am trying to see if I can recall what you mention here. I do not recall the sense of replacing Jesus with the ministry, but I don’t want to answer too quickly. Sometimes growing up in something can give you a blind spot.

          Again, thank you for the opportunity for cordial discussion.

        • Brother Warren, I don’t know where you’re from. TPM pastors outside India have toned down this rhetoric. So maybe you won’t be able to relate to the points I’m making regarding TPM ministers replacing Christ. But in India, especially southern India, it is not so. Believers are expected to take every decision by asking the servants of God. In reality they have replaced the place Christ should have in a believers life.

          Let me ask you. The book of Hebrews clearly mentions why only Jesus could be our high priest. I was taught in my 11th std Sunday school years ago that servants of God are the high priest who intercedes for us in the Holy Place. This is still in circulation. You can pick up a Sunday school syllabus and verify what I’m saying. So, aren’t tpm ministers replacing Christ (at least partly) by claiming to be high priests? I haven’t heard any other denomination say such things.

        • Also Warren, the passage where Paul says he is pouring out his life as a drink offering on the your sacrifice of faith, is part of God breathed scripture (this isn’t connected to the atonement of sin. Paul is merely using an imagery to describe his ministry). So if TPM ministers claim that their life is being poured out on our sacrifice of faith nobody will criticize them. The problem with TPM is they go beyond what is written. They claim to bear our sins and connects their ministry with the atonement ministry of Christ as through it is a 50/50 partnership with Jesus. The words of TPM pastors aren’t scripture.

        • Brother,
          Can you please show me the role of the clergy in 1 Cor 14:26? Why are we believers continuing to be spectators in the whole fellowship? This One-Man show is totally unbiblical and needs to be done away with.
          I do not see a Clergy role anywhere in the Bible. We all are Brothers/sisters.
          The hierarchical structure that is there in today’s system is called the doctrine of Nicolaitans.

        • The doctrine of Nicolaitans as the clergy system is not a world-wide accepted point of view… It is a popular etymological derivative from the root word- Niklaus or Nicholas.

          While I do not disagree in essence to your comment, I also feel that the meaning can hold different opinions, as early writers themselves differed from each other.

          Another plausible meaning to Nicolaitans are the group of Greek Christians turned liberty into licence and saw nothing wrong in being members of pagan festivities, where sacrifice to idols and sexual immorality was common and legalised. This sect, perhaps believed that they could remain Christians and at the same time retain their membership in the guild, social associations etc.
          Little did they want to concede that they were becoming a defilement to the body of Christ as their semi-pagan attitudes greatly diluted the fervour of true Christians.

          In my opinion here, perhaps Nicholas their leader, who once winked at their unregenerate behaviour must have placed great strictures at regulating gentile Christians who saw Christianity as a Judaistic overreach. In his zeal at reformation, he “might” have placed several strictures, do’s and don’ts, to realign these erring folk back into the meanstream.
          It is from his reformative works, informal hierarchy was introduced which culminated into fool proof ceiling separating the converts from professing Christians.
          You can see here that my opinion is merely the third postulation
          Opinion 1- Nicolaitans are Clergy/laity divide
          Opinion 2 – Nicolaitanism was an antinomian movement whose antecedents can be traced in the misrepresentation of Pauline liberty, and whose incidence may be connected with the special pressures of emperor worship and pagan society
          Opinion 3 – Opinion two plus reformation which brought about Opinion 1.

        • This is a general comment, with regards to using 1Co 14:26 as the basis for establishing a doctrine of non-clergy. I know other references have been made, but that verse is used as something of a proof text by more than one commenter.

          In the kingdoms that God has established, and in the ministries that God had established previously, hierarchy was always a part of it. The angelic kingdom has obvious distinction in its ranks; and even the fallen angels maintain a semblance of rank as well. The ministries of the old testament had various levels of ministry. Christ is a Head for His church, an analogy that makes sense because of the hierarchy in the human body.

          In discussing the hierarchy of the body, in 1 Cor 12, Paul writes God sets members in the body as it pleases Him, and He set some in the church, FIRST, apostles, SECONDARILY, prophets, THIRDLY, teachers, after that… Paul makes it clear that God does establish a hierarchy, that different ones have different callings.

          For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office, he writes in another place.

          The general tenor of scripture is that there is there are established orders and powers. Understandably, Jesus and the apostles taught that authority should not be lorded over the flock: and neither TPM nor any other congregation should practice that.

          And the Lord said, “Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?”

          The Lord does set those who would watch over His house, to tend to His flock. “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God.”

          That is the general language of the Bible, and specifically of the New Testament. I think 1 Co 14:26 should be understood in the light of the whole body of scripture, and not isolated to make a random point.

          I understand the verses about not being called Master/Teacher, but those are about not seeking titles and honor. The positions are there: Paul would assertively declare the same: “I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.”

          “Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task.” The idea that God intended a church without clergy doesn’t find support in the general body of scripture. You are going to run into way too many verses that speak differently than what 1 Cor 14:26 is being forced to mean.

        • Brother Warren,
          I do no know why you feel you can ignore the setup in 1 Cor 14:26 and that too with a sequential setup of 1 Cor 12.
          Firstly, Secondly, Thirdly is precisely a SEQUENTIAL ORDER. It does not by any means give a hierarchy. The Apostles are the Missionaries who Establish the Church. Therefore They are “FIRSTLY”. “SECONDLY” the prophets inspire the new members and give them necessary support. Clearly, the words are SEQUENTIAL NOT HIERARCHIAL.

          If you are really looking out for a Heirarchy setup, you can get that in 1 Cor 11:3

          But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

          I strongly feel that you have a Clergy position and therefore trying to find out legitimacy for your standing. But unfortunately, it does not get support from scripture.

