A lot of times, pple quote this verse of scripture in d bid to get you to stop pointing out d wrongs of a man of god. They even go as far as adding touch not; by words or by pen...thereby scaring people from saying what they want to say. I think its wrong to so do, this is because, first of all, christ d anointed one was touched, even harmed- with respect to this, who is a 'man of god' not to recieve d same treatment if not more, afterall is he not a follower of christ and shouldn't he expect anything more than what was done to his master? Again, every follower of christ recieves a 100 fold of whatever he left behind to follow plus persecution which can come in d form of touch or harm and d forerunners of d gospel of christ counted it joy when they were persecuted, for instance paul was flogged, stoned severally, yet he did not quote d 'touch not' verse, how come today's men of god do d opposite? A true man of god dt is full of love shouldn't quote dt verse cos d verse can be equated with calling fire from heaven like elijah did...let's learn from d master who said to his disciple when they threatened to bring fire from heaven...'you don't know d kind of spirit you have'...people of god ought to have sweet spirit and not breathe fire from their nostrils when 'provoked'. Moreover, if u are a man of god, its ok for people to criticise u; some of these criticism r constructive and will help you grow but if u reject them with threats of how god is going to fight for you, you may end up not improving and then be among the ones d master will say to- depart from me ye workers of iniquity. Comments r welcome.

Do NOT wish to derail your thread but same thread had been treated here: https://www.nairaland.com/866519/touch-not-anointed-taken-out

However, if you want your thread independent, then I can remove the link and/modify my comment.

And Noah began to be a husbandman,and planted a vineyard:and he drink of the wine and was drunken;and he was uncovered within his tent.and Ham,the father of Canaan,saw the unclothedness of his father,and told his two brethren without..and She and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders,and went backward,and covered the unclothedness of their father;and their faces were backward,and they saw not their father's unclothedness and Noah awoke from his wine,and knew what his youngest son had done unto him,and he said "Curse be Canaan;a 'SERVANT' of servants shall he be unto his brethren,and he said,Blessed be Jehovah,the God of Shem;and let Canaan be his Servant.God enlarge japheth,and let him dwell in the tents of Shem;and let Canaan be his servant....Gen9:20-27" In God's plan Noah was the Head of his family.He put the whole family under Noah's authority.but one day Noah became drunk in his vineyard and he uncovered himself in his tent,his youngest son,Ham,saw his father's nakeness and told his two brother's outside(the word outside meant "in public".so far as Noah's conduct was concerned,he certainly was wrong;he should not have been drunk.yet Ham failed to see the dignity of authority.the father is God's instituted authority in the home,but the flesh delights in seeing a defect in authority so as to throw off all restraint.when he saw his father's improper conduct he did not have the slightest sense of shame or sorrow,noo did he try to cover his father's fault.this reveal's that he had a REBELLIOUS SPIRIT.he went out instead and told his brethren,pointing out to them his father's ugliness and so adding to himself the sin of REVILING.in the above verse you can observe,though how Shem and Japheth manage the situation.
From the above scripture,it is seen then that the failure of Noah became a test to Shem,Ham,Japheth,and Ham's son-Canaan.it revealed who was OBEDIENT and who was REBELLIOUS.
After Noah awoke from the wine he prophesied that the descendants of Ham(Canaan) would be cursed and would become the slaves of a slave to their brethren.THE FIRST ONE TO BECOME A SLAVE IN THE BIBLE WAS HAM.
"THRICE" was the sentence pronounced that Canaan would be a slave.indicating that anyone who's not Subject to authority shall be slave to him who does obey authority.
He was the first to be cursed after the flood.not knowing authority,he was put under authority from generation to generation.

Goshen360: Do NOT wish to derail your thread but same thread had been treated here: https://www.nairaland.com/866519/touch-not-anointed-taken-out

However, if you want your thread independent, then I can remove the link and/modify my comment.

tx, i didn't see d thread b4 opening, if i had, i wouldn't have opened this...i think u should leave ur post as it serves as a link, i bet pple will learn a lot. Goodmorning dear.

