I joined a fast growing Pentecostal church located in Majidun when I moved to Ikorodu in 2004 which is the aftermath of my retirement by Otunba Mike Adenuag when he bought National Oil known as Conoil. A year later the church opened another branch at Itamaga. The General Overseer of the church is no doubt blessed with the gift of healing which made the growth of the church rapid. But just like most human being that have one gift or the other, pride started having the best of this G.O. Before I forget, I was the Men Leader at the headquarters which by implication makes me next in line to the resident pastor.

I was in-charge of the bible study and Sunday school. The church grew so fast at a point that seats were never enough for people to sit on Sundays. This made people come to service that would normally start at 9 o’clock by sometimes 6 o’clock. The G.O became swollen headed. Sometimes when he is preaching, he will make reference to some churches that had started years ago but don’t have half of the congregation he has. I would caution him not to see the growth of the church as his handwork but Gods. The colour of his eyes would change. In most cases whenever he is on the pulpit preaching, he will stylishly rebuked me for this quoting the bible to back him up. Nobody in the congregation except the resident pastor would know he was referring to me.

The resident pastor sometimes when he feels offended by the G.O, will come to me because I was the only voice of truth who can talk to him without fear or intimidation. While he will threaten others will damnation and brimstone, he knew I am not moved by such treat. In spite of this, I believe in the biblical injunction of ‘touch not my anointed’ so I tolerated most of his outbursts.

Then sometimes last year, he called the elders to his office and told us God revealed to him that his wife of many years who already had four children for him is not the woman who will complete his journey with him. I told him to explain this to us in plain language. God told him to divorce his wife. He made a lot of damaging allegations against her. You could hear a pin drop in the office. What did the bible say? Is the wife an adulterer?

This is the only ground for which Jesus allowed divorce. The G.O said he never had any cause to suspect his wife. Why then did he want to send his wife away because all the allegations are what most husbands accuse their wives of doing?
We called the wife the following Sunday to hear her side of the story. The G.O was infuriated that we ordinary mortals had the temerity to dabble into his marital affairs.

He made us the topic for his preaching that Sunday. This time no one in the congregation was left in doubt as to whom he was referring to. I told him pointblank after the service that I don’t like the way he painted us on that day but he was without remorse.

I continued to reconcile him and his wife until I gave up because I realized the man had already made up his mind and nothing anyone say would make him change it. A couple of weeks later, he packed out of his house and moved to Itamaga. The wife came crying to me but I told her to continue to pray.

One year later, the church in Majidun is closed. Only the Itamaga now exists. I heard from the wife that even that one now operates with a quarter of its original members. Some of his fellow pastors have accused me of not keeping faith with him. They said I should have stayed back in the church since I am the only one who used to advise him. They said that was God’s purpose for bringing me to the church. What would I have done? The man at the point when he wanted to divorce his wife saw anybody who voiced a contrary opinion as an enemy.

Should I have stayed back in the church when it was obvious the G.O would not have tolerated my critical view of his wanting to send his wife away? I had written a book on his exploits which a publisher had accepted because it is a very unusual story. What do I do with this book? Do I tell the publisher to go ahead and publish even though I don’t believe in what I wrote anymore?

! Canal worshippers !

Are you serving your Pastor or God ?
Allow the dead to bury their dead. YOU YOURSELF , HOW IS YOUR MARRIAGE ? Very smooth ? Amen.

Go to church or not, remain in the church or not. Always worship YOUR God. Although , it depends on Who is really your God .
Are you really my God ? The God of my fore- fathers ?

Time will come when you will not worship God in this Mountain nor in the Temple, but in YOUR SPIRIT. FOR God is SPIRIT.

Watch yourself !!!!!!!!!

@oluti

Should I have stayed back in the church when it was obvious the G.O would not have tolerated my critical view

You should not have left him. That could have been the reason you were there. There are people we need in our world , and If those people back out ,things may come down crashing. A man of God may not be 100% perfect . He need to also recognise the grace upon those people who God has blessed him with. Either as fellow ministers or surbordinates .David had counsellors like ahithiopel .Kenneth Hagin had ministers friends whom he share thoughts , revelations and ideas with. Even when he feels led of God , he still allows his friends to judge him. Just in case he is hearing a wrong voice.