        • Yes, to be clear, I do have a clergy position. I thought my incredulity at the statement “There is no clergy with God” would have indicated that.

          I have no problem finding legitimacy with my standing, as I have referenced a few supporting verses in the comment above.

          For the sake of argument, I’m trying to find support for a non-clergy view, and I find that extremely lacking.

          The idea that apostles, prophets, teachers, etc. is a sequential list is interesting, but hardly finds ground in that passage or anywhere else.

          But even if that is your view, are they not clergy?

          And in the “etc.” part of that list, one of the things God sets in the church are “governments.” Would that not clearly refer to a hierarchical system?

        • With regards to my “ignoring the setup of 1 Cor 14:26,” I feel just the opposite is true. The setup of the entire chapter is to address confusion in the church by everyone operating in the gifts of the Spirit without order. “Let all things be done decently and in order.” There should be an order in how things are done. Following verse 26, he immediately makes clear what the issue is: everyone was coming with their own song/revelation/tongues, etc., but that was bringing confusion, so he establishes an order for it.

          An alternate reading for verse 26 could be (and I’m asking you to approach this with an open mind, as I am trying to do with the positions put forth here) How is it, brethren, that when you come together every one of you has a psalm, a doctrine, a tongue, a revelation, an interpretation? Let all things be done unto edifying.

          In other words, everyone coming and contributing out of order was not edifying the church, but rather bringing confusion. So Paul establishes an order…everyone doesn’t need to prophesy…two or three is enough. Everyone doesn’t need to give an message in tongues: two or three would be enough.

          Definitely his heart is that all would participate: just not all at one time, or in one meeting. Let some participate this week, others participate next week (for example). And definitely there are no superfluous members of Christ’s body: every part has a function, a ministry, a calling.

          In the same tone of keeping order, Paul writes about married woman being mindful of their place in such a gathering, and of those who think themselves to be prophets or spiritual, to recognize that he, Paul, was speaking to them with a greater authority.

          I’m not trying to force an exact interpretation of these things: I’m only pointing out that both role of clergy in establishing order, and the assumption of some sort of hierarchy are integral to the discussion of 1 Cor 14. To read it any other way, to me personally, seems like forcing an interpretation.

        • Dear Warren Brother,
          Surely the entire chapter of 1 Cor 14 is about setting things in order. If setting up a Controlling Clergy was going to resolve it, Paul should not have wasted precious ink and paper those days putting such a long chapter. He could have straightly done that by just a few verses.
          However, Paul’s view of Church Operation was never a clergy controlled one. Therefore he had to specifically write the way we(each one of us) should behave when we come together.

          As the entire chapter is devoted to conducting oneself regarding speaking in tongues and prophecy, he never says a word against actively operating of these gifts. Clearly, he is telling us that each one of us has these gifts. I guess the operation of other gifts were not so much confusion creators. That could be the reason he did not focus on it and just mentioned it in the passing in verse 26.

          Sad to say that TPM does violate the speaking in tongues instruction given by the Apostle, even today.

          Now coming to the earlier point. Paul always viewed the Church of God as the Body of Christ and he did quite a lot of times compare it to the human body. Now please tell me which part of the Human Body is the CLERGY? NONE. Each member is controlled by the head. I do not think you will say that the Head is the Clergy. But certainly some of TPM’s doctrine does replace Christ’s function with that of the Clergy. And that replacement is a Clear Bright Red Light for me.

          Each and every part(member) of the human body has a ministry towards the other parts. No one member’s ministry is controlled by another controlling body part (Clergy Equivalent). So all ministries have to be done by the member always when there is a need. This need is known only by the Holy Spirit who urges each one of us in the right time to operate it. The Holy Spirit Urge will never work if there is a clergy in the Pulpit.

          I would like to say one thing. The Pulpit and the Pew structure we see in today’s churches are totally unbiblical. Historically(Early Christianity) this was not how a fellowship was. This is an import of Official Clergy setup. But that is not the point of this comment. Maybe we can put up an article on that later.

        • Dear Admin,

          Thank you for your response.

          The analogy of the body is used to represent the church several times in the scriptures: one of the expanded uses of that analogy is in 1Co 12. In that expanded use, Paul explores the idea that some members would feel that they could operate independently of other members (the eye feeling it didn’t need the hand, and the head saying it didn’t need the feet), or that some members would desire the ability of other members (the foot feeling left out because he didn’t have the privileges of the hand, and the ear feeling inferior because he didn’t have the skills of the eye).

          Paul’s points here are that 1.) God places members in the body as it pleases Him; and 2.) The body is many members, yet one body. We do not choose our place in the body: and the position we have is essential within the body, though it would be without value apart from the body.

          In that context, of God placing the body where it pleases Him, it is mentioned God has set the apostles, prophets, teachers, etc. The one should not say, I want the privilege/ability of the other. God put each one where it pleased Him: and we were created for His pleasure, not our own.

          Ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular, and God hath set some in the church, first apostles, etc…

          He is directly comparing the members of the body to the different ministers/ministries.

          You were asking which part of the body is the clergy. Overstretching any analogy can lead to strange revelations: but staying within the safe boundaries of what Paul has already written: a) there are at times jealousies/envyings because one desires the role of another part of the body. b) God sets each member where He wants it, and we should work with that. c) some of those members are apostles, others are prophets, others are teachers, others function in other ways.

          **Regarding overstretching the analogy, generally we take Christ as the head, and the church as the body. But here, Paul speaks of conflict between the ear and the eye, both parts of the head. Was he suggesting that in the Head, Christ, there is conflict? No. That would be overstretching the analogy. Here he is using the body as a whole to refer to the church, and that there are at times schisms because different parts are at conflict with where God has placed them, desiring something else instead.