@i.chuka, ur interpretation of this story is wonderful. May i call ur attention to d fact dt my post concerns 'men of god' being corrected...d story u shared from d bible teaches me dt god looks at d motive more than he does d act, ham told his brothers not so they do something about it but he was mocking his dad. Get my point clear, a man of god in this our time shouldn't use touch not my anointed to shield himself from reproof/correction...dt's wrong cos he might end up destroying himself. This teaching of 'a man of god should not be corrected cos d bible says touch not my anointed' blah blah is d bane of most ministers. I believe god can use anybody to effect correction, nd our response to correction is an indication of whether we r proud or not nd most men of god nd their followers resist correction with self defence mechanism using d word nd dt's terrible. Again, as per ur post...i don't encourage public correction (though dt should be implemented when necessary) of a man of god for d sake of respect, not withstanding, a man of god should learn to take correction even from a child when necessary for his own good. When d word said d scripture is given for...reproof etc, it didn't specify except for a man of god.

ATMC: @i.chuka, ur interpretation of this story is wonderful. May i call ur attention to d fact dt my post concerns 'men of god' being corrected...d story u shared from d bible teaches me dt god looks at d motive more than he does d act, ham told his brothers not so they do something about it but he was mocking his dad. Get my point clear, a man of god in this our time shouldn't use touch not my anointed to shield himself from reproof/correction...dt's wrong cos he might end up destroying himself. This teaching of 'a man of god should not be corrected cos d bible says touch not my anointed' blah blah is d bane of most ministers. I believe god can use anybody to effect correction, nd our response to correction is an indication of whether we r proud or not nd most men of god nd their followers resist correction with self defence mechanism using d word nd dt's terrible. Again, as per ur post...i don't encourage public correction (though dt should be implemented when necessary) of a man of god for d sake of respect, not withstanding, a man of god should learn to take correction even from a child when necessary for his own good. When d word said d scripture is given for...reproof etc, it didn't specify except for a man of god.

@ATMC
You called them 'Men of GOD' meaning God is directly responsible for their conducts.when we reprove them we are directly saying to God that He made a mistake.
Sister,its a 'Dangerous trend' we should pray,encourage and always cover their 'unclothedness' with love.

ATMC: @i.chuka, ur interpretation of this story is wonderful. May i call ur attention to d fact dt my post concerns 'men of god' being corrected...d story u shared from d bible teaches me dt god looks at d motive more than he does d act, ham told his brothers not so they do something about it but he was mocking his dad. Get my point clear, a man of god in this our time shouldn't use touch not my anointed to shield himself from reproof/correction...dt's wrong cos he might end up destroying himself. This teaching of 'a man of god should not be corrected cos d bible says touch not my anointed' blah blah is d bane of most ministers. I believe god can use anybody to effect correction, nd our response to correction is an indication of whether we r proud or not nd most men of god nd their followers resist correction with self defence mechanism using d word nd dt's terrible. Again, as per ur post...i don't encourage public correction (though dt should be implemented when necessary) of a man of god for d sake of respect, not withstanding, a man of god should learn to take correction even from a child when necessary for his own good. When d word said d scripture is given for...reproof etc, it didn't specify except for a man of god.

@ATMC
You called them 'Men of GOD' meaning God is directly responsible for their conducts.when we reprove them we are directly saying to God that He made a mistake.
Sister,its a 'Dangerous trend' we should pray,encourage and always cover their 'unclothedness' with love.

@i.chuka if we should pray for them then we might as well pray for every other believer without reproving them cos its also dangerous seeing dt we r all ministers of reconciliation...

ATMC: @i.chuka if we should pray for them then we might as well pray for every other believer without reproving them cos its also dangerous seeing dt we r all ministers of reconciliation...