William Marion braham was endowed with great prophetic and miraculous creative  healing anointing. But he didn't have so much grace in teaching the bible. Sometimes he even teach erroneously. But he has Gordon Lindsay whom God use to help him out , doctrinally and in other things because Gordon was sound in scriptures. But when Gordon left him, things came down crashing and not only the ministry , braham died too early also.

People that God has called to help some other ministers sometimes don't know how powerful their call is. Since they seem to always be in the background.  It's a place of power , it's a place of intercession and sacrifice . Some don't even know how to operate in such offices. They may tend to enter gossip about the G.O instead of praying. They may become negatively confrontational or critical instead of admonishing in humility. They may tend to pollute other people's mind against the G.O. Unconsciously and that will destroy the relationship.

So  I think you ought to have stayed. Even if the man rejected your advice. You should have gone into deep intercession for him. Prayer always work . Your faithfulness would have caused greater grace to abound.  Now nobody wins . Satan seem to be smiling somewhere . Ministry unfulfilled.

You could only have left if God had said "SON YOUR TIME IS UP HERE"

Oluti:

Should I have stayed back in the church when it was obvious the G.O would not have tolerated my critical view of his wanting to send his wife away? I had written a book on his exploits which a publisher had accepted because it is a very unusual story. What do I do with this book? Do I tell the publisher to go ahead and publish even though I don’t believe in what I wrote anymore?

It is easy to 'advise' people whose experiences we have not tasted. But advise is one thing, experience is another. If I were in your shoes, how would I feel? What would I have done?

I don't think you should be filled with regret or guilt for having left him. It was not your "critical view" he rejected, for you were trying to show him just one thing: the Biblical foundation of your fellowship in Christ. When he rejected that, he as well may have indicated he was no longer interested in letting Biblical truth guide his personal life. After all the efforts you and others have made to reach out to him, it was best to have left him alone in his chosen path - there's very little you would have been able to do to help him.

The behaviour of Christian leaders in their personal lives is vital to their ministry. When you notice someone whose life contradicts Biblical godliness, there's very little substance in his ministry if any at all. Leave such men to their shameful lives - but don't treat them as enemies (2 Thes. 3:14-15).

As for your yet-to-be published-book, do not aim at attacking or ridiculing that man's ministry - remember Romans 14:4. Don't focus attention so much on him as if you have axes to grind with him: the effect may turn round upon you. I would rather that you focus on the ministry that God has placed upon your own life - that is true and authentic ministration. Have you noticed that those who attack other people's ministries out of ridicule are never able to show as much impact as those whose ministries they attack unjustifiably?

Think about these things - and let God speak to your heart.

wordtalk:

As for your yet-to-be published-book, do not aim at attacking or ridiculing that man's ministry - remember Romans 14:4. Don't focus attention so much on him as if you have axes to grind with him: the effect may turn round upon you.

@oluti, this is very good advise from wordtalk. Something you should consider.

I missed this part

I had written a book on his exploits which a publisher had accepted because it is a very unusual story. What do I do with this book? Do I tell the publisher to go ahead and publish even though I don’t believe in what I wrote anymore?

It's ok to publish . If it's in good light. And the testimony can be of inspiration to others . But since the person is still alive, you may need to get his consent.

I concur with the advice that you should have stayed. And I encourage you to move back, if possible, unless he's using force to prevent you. What happens from now may even add a chapter or an epilogue to the book. The truth is attaining success is way easier than managing success. From my experience, while many have experienced the former, only a few has done well with the latter. And a lack of the right people or supportive networks often contributes to it. I believe everyone in this world needs a Dutch Uncle - one who can tell them the truth when they're going the wrong way. Unfortunately, the nature of ministry today is that many senior pastors are surrounded by hero worshippers who are afraid to tell them what they're doing wrong or those who choose to keep quiet in order not to elicit the pastor's ire.

Friend:

Please go back and help him (if he will listen). But remember what brought him down is pride so do not imagine henceforth that you are always right and him always wrong.