          Going back to the end of chapter 12, Paul ends with a list of rhetorical questions: Are all apostles? [No.] Are all prophets? [Again, no.] Are all teachers? [Yet again, no.] Have all the gifts of healings, etc. Paul is stating that we are not all in the same function, but we are all in the same body, to the same end.

          While analogies can present difficulties, because they are not direct teachings, thankfully the New Testament has direct teachings, directives on ordaining leaders, clergy for the church. Writing to the clergy, Timothy and Titus, there are direct commands for ordination of elders/bishops (esp Tit 1:5-9). So while the ambiguous task of finding clergy in the body analogy is yet undone, finding a direct responsibility for the ordaining of clergy in the New Testament is not hard at all. And it is from such direct statements, and not ambiguous analogies, that doctrines should be establish.

          Bear in mind that I am not writing this in defense of TPM practices: there are those in TPM who rely too heavily on analogies and types and shadows as well. I am writing this in defense of my understanding of God’s plan for clergy within the church.

        • Brother Warren,
          In our Modern world, The Word MINISTER is given the impression of a Christian Clergy who runs an institutional church in some capacity. However, going to the root of the word, it means SERVANT. Nothing More. So every person in the Body of Christ has a Ministry. It means we do have some SERVING to be done for others. There is not even one member who in the body who does not have any ministering activity. But is that the impression you get in any Modern Churches including TPM? I can assure you that almost all of us get the impression of Ministers as Rulers. This is diametrically opposite to what Christ commanded.

          Matthew 20:25-27 But Jesus called them aside and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their superiors exercise authority over them. 26 It shall not be this way among you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 27 and whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave.

          The apostle John, who wrote the book of Revelation, also wrote the following concerning what was already being done in the church, before he was ever sent to Patmos:

          I write somewhat to the ekklesia, but Diotrephes, who is fond of being foremost among them, is not receiving us. Therefore, if I should be coming, I shall be reminding him of his acts which he is doing, with wicked words prating against us, and not being sufficed with these, neither is he receiving the brethren, and those who are intending to he is forbidding, and is casting them out of the ekklesia.
          3 John 1:9-10

          In the early church, there existed a man who thought of himself as one who held a high position and occupied an awesome office in God’s assembly. I’m sure he said to himself, “After all, Jesus has delegated authority to me to rule in His church.” Diotrephes was a controller. He controlled what his brethren should read and who they should fellowship with. He would have nothing to do with the apostle John.

          So, when John wrote the church, Diotrephes squelched the message. He maliciously gossiped about John, refused to welcome the brothers, stopped those who wanted to welcome them and put them out of the church. Diotrephes was a good example of the kind of delegated authority mentality and rulership that we are examining. John describes the actions of this arrogant, despicable scoundrel in his third epistle.

          Where did Diotrephes get this authority to exclude believers from their fellowship…even John? Think about it!

          He didn’t get this authority from Jesus, even though he may well have claimed so. He might very well have said, “I am clothed with the authority of Jesus. Jesus, the Head and King said, I delegate My authority to my duly-recognized office bearers and failure to obey them is rebellion against God!”

          NO! Jesus didn’t say that at all! Diotrephes assumed it for himself and the people believed and accepted it!

          Diotrephes misrepresented Jesus and falsely assumed his delegated authority posture. To be sure, he had his band of followers. They may have followed him for a variety of reasons but they followed him just the same.

          In reality, his “delegated authority” came from all those who allowed it to happen; those who had no Scriptural right to do so. The people may not have “called him Rabbi” or “teacher” in theology, but looked upon him as such in PRACTICE.

          No different as when the Israelites failed to listen to Samuel. The believers (unto whom Diotrephes “ministered”) failed to listen to Jesus and the apostles. They preferred instead to have “those who have been delegated with authority”; they preferred to have “church officers” moderate their discipleship and their fellowship and then, after all was said and done, they were tyrannized by them.

          They failed to obey Jesus’ teachings, warnings, and example.

          I suppose Diotrephes would fit in pretty well among the “leaders” of many churches today. But even John, the apostle of love, found this kind of ecclesiastical arrogance and despotism too intolerable to go unchallenged. Freedom is too dear to be lost!

          The fact that WE DO have so many “Diotrephes” in the church today is a great tragedy. But the fact that many people shrug their shoulders and do absolutely nothing about it is an even greater tragedy.

          “All they which are in Asia” had forsaken Paul.
          Peter tells us that those in the churches he was addressing were “wresting… the… scriptures.”
          John tells us that he was not received by the church, and those he sent were “cast out of the church”.

          Corruption, distortion, usurpation in the assemblies was an accomplished fact, even before the apostles were dead. Down through two-thousand years of church history, how much more forsaking, wresting, and corrupting has Christendom become.

        • In the formative years, when there were few Christians, and mature at that, there would have been no need for a clergy set up.
          However, as more and more pagans accepted Christianity, there was a need for regulation- some had to be enforced. Certain immature Christians also started becoming self-acclaimed teachers, they had to be corrected. Here again, God uses regulation in the form of an unofficial clergy structure.
          Had there been zero clergy in the strict sense, you & I would not have had found uniformity in practice.

          My take- because the early apostles could not set up an assembly in every place they preached, the converts took over, from where they left. They, in turn, would have paid more attention to certain aspects and lesser attention to the mind of God which was against clergy system.

          (Gnostism, Manicheism, early Islam, Saivism, Vaishnavism are some of the sects that sprouted because the Word was left to unscrupulous handling by converts who were still pagan in their mindset. TPM is also another example of Christianity melded with Buddhism)

          We see of instances where Paul did the preaching and Eutychus fell asleep and off the edge; Titus at Crete; Timothy at Ephesus- were they clergy? Answer is yes and no…
          They were clergy in order to help divide the word in its original spirit and letter to the next level of converts.
          They were non clergy in their spiritual fellowship with each other, fully partaking of their fellow’s sorrows and joys.
          Was there a hierarchy?
          Yes- that was only to facilitate the new converts to embrace the Trinity and to lead them to be infilled by the Comforter
          Again, there was no hierarchy in the spirit filled gathering of Christians who seek to grow in the knowledge of the saviour.
          Because, of the meekness in this rule of love, certain elements like Diotrephus, too advantage, even to the challenging of John the elder.