Jesus said "If your brother sins against you,go and show him his fault,JUST BETWEEN THE TWO OF YOU.......Matt18:13-17"
We shouldn't uncover the unclothedness of our brothers in public.by doing this,implies that the spirit of rebellious dwelleth in us.

i.chuka:


Jesus said "If your brother sins against you,go and show him his fault,JUST BETWEEN THE TWO OF YOU.......Matt18:13-17"
We shouldn't uncover the unclothedness of our brothers in public.by doing this,implies that the spirit of rebellious dwelleth in us.

u see, 'if ur bro sins against u', some ministers make mistake dt can make them miss d mark, nd this mistake may not be against u in particular but u sense this man is making a costly mistake. Its good dt he be called to order whether publicly or privately as long as in d end d aim of straightening him is achieved...at this point, d person should not take offence nd quote touch not blah blah. U get me. Its very very ok to correct a man of god because all ur critics may not be wrong afterall.

ATMC: u see, 'if ur bro sins against u', some ministers make mistake dt can make them miss d mark, nd this mistake may not be against u in particular but u sense this man is making a costly mistake. Its good dt he be called to order whether publicly or privately as long as in d end d aim of straightening him is achieved...at this point, d person should not take offence nd quote touch not blah blah. U get me. Its very very ok to correct a man of god because all ur critics may not be wrong afterall.

Some of The effects of correcting men of God in public.
1:Ham and his generation became slaves of slaves to their brethren..Gen9:25-27.
2:Miriam turned leprous..Num12:10.
3:the earth swallowed Koran,Data and Abiram with their household and fire consumed 250men..Num16:31-35.
4:Uzzah was struck dead because of his irreverent act...2Sam6:7.
5:Michel became the only barren woman in the Bible...2Sam6:23.
6:because Moses failed to uphold God's holiness among the israelite,he was denied access to Canaan...Deut32:51.

@i.chucka, u sef, all this pple u quoted had a problem with motive nd not d act of correction. They were dealt with cos their motives was wrong not because they were not supposed to correct. Paul corrected peter nd there was no recorded consequence but miriam a prophetess corrected moses nd there was consequence. R u seeing it...if ur motive is right...to bring d person on d right way...go ahead nd give it, whether d person is bishop, etc, it shouldn't matter, just do it with wisdom. Remember my point; its ok to correct a man of god.

ATMC: @i.chucka, u sef, all this pple u quoted had a problem with motive nd not d act of correction. They were dealt with cos their motives was wrong not because they were not supposed to correct. Paul corrected peter nd there was no recorded consequence but miriam a prophetess corrected moses nd there was consequence. R u seeing it...if ur motive is right...to bring d person on d right way...go ahead nd give it, whether d person is bishop, etc, it shouldn't matter, just do it with wisdom. Remember my point; its ok to correct a man of god.

We don't do the correction in public,it had to be done in private(between you and the person).

i.chuka:


We don't do the correction in public,it had to be done in private(between you and the person).

same goes for others dt r not 'men of god'...but when public correction is required, nothing stops u...paul once corrected peter publicly.

ATMC: same goes for others dt r not 'men of god'...but when public correction is required, nothing stops u...paul once corrected peter publicly.

When i saw that "THEY" were not acting in line with the truth of the Gospel,i said to Peter in front of THEM ALL.....Gal2:14.
Paul rebuked Peter with his cohorts(a delegation of Jewish Christains from Jerusalem)that are not in line with the Gospel truth.
These verse have nothing to do with public rebuke.
It was an in-house rebuke.

O...i've heard u. Try nd reread our posts nd then visit dt link by goshen360, i rest my case.

@ i.chuks, i must thank you for all your posts on this thread. God bless you. God2man.

God2man: @ i.chuks, i must thank you for all your posts on this thread. God bless you. God2man.

God bless you too,Sir.