But you don't seem proud so you should be alright

trekkie:

let me even ask you are you sure he was born again from the beginning?

What kind of question is this to ask of a minister?  

just cast your mind back and try to see if he ever displayed the fruits of the spirit. the problem with the church today is that as long as the pastor can procure "miracles" for the members, they dont give a hoot about his character

The character thing has nothing to do with calling. Thats not what determines who is a minsiter. God doesnt call people because the have perfect character . That doesn't take the fact away that a minister ought to be example in everything good character inclusive. It is part of The responsibility of ministry for a man to puritfy himself as vessel unto honour.

when God talked about "touch not my anointed" he did not mean the immunity of pastors and leaders in the church from gentle rebuke.

That scripture is based on spiritual principle of honour for anointed ones. "do my prophets no harm" ask yourself ,Are they all prophets?He made a generic statement based on spiritual principle , that does not take away the specifics. When abimelech took Abrahans wife God appeared to him and told him he would die. Because he had "touched" a prophet

Genesis 20:7
7 Now therefore restore the man his wife; for he is a prophet, and he shall pray for thee, and thou shalt live: and if thou restore her not, know thou that thou shalt surely die, thou, and all that are thine.

moreso the David being quoted here displayed his understanding of this spiritual truth in his dealing with King Saul. He had every opportunity to kill Saul but he wouldn't lay his hand on his leader for just one reason , "the anointing"

1 Samuel 26:8-9
8 Then said Abishai to David, God hath delivered thine enemy into thine hand this day: now therefore let me smite him, I pray thee, with the spear even to the earth at once, and I will not smite him the second time. 9 And David said to Abishai, Destroy him not: for who can stretch forth his hand against the Lord'S anointed, and be guiltless?

 That's a man that understand the anointing . Even when someone else claimed to have killed Saul , David ordered the mans death for only one reason he "touched" the anointed.

2 Samuel 1:14-16
14 And David said unto him, How wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thine hand to destroy the Lord'S anointed? 15 And David called one of the young men, and said, Go near, and fall upon him. And he smote him that he died. 16 And David said unto him, Thy blood be upon thy head; for thy mouth hath testified against thee, saying, I have slain the Lord'S anointed.

So " touch not the anointed" is based on spiritual rule or principle.

.  by the time the pastor says "god " said he should leave his wife, you know that it was the devil controlling him by that time and should you have stayed so that the satanic anointing will rub off on you?

A prophet can miss it, that doesnt mean he was under demonic anointing. If a man makes mistake in prophecy, he needs correction and not condemnation.

1 Corinthians 14:29
29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

So by the time the pastor comes with such prophecy that seems unscriptural. They ought to have asked him to look at it from the bible. And ask for explanation. Asking in humility "sir, this is what the bible says on this issue, but this thing you said seem contrary to my understanding of scripture, pls can you clarify this scripturally " If the man would say "oh ,I didn't know the scripture says that, im sorry ,thank you" or he says "To hell with your bible"

I would have loved to know if he will have any scriptural argument over truth.

. should you have continued to obey instructions from a man that has CLEARLY deviated from the faith? NO.

That is not deviating from faith . He hadn't denied salvation nor the lordship of christ. He was merely dealing with deception. I may not even use that word until i hear  his own side . Im only takikng based on genersl principles .But the point is , he hadn't deny Jesus as lord, he could have been deceived into an error and there is room for restoration.

1 John 5:16
16 If anyone sees his brother [believer] committing a sin that does not [lead to] death (the extinguishing of life), he will pray and [God] will give him life [yes, He will grant life to all those whose sin is not one leading to death]. There is a sin [that leads] to death; I do not say that one should pray for that.

The only thing i felt went wrong was the fact that they had meeting with the wife without his consent and he felt slighted. They should have gotten a fellow minister to to talk to him ,if discussion had fail. But discussion could only have failed if he argues with truth of the bible.

We don't give up easily on people that way in the kingdom.we restore and not destroy.  He wasn't the first person to have missed God in prophecy. Samuel missed God once, but he corrected himself. So missing it, doesn't mean he is out of Gods plan. Besides before we give dangerous advice we should ask proper questions. I would have loved to know what specific allegations the pastor levied against the wife.