          In today’s set up- the information era- in a free democracy, the clergy system is not at all required.
          How many people are shunning Christianity because of newer churches, newer prophets, etc sprouting everywhere, in the name of Christ, but are drawing people unto themselves.
          Churches like TPM are a different category, for it derives its suppositive theology from the Aaronic priesthood and have revived the same in the Church period. This is again, taking sincere Christians far away from the throne of grace.

        • I once heard a pastor in TPM who preferred to be called brother many years after he was made a pastor. (And in his case, even up to the point of his death, many still referred to him as “brother.”) The reason he stated for this was “Pastor” is my job, but “brother” is my relationship with you. And so he wanted to be called according to his relationship with others in the church.

          I think you are against, not what clergy is in its truest sense, but against what it has become, in its many perversions. And God would be against such perversion as well, though He be long suffering towards it.

          In its truest sense, clergy is this: If you love Me, feed My lambs, feed My sheep. A pastor is a shepherd. Jesus is the Chief Shepherd, because there are other shepherds.

          In Matthew 9, Jesus healed the man sick of the palsy, called a publican named Matthew to serve Him, healed the woman with the issue of blood, raised Jairus’ daughter from the dead, healed two blind men by the road side, delivered a mute man.

          And then if all that weren’t enough, the next verse says, Jesus went about ALL the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing EVERY sickness and EVERY disease among the people.

          It would seem like that would be enough for anyone to be satisfied with their ministry. That seems like covering all the bases. But Jesus was anything but content with the results of His ministry: “He saw the multitudes, He was moved with compassion, because they were as sheep having no shepherd. Then He said, Pray therefore that the Lord of the harvest would send forth laborers into His harvest.”

          The sheep were without a shepherd, the fields were without laborers. And Jesus asked us to pray with Him for this. He didn’t ask that the sheep would learn to take care of each other, He didn’t ask that the field become self-maintaining. He asked that people be raised us to look after the church.

          I don’t think His heart against that: I think His heart cries for that. While you and I may have had bad experiences with the clergy (as did Jesus), to say the heart and mind of God are against clergy as a whole is to misrepresent the heart and mind of God.

        • Thank you, Brother. Appreciate your position. I do not, however, understand it that way.

          The Greek word translated “clergy” is kleros, which refers to the inheritance laid up for all the saints (Colossians 1:12; Acts 26:18). Believers as a whole make up the kleros, inheriting forgiveness of sins and the power of the Holy Spirit. Biblically speaking, the clergy are not a special group of elite leaders. The Greek word laikos, which means “laity,” is not found in the New Testament. The Greek word used in the New Testament is laos, which means “people.” All believers are the people of God (2 Corinthians 6:16; 1 Peter 2:9-10). All of God’s people are “a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession” (1 Peter 2:9a NIV). Therefore, the distinction between clergy and laity, as most understand it today, is not biblical.

          While believers have different callings and gifts (Romans 12:6), all are servants of the Lord (Romans 14:4). There exists in the Bible a distinction between one gift and another, but those distinctions refer to functions within the church, not to position. For example, one may be gifted to preach, to shepherd, to teach, or to lead, but all are brothers and sisters in Christ, one with Christ and with one another (Hebrews 13:1; John 17:20-23; Romans 12:14-15).

          Paul considered himself a “brother” and “fellow servant” with Tychicus (Colossians 4:7), Epaphras (Colossians 1:7), Epaphroditus (Philippians 2:25), and Silvanus (1 Peter 5:12). The apostles never talked in terms of “us” and “them” in the context of serving Christ. They considered themselves to be fellow laborers with all believers in the church.

          It was not until the third century that “clergy” was employed to designate a limited number of persons who functioned in the church. Gradually, the professional, full-time ministers were seen as a special, separate class instead of as fellow servants of Jesus Christ. Out of this mindset grew the hierarchical system in which the distance between clergy and laity increased, seen in the use of titles such as “Pastor Smith,” “Reverend Jones,” and “Father Brown.” Such a distance is not biblical.

          Jesus warned against the use of honorific titles that would draw the distinction between believers. He saw the corruption of the scribes and Pharisees as a result of elevating one group over another. “But you,” He said, referring to His followers, “are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ. The greatest among you shall be your servant” (Matthew 23:8-11).

          Bible passages such as 1 Corinthians 12–14, much of Ephesians, and Romans 12 all emphasize the real brotherhood of the saints in Jesus Christ and the humility required of all believers as we exercise our spiritual gifts and callings to benefit the body of Christ.

        • Though much has been said, it is not good to make it more lengthy! But i felt urged to place my views on the same!Forgive me for making you read more!

          As for the clergy debate, I think no one is opposing, that there should be a pastor in church or not, who can teach people word of God. But the idea of imposing his teachings as absolute truth and not open to correction from any believer is what is questioned. (Admin has made this clear in his last comment using example of Diotrephes)!

          The hierarchial order (within the clergy system) that brother Warren is advocating is no where supported in scriptures! Usage of words “first , second, third, etc” in I Corn 12 is not used to support ranking system. If so then what about I Corn 4:9 where apostles are termed as Last? Peter in his epistle says elder = apostle (1Pet 5:1).