God2man: @ i.chuks, i must thank you for all your posts on this thread. God bless you. God2man.

i.chuka:


God bless you too,Sir.

Exhorting yourselves in lies and deception. False teachings must be stamped out of the church no matter whose Ox is gored. Jesus christ never condoned the hypocrisy of the religious leaders of his time (pharisees and saducees) he exposed them. he also warned his followers to be wary of false teachers and not tolerate them. He made it clear he would deny them on the last day despite the fact that they preach in his name. It's easy to say one should not judge or rebuke them bu the truth is that these charlatans are leading millions f believers to damnation. The question begets: is it right for us as christians to keep quiet and watch Preachers rip off and deceive believers just becuase the preacher wears the toga of a MOG? All false teachings and teachers in the body of christ must be exposed. It is very unchrist like to cover up for them.

Pastor Kun:



Exhorting yourselves in lies and deception. False teachings must be stamped out of the church no matter whose Ox is gored. Jesus christ never condoned the hypocrisy of the religious leaders of his time (pharisees and saducees) he exposed them. he also warned his followers to be wary of false teachers and not tolerate them. He made it clear he would deny them on the last day despite the fact that they preach in his name. It's easy to say one should not judge or rebuke them bu the truth is that these charlatans are leading millions f believers to damnation. The question begets: is it right for us as christians to keep quiet and watch Preachers rip off and deceive believers just becuase the preacher wears the toga of a MOG? All false teachings and teachers in the body of christ must be exposed. It is very unchrist like to cover up for them.

Brothers,if someone is caught in sin,you who are spiritual should restore him GENTLY."But watch yourself,or you also may be tempted".CARRY EACHOTHER's BURDEN's,and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ...Gal6:1-2.

@i.chucka, u don't seem to get d point which is dt a pastor can be corrected. Ur argument is dt a pastor shouldn't be corrected publicly; who is talking about public or private...d point is dt a pastor when wrong should be called to order, simple! How it is done rests entirely on d person doing d correction. So long as we r in d flesh, pst as well, we r bound to make mistakes...u r finding it difficult unlearning what u learnt abi? I believe growth is progressive, maybe by this time next year, ur thinking would have been stepped up a bit.

ATMC: @i.chucka, u don't seem to get d point which is dt a pastor can be corrected. Ur argument is dt a pastor shouldn't be corrected publicly; who is talking about public or private...d point is dt a pastor when wrong should be called to order, simple! How it is done rests entirely on d person doing d correction. So long as we r in d flesh, pst as well, we r bound to make mistakes...u r finding it difficult unlearning what u learnt abi? I believe growth is progressive, maybe by this time next year, ur thinking would have been stepped up a bit.

If you have an issue with your pastor go and deal with it personally.your ranting and raving about touching him in NL only indicates the source of your motive.

i.chuka:


If you have an issue with your pastor go and deal with it personally.your ranting and raving about touching him in NL only indicates the source of your motive.

so b4 i'll discuss a truth, i must have issue? Well, u r wrong...i's taught this nd went back to study nd discovered a minister can actually be corrected. I hope u do take correction when necessary. U appear as one who holds onto what he 'knows' nd refuses to accept a view dt differs from his nd yet preaches revelation is progressive. Its only 'SELF' dt refuses correction.

I don't think Boko Haram is listening o!
Mu che che che che che che

@ATMC
No body is above correction.the way and manner such correction is done implies if one is submissive/obedient to authority,because all authority is from God.
Apologies for my previous post.

i.chuka:
@ATMC
No body is above correction.the way and manner such correction is done implies if one is submissive/obedient to authority,because all authority is from God.
Apologies for my previous post.

accepted...finally we arrived at d same conclusion. Dt's good! Correction should be given with wisdom nd d 'man of god' shouldn't scare pple with 'touch not my anointed blah blah' rather should recieve correction with meekness even if its from a subordinate. THIS IS MY POINT!

Bless!

tx for dt.