And we should know also that ,there are grounds on which divorce can take place as a last resort. For example if a man ministry is at stake by the marriage. And if Christians divorce, they should remain unmarried. Or be reconciled .

1 Corinthians 7:10-11
10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

wordtalk:

It is easy to 'advise' people whose experiences we have not tasted. But advise is one thing, experience is another. If I were in your shoes, how would I feel? What would I have done?

As for your yet-to-be published-book, do not aim at attacking or ridiculing that man's ministry - remember Romans 14:4. Don't focus attention so much on him as if you have axes to grind with him: the effect may turn round upon you. I would rather that you focus on the ministry that God has placed upon your own life - that is true and authentic ministration. Have you noticed that those who attack other people's ministries out of ridicule are never able to show as much impact as those whose ministries they attack unjustifiably?

Think about these things - and let God speak to your heart.

I couldn't agree less with you but as regards the issue of rendering advise based on experience l would kindly say that it is not always the case that one must experience certain things first for one to be termed competent to render advise though in some cases it might prove to be an added edge but see there is the place of the annointing of God's Spirit and God's wisdom as revealed in the word of God and by whatsoever means the Spirit of God deems favourable to communicate. For intance how can you explain a pastor who is unmarried yet renders result proven advise and councel to members of his church who are married?

newmi:

. For intance how can you explain a pastor who is unmarried yet renders result proven advise and councel to members of his church who are married?

Christian counselling is not by personal experience. It's by the word of God and by the holyghost. The idea that a single pastor can't counsel married people is unscriptural. Those who who wrote about marriage in the bible were singles.

^^^^
Hmmmmm l couldn't agree any less

^^^ Still making the same mistake I tried to point out to you the other time. What you have said is that you disagree with the previous post.

@joagbaje,
i disagree with your point on character and calling, if you've got a calling and you do not allow the Spirit to handle your flesh, you remain an empty vessel. Character is one of the things that God works in in a man; and touch not my annointed and do my prophets no harm does not apply here. Telling a man that he's wrong using the Word of God as your basis is absolutely doing NO harm to the prophet! in fact keeping quiet in the face of evil is doing more harm than good sef.
so i agree with trekkie.
@poster
first. if the book to be published has the purpose of disgracing your former GO, shelve that plan, however if there isn't going to be a direct reference to the GO in question and the book is just to caution other men of GOd, please go on
SEcond. as to whether you should have left the church or not, i think we must first examince the purpose of a church. it is for fellowship among beleivers for their nourishment, spiritually, materially etc, if you were being villified and insulted and castigated in a place where you shoud have been blessed, i think it would have been okay to leave.
the problem of most churches in our days is that the head of the churches have no one to account to. God forbid, if Oyedepo or Adeboye or any other preacher in Nigeria messes up, their churches cannot fire or remove them, unless they choose to resign. that is what has happened in your own case,

now to 'solution'
i think you can just continue to interceed for the man, renew contact with him to the purpose of letting him see the light and God helping you, he'll be back to where God wants him to be in no time.
God bless you!

@ poster

I would not have stayed but would have continued praying for him. He clearly went against the word of God when he left his wife and that could be disastrous for the faith of the flock. I used to attend a church where the Pastor quietly married and had a child with another woman when he was angry with his wife for a period. This led to unmarried women being brokered for already married men within the church, leading to actual second marriages and broken homes. It was crazy! My family pulled out of the church when the Pastor would not listen when other things he was doing contrary to the word of God were pointed out to him in love.

What has the Holy Spirit said to you about the matter? This is what really matters!

Joagbaje:

What kind of question is this to ask of a minister? 

does being a minister make him infallible?

Joagbaje:


The character thing has nothing to do with calling. Thats not what determines who is a minsiter. God doesnt call people because the have perfect character . That doesn't take the fact away that a minister ought to be example in everything good character inclusive. It is part of The responsibility of ministry for a man to puritfy himself as vessel unto honour.

character nothing to do with calling?  this is the reason why the church is sick today. remember many are called but few are chosen. what do you think is the reason for this? many have been called by God but their character let them down and they end up outside of God's plan. look at saul for example. i am glad though that you at least admit that a minister ought to be an example in GOOD CHARACTER. i am not saying that Good character is the qualification for God's initial call on a man's life but in order to maintain the calling. that's why jesus rejected those who claimed to have performed miracles in his name and why did he reject them? he called them "you who practice  lawlessness" matt 7:23.