          In the Old Testament there was post of priest and high priest within the clergy system. But the mind of God behind establishing two orders within the clergy system must be understood first otherwise we will end up in creating hierarchial clergy system like Catholic church and Tpm church. The post of high priest in OT was symbolic pointing to Jesus and every member of Israel was called kingdom of priests.” There was only one post of high priest which God meant to refer to post of one mediator which is Jesus.

          In the new testament Jesus in most clear words said, ” This should not be among you (among disciples), ye are ALL brothers… there is one master (rabbi=ruler=God) for you.” Peter never claimed as pope of the church. Apostles were respected because of their association with Jesus and it never meant they were not open to correction. We have clear picture of that when Paul rebuked Peter. Paul applauds Berrians because they didnt blindly believe teachings of miracle working Paul but checked it from scriptures. Therefore he applauded the idea that he was not taken as authority but scripture was considered authority by Berrians.

          As for me there can be division based on fuctions but no division should be based on power authority level ranking or seniority etc. Division based on functions means some can be teacher, some can be prophets. But there should not be ranking as to prophets are higher in power and authority than a singer or teacher. Paul clearly explains through the analogy of body that, different members of body have different function but no member is given higher ranking (I Cor 12:25). There should be no schimism he says. He rather says the members without any function in church should be given more more honour (1Corn 12:24). Which means one who is not a pastor nor singer nor prophet but a lay member is to honoured more. To this testimony of Jesus affirms. Jesus said he who thinks himself great must serve the least.

          TPM workers have been brainwashed to think themselves as apostolic. ( I have read you are not advocating Tpm). If you look at history you’ll find that the idea of of calling oneself apostolic originated in second and third century. The intension behind claiming apostolic origin was to create impression of authority. In history of Christendom many groups arose claiming apostolic origin and brought in heretical teachings. Finally from 1920 onwards another group called Tpm arose who also claimed to be apostolic. With this mindset Tpm workers try to create a impression that the word of clergy being of apostolic origin is final and unquestionable and this is what is opposed here! If there is a genuine Christian he will give scriptures as final authority rather than traditions of his organisation and thereby he wont feel any need to defend any apostolic origin claim for his clergy position.

        • {The apostles never talked in terms of “us” and “them” in the context of serving Christ.}

          Actually, they very much did speak in terms of “us” (the ministry) and “you” (the church). An example I mentioned earlier, is when Paul refers to the ministers as “laborers together with God” and to the church as “God’s husbandry, God’s building.” In 1Cor 3 & 4, he repeatedly goes back and forth between “us” the apostles, the ministers of the church, and “you” the ones to whom “we” minister.

          Paul commended the Bereans for searching the scriptures: he also commended the Thessalonians for accepting their word as the word of God.

          Am I personally comfortable with assuming a minister is always speaking God’s word? No. Do I assume a ministry, even an “apostolic” ministry is infallible? No. Judas was an apostle, and he failed. Peter was an apostle, and he stumbled on several occasions, including after Pentecost.

          Yet, to show the importance of an apostle, Jesus is called the Apostle and High Priest of our profession (Heb 3:1). If Christ is called an apostle, then it is not a light thing.

          I have appreciated your dialog, and your labors to help me to see things the way you see them. Until now, I haven’t found the arguments set forth convincing, but I’m willing to continue to look at the matter.

          Most of the verses used are those which emphasize that the ministry should not be position/title seekers, seeking honor coming from men, etc.

          Yet to desire the office of a bishop is a good thing, according the Bible, so that is there.

          I welcome additional comments on the subject, but I may abstain from responding, simply because I am pleased that the discussion has remained cordial, and that is the greater gain. (To win your brother, not necessarily with the argument.)

        • //Actually, they very much did speak in terms of “us” (the ministry) and “you” (the church). An example I mentioned earlier, is when Paul refers to the ministers as “laborers together with God” and to the church as “God’s husbandry, God’s building.” In 1Cor 3 & 4, he repeatedly goes back and forth between “us” the apostles, the ministers of the church, and “you” the ones to whom “we” minister.//

          It is a language construct when we say we/me to you. However, at no point, Paul is excluding himself from God’s Husbandry or his Building or his Bride.
          From God’s perspective, Paul is the part of the Church/Husbandry/Building/Bride. It is the desire of the Clergy to somehow superimpose on the rest which is quite unGodly.

          TPM Ministers are nothing more than an organization worker. For an organization worker to lay claim of being a Apostle/Minister etc. and take the same sentence as written by Paul to claim superiority is nothing short of imposing themselves upon others.

        • Warren, I wish to make one comment on Heb 3:1. The word “apostle” means “one who is sent”. So Jesus is called an apostle because God the Father sent Him to earth with a mission. Having completed it, he is in the presence of the Father as our eternal High Priest.

          Just because Jesus is called an apostle, doesn’t mean the apostles that Jesus “sent out” have the same position as Jesus (Not that you said it). But I’ve seen TPM ministers conflate this and teach just because Jesus is called an apostle and later the High Priest, they too are High Priest. That is a gross error.

          Concerning leaders in the church, the intention of Paul was to appoint EXEMPLARY men to be elders. Leader is someone who leads by example. Not as a ruler of this earth, but who lives as an example to the congregation. Paul says in 1 Cor 4 “Be you followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.”. That is what makes one a leader. But I fail to see the TPM style distinction in the bible. In the bible elders were family men who led an exemplary family life and they were chosen from among the very congregation that he was to serve so they people knew for certain the elder was an exemplary Chrisitan. There may be distinction in the role one plays as part of the Body of Christ. But they were equal in every sense. In “you” and “us” seen in 1 Cor 3 and 4 were down to the people in Corinthians trying to make a divide between Paul and Apollos. Paul says he isn’t able to speak to them as spiritual people. That is the reason for the “you” and “us”. Paul clearly states the one who plants is nothing and neither the one who waters. Of course Paul was a teacher, and had the authority to teach the word of God but he considered every believer his equal. He didn’t have a notion that he was destined for “zion” and a lower class believers were destined for “New Jerusalem” and “New Earth”. I hope you get my point.

          So to reiterate, there is a distinction in terms of role played to build God’s church, but absolutely no distinction in terms of standing with God.

        • Thanks again for the replies/responses.

          I had mentioned once before that the anti-TPM bias can cloud your vision, just as a TPM bias can.

          It seems like the ideas against clergy are more against the TPM version of an exclusive clergy, complete with special eternal distinction as well.

          I was merely advocating the idea of clergy, period. (My comments begin in response to the comment posted here: “There is no clergy with God.”)

          While I understand that the idea was to appoint leaders from each local assembly to look after the assembly, 1. That’s still an ordination to an office, and 2. That still required someone over them (hierarchy) to ordain those elders.

          Also, that was not the only way things were handled. Timothy, Titus, and others were posted at different places, according to the need. They were not simply assigned to the place in which they grew up.

          And finally, the we/you language is throughout the epistles. I only referenced 1 Cor 3-4. But I would ask you with an open mind to read through the epistles, and see if you are not amazed how many times the distinction is clearly made.

          “Death worketh in us, but life in you.”

          “Whether we be afflicted, it is for your consolation and salvation.”

          “Ye helping together by prayer for us”

          “We are your rejoicing, even as ye also our ours”

          “Ye are our epistle”

          “We preach Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake”

          “We commend not ourselves to you, but give you occasion to glory on our behalf”

          “We are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be reconciled to God”

          “We then, as workers together with Him, beseech you also”

          “Our mouth is open unto you, our heart is enlarged. You are not straitened in us, but you are straitened in your own bowels”

          “Our hearts are to die and live with you”

          “Titus is my partner and fellowhelper concerning you: our brethren are the messengers of the churches, and the glory of Christ”

          “Our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction”

          “that which comes upon me daily, the care of all the churches”

          etc., etc. 🙂

          I said I would refrain from responding, and I should abide by that. I am blessed with the discussion, as iron sharpens iron. Thank you for your patience in reading my long posts as well.

        • It’s not at all surprising for me to see this kind of thought process in you. Having been a clergy for long enough will make your thinking oriented in that direction. I understand that letting go off that baggage is very tough.

          Every overarching Clergy will try to put themselves in the category of Paul and then use those wordings at people of their congregation. They seldom realize that they are Organizational Workers(Not Apostles or Prophets or teachers etc) who are not called by God for any Paul kind of Work. It’s high time our TPM Clergy realize that they have joined a corporate Religious Institution and it has got nothing to do with God. Today’s TPM Clergy has No Evangelization, No Suffering for Christ’s sake, No Fruits of Spirit, No Gifts of Spirit, Does not work in secular jobs like Paul, no power but only manipulative words comparing themselves to Paul whereas Paul never made himself the clergy they are trying to project.

          I would have gladly responded to all the above statements.But just as you mentioned, I am glad to stop this discussion here.

        • //Sometimes, however, the articles here seem to make a straw man, and then beat it vigorously to make a point.//

          Brother, that is what an iconoclast does- he breaks idols and doesn’t bow down to it.
          Its better than citing specific examples and formenting grapevine.

        • I’m not sure if the reference to a “straw man” is understood.

          For example, the quote taken from Pastor AC Thomas’ message about Jesus dying to satisfy the demands of Satan. That is an obviously wrong statement, though it persists in modern Christianity.

          While Pastor AC Thomas’ statement is wrong, the fact is his statement was not in line with TPM’s own doctrine books on the subject of redemption. That is what I am referring to by a “straw man.” Taking an isolated incident, which doesn’t actually reflect the church as a whole, and placing much attention on that, and going through great lengths to debunk it–whereas a simple reference to the doctrine would have shown that was an isolated error, and not a general teaching of the church.

          I don’t say that the one writing the article was being intentionally dishonest in misrepresenting the church’s teaching in that article: but the fact is it was an inaccurate representation.

        • Warren, the message by AC Thomas is still in circulation. If TPM chooses to pull that from circulation and publicly denounces this particular theory of atonement, then it’s all good. TPM doesn’t have any fixed “statement of belief”. In TPM anything a pastor teaches is considered “official”. I shared this clip with a few staunch tpm folks and they are in agreement with what AC says. According to them any word from pastor AC is the word of God.

          Secondly, this isn’t a strawman. We are criticizing a particular public sermon made by AC using the word of God. This is the definition of a strawman – “A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent’s argument, while refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent”. We are refuting an argument that AC made. So clearly, this isn’t a strawman.

        • Again, I have never heard this taught in TPM myself. And I have heard pastors specifically teaching against this teaching. So I am surprised that the mistake was made by Pastor AC Thomas.

          But because I personally have not heard that taught by the church, and have personally heard teachings against that line of reasoning, to me it seemed like a straw man, because to me it does not reflect the actual teachings of the church. (Especially what is in print, with regards to redemption in their doctrine book.)

          I have mentioned in an earlier comment that there is at times an unhealthy reverence for ministers in the church, and that could cause some to automatically align with whatever Pastor AC said.

        • Warren, As long as TPM sells those CDs, it wouldn’t be right to say “TPM doesn’t teach that”. The church is responsible for what they teach no matter what medium they use. The right thing might be to say “TPM teaches contradictory theories regarding the atonement”. If you say that I will 100% agree with you. What they print in books and sell have EQUAL WEIGHT to what they print in CDs and sell. Both are documented evidences of what TPM teaches. Maybe we are at an impasse here.

        • Again, I just want to say that I appreciate the cordial discussion here. I forget who I heard/read say this (I think it may be RC Sproul), a quote that goes something like “I don’t want to know that what I believe is true: I want to know what is true, even if it is not what I currently believe, so that I can believe what is true.” In other words, I don’t want to simply seek to justify what I believe. I want to know what is true (because Jesus Himself is Truth), and then wholeheartedly believe that.