Joagbaje:



That scripture is based on spiritual principle of honour for anointed ones. "do my prophets no harm" ask yourself ,Are they all prophets?He made a generic statement based on spiritual principle , that does not take away the specifics. When abimelech took Abrahans wife God appeared to him and told him he would die. Because he had "touched" a prophet

you are wrong sir.
1 Chronicles 16:17-22
17 And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute,
To Israel for an everlasting covenant,
18 Saying, "To you I will give the land of Canaan
As the allotment of your inheritance,"[/b]19 When you were few in number,
Indeed very few, and strangers in it.

20 When they went from one nation to another,
And from one kingdom to another people,
21 He permitted no man to do them wrong;
[b]Yes, He rebuked kings for their sakes,
22 Saying, "Do not touch My anointed ones,
And do My prophets no harm."
NKJV
1 Chronicles 16:17-22
17 The LORD made a covenant with Jacob,
one that will last forever.
18 "I will give you the land of Canaan," he said.
"It will be your own possession."

19 God's people were few in number,
strangers in the land of Canaan.
20 They wandered from country to country,
from one kingdom to another.
21 But God let no one oppress them;
to protect them, he warned the kings: 22 "Don't harm my chosen servants;
do not touch my prophets."
TEV
i have taken the liberty of copying two versions of the same scripture. you make the mistake a lot of pastors make in adapting the scripture to fit your perspective. you have taken just a bit of a verse and expanded that to fit your world view. verse 19 clearly states that God was talking about his people as they wandered from place to place. remember they had left egypt and were yet to have their canaan. which prophets were in egypt with them. God told pharoah through moses to let his people go into the wilderness to worship him

Exodus 6:2-5
2 God spoke to Moses and said, "I am the LORD. 3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as Almighty God, but I did not make myself known to them by my holy name, the LORD.  4 I also made my covenant with them, promising to give them the land of Canaan, the land in which they had lived as foreigners.
TEV
is this part referring to only prophets? did the lord promise the canaan only to prophets.? now link this with the song of praise to God in first chronicles and see that God was talking about the ALL the children of isreal. God reproved KINGS for their sake. if i am to go by what you say the the prophets could not be touched by the KINGS so were the remaining children of isreal the kings?

if you refuse to see this then it's ok after all it's not my responsibility to convince you of the truth you can clearly see from the scripture. i am not usually so verbose or go to such such lengths to prove my point. the scripture warns us to avoid unproductive arguements and just to try to point out the truth in love. for too long the church has danced to the tune of a few who claim to know the scripture and that's because people are too lazy to read for themselves and ask the lord to expound the scripture to them.
knight one has said it all that if you refuse to talk to a man of God to try to save him from hell the a greater evil has been done by your silence.
i don't have time now to reply to all you wrote and may not even reply . abeg i am tired of writing. brother have a blessed week.

Knight1:

@joagbaje,
i disagree with your point on character and calling. if you've got a calling and you do not allow the Spirit to handle your flesh, you remain an empty vessel.

That is not scriptural he can't be an empty vessel if christ dwells in him and he is filled with the spirit. He may function in a limited grace but cannot be empty. Can you prove this scripturally?

Character is one of the things that God works in in a man; and touch not my annointed and do my prophets no harm does not apply here. Telling a man that he's wrong using the Word of God as your basis is absolutely doing NO harm to the prophet! in fact keeping quiet in the face of evil is doing more harm than good sef.

If you read my post I did say the msn could be confronted to explain his intention since it's contrary to "bible" let's hear what he has to say. we can draw conclusion from his response . "this is what the bible says sir" "what do you say to this scripture?"
churches cannot fire or remove them, unless they choose to resign. that is what has happened in your own case,

now to 'solution'
i think you can just continue to