          There are discussions that I have not entered into here, because of the strength of the arguments you have put forward. I don’t want to blindly defend something just because it was what I was always taught. I’m reading the things you’ve written, and searching the scriptures, because I do honestly want to know what is right.

          When you are civil in discussing these things, it helps to facilitate that.

        • Dear Warren,
          I have one question. Now that you have accepted that what AC Thomas has taught WRONG. Does he qualify to be called a FALSE TEACHER?

        • Making a mistake in teaching I don’t think is the same thing as being a false teacher.

          I don’t know if this is what Pastor AC Thomas generally taught on the subject of ransom/redemption.

          It is an error in teaching: but I personally don’t see the need to apply the term false teacher for making an honest mistake. I think “false teacher” has strong negative connotations, and should be applied carefully.

        • But Warren, a mistake is something one utters without much thought. This seems like a well researched POV by AC. This wasn’t unheard of. As the article says, this was taught since the 3rd century. A few minutes are teaching the ransom theory of atonement, AC says and I quote “Instead of God speaking to you, we are speaking to you”. Anyone who hears this, if he is a staunch TPMite, will take this as God’s truth. My issue with this is TPM idolizes AC Thomas. Many believers will sure be lead into thinking what he taught was true. If TPM believed what AC taught was wrong, will they still sell his CDs and still be making money out of it? All evidence points to the fact that TPM is okay with what AC taught.

        • Does the Bible say so?
          I do understand when a person makes a mistake in the not so key parts. But redemption is the most foundation of Christian Doctrine.
          I do not think False teachers are deliberately being false for the purpose of deceiving people.
          2 Timothy 3:13 says they are Deceived and hence they deceive by passing on the deception.
          2 Thessalonians 2:11 says God gives them to such delusions because they LOVE the LIE they have pleasure in unrighteousness.

          All TPM Specific Doctrines are UNRIGHTEOUS and Man Made. As far as I know TPM Specific Doctrines are questioning God’s Moral Character to a great extent. This is Unrighteousness.

        • Brother, there is nothing wrong if TPM distances itself from this theory, by stating that they hold a different opinion on the topic.

          The uneducated believers especially of the 70’s & 80’s who have taken the pastor’s revelations at face value, will be happy t accept the new revelation.

          TPM is guarded when they preach to the literate esp. in the west, but in the east, there is a lot lot non sense passed off as ‘inspired’
          In Fact, they should revise all their doctrine books once again, and take a new stand, an official stand, and clarify what they stand for. And that should be universal in its application and receptive to probity.

          I hope I have been sincere in my request.

    • Pastor Joel is the one guy I have a soft spot for. I believe he was truly sincere in what he did. Unfortunately one can be sincerely wrong. He used to visit our home even when he was a junior brother in FT. His dad and his brother used to attend church in FT.

  2. Perhaps you should conduct a quiz:

    Question one
    Who is your sin offering?
    a) Aaron
    b) Bull
    c) Christ
    d) De(a)dicated servants of God

    • Another question would be, The statement “it is finished” ( Greek – tetelestai – an accounting term that means ‘paid in full’) means

      a) Jesus paid it all
      b) Jesus paid 1/3, we pay 1/3, “consecrated servants” pay 1/3
      c) Jesus paid 1/2, “consecrated servants” pay 1/2.

      • I think the greatest stumbling block for Tpm is doctrine of perfectionism and overcoming life.

        They strongly believe in option option e)
        e) Christ paid half and rest half is to be paid by individual (saints/believers)

        • Tpm believes in seven steps of salvation. I have heard sermons “garments of salvation”. For example there is one garment of needlework and another garment of praise etc…

        • Yes brother, I know very well about the preaching tools of the pastors.

          They use a KJV and a concordance and come up with a catch word and then a match word and align that with the examples from the concordance.

          A spattering of Hebrew/Greek meanings are also used, but mostly misapplied.

  3. TPM Believes taking Moustaches as a Consecration and this was a absurd Practice as even Many People from the World are taking the Moustaches for Life Fun and Glamour activities and its is said that Many believers are following the Same Nature as that of TPM Full time Servants of god and they can take their Moustaches but they must not force to do the Same and these pastors have their spirits transferred to the Fellow Believers and who spiritually claim that they of high Superior in divinity and these clearly indicate that the transfer of spirit from the TPM Full time Servants of god is a deceiving Spirit that tend to make such modifications to Super Project themselves and so whenever they think of Shaving Moustaches and they think that they have sacrificed the most best thing to god but having tons of pride developing hatredness and Jealous with themselves and also encouraging the believers with Moustaches shaved as Super Believers and having Maintaining Relationship with them denying the true spirit of God the Jesus.

  4. Next time if any Tpm worker ask any believer to shave of his moustache tell him pastor Paul Ramankutty did not sacrifice his moustaches!! ?

  5. There are people still believing that, TPM pastor praying for their funeral will sent them to heaven, and wanted the most high pastor to open. The gates of heaven on the day of funeral
    Lot more..

    • Yes, there are lots of such superstitions in TPM. I know of a wedding which was conducted jointly by the Chief and Deputy Chief Pastor especially. From what I hear now, both the husband and wife are living separately and not at all in a wedded life. If this is what happens if you get your children married by the SAINTS OF TPM, better learn at least now.

  6. //Thanks again for the replies/responses//

    @ Warren,

    I deeply appreciate your point of view and you have provided a slew of verses to prove that apostles and prophets are very much the implements in the working of the building of the church. You have also stated about pastors as shepherds.

    I do not stand in contradiction to you, when I read your comment in isolation or without a leaning/bias. However, this is a part of an overall context, that I wish to remind myself.

    Perhaps, you are called and chosen by the Lord for a specific mission- I do not stand in the way to judge that.

    My point is, Sir, that modern theology and doctrines are so photoshop’d that they can give one a huge basis to do one’s one will and totally neglect the heart of God.

    Time will tell whether today’s apostles are REALLY CALLED or are they pursuing it with their own understanding.

    God will put a difference between the sons of Sceva and the true apostles like Paul.

    I completely agree with admin, and add that religious institutions are not start-up corporates from heaven. Even if each member of the ‘so called clergy’ are truly sincere and faithful and BIBLE-based, there is 99.99% chance that they were never called to be apostles, but disciples.

    It’s a pleasure to read your comments as you are sincere in your rebuttals and have shown willingness to see perspective.

    I sign off on this thread and let us agree to disagree, but we both are confidant of one thing that there are widespread deceptions in the last days and that the Son of Man will soon appear!

    Praise the Lord.

  7. This is a live incident that had happened some 16 Years before i know Pastor Paul Sundar a good Servant of God and one day i went to visit him in his personnel room where he was sleeping with all his thighs exposed and suddenly a sister whom well know in TPM World in TamilNadu was used to Translate some times in the sunday sermon visited him when he was sleeping and both lack a sense of wisdom and the sister after seeing Pastor Paul Sundar should have went outside and Pastor Paul Sundar could have covered his thighs and both of them have not done anything and the sister came there to get some permissions from him and even while she was talking to Pastor Paul Sundar that i bent down my head and suddenly i looked at her and iam able to sense that her concentration was deviating then and there to Pastor Paul Sundar Thighs which is exposed and the Pastor must not suppose to induce Sexual Feelings to their TPM Women Servants and Some times this may give them Problem Amen an a lot more to come on Sunday Class Methods and Practices and which is not at all needed as Jesus is in ICU and Dedicated Sunday Class Teachers must join the Force immediately to take away the Burden of the Christ as himself his suffering from Pain because of the lack of the dedicated TPM Workers and Servants of God and How long Jesus can trouble me and all the Time and this is very Serious Problem and this problem must be addressed to all TPM Levels to immediately to stop the Sunday class in all TPM Churches and because Jesus Knows how to protect his own children and all we need at this instant is all TPM Sunday class Teachers must take the burden of Jesus to immediately solve all the Issues of Jesus and mostly the entire world is undergoing a serious of threats because of the Satanic bindings which is causing a continous Serious Problem among the people of the world most Probably in INDIA as India is registered for the Maximum Harvest of ZION if TPM is not obeying this orders and very Serious Problem may Enter TPM creating a huge Pain among the TPM Fulltime Servants of god and can create rigorous Side effects among the world as i have already sacrificed for TPM causes and Jesus causes as my Limitation is even Limited before 2 Years because Jesus does not have believers of my Graces and Honest and Truthfullness and Iam writing this everything after Jesus forced me to write all what he had said Amen Time has Come the Sunday class Children do not need to worry about anything and Just be with Jesus and Pray whenever you want and that love towards god cannot be decreased and eventually will grow higher Amen.After Some time let me tell about ransom of satan in TPM Ministries that even in TPM Baptism that believers are under influence of the Ransom of Satan and Today Iam blessed and no TPM influenced Satan not deceived me in doctrines because i have taken Baptism from other denomination Pentecost Pastor when i was 16 Years of age Amen .The Chief Pastor Wesley was influenced by Satan that when i listened to his preachings that i have observed and satan was claiming ransom in him for his Mal practices and Certain Some wrong doctrines and this all leading to immatured Growth of Church and Finally we are Suffering and the Time has come for the god wishing me to get relieved and need to stay and live with My Family Amen as Jesus told Iam writing. Soon after Some Time and i Request Denzel and admin to immediately send all my Post across TPM Churches so as to help believers to be aware of such things and this May reduce some bindings and curses by creating a huge Mental Pain across TPM Levels and can help Jesus and also TPM May correct all the Mistakes that which ever i have told and can create a TPM Ministries that can be useful across the world and sad to Say that Jesus is not allowing Me to appreciate even a little

  8. I have heard words giving ‘accolades’ unto the ‘ consecrated monks’ and ‘consecrated nuns’ in this organization (which catches a person’s attention if this is a new thing in someone’s church-going experience). The beginning verse “Praise the Lord” to testimonies and conversations catches the ear for it is used like a mantra to the listener, but only God knows each and every heart. However, these things cause a person to wonder about the history of this organization from its outset and along the way. Undue eminence is given by members to the preachers and their preaching, even ecstatic raptures are attributed to them, not discerning many things, even double mindedness. A preacher in his sermon even stated that a conversion occurred because of the preacher’s ‘perfectly manifested’ (that idea conveyed to me) Christianity. I ask…is this a humble statement, that gives God the glory? We know that people are saved by the preaching of the gospel of Christ… “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek” – Romans 1:16. Yes, the articles that Admin are sharing over the internet shall bring truth and light to many souls. May Almighty God do great and mighty things to bring this to pass, I pray, according to his word in Jeremiah 33:3. “Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and shew thee great and mighty things, which thou knowest not”.
    May the Lord Jesus Christ bless and keep us.

    • On the contrary, if by any chance, you fail to make the workers feel special, you can notice their countenance fade.

      I have also felt the same, and I used to wonder why this worker gets honor/ affection and not me… That was thankfully then, not now.

      Initially, I believe that the early gathering of believers were not socially literate, so they were coached to show some token of respect, in the typical Indian manner. This must have caught on like a raging fever and infected the subconscious conditioning and cultural norms of the Mission.

      The lack of flexibility has made the harvest report of our mission a sorry statement.


Please enter your comment!

Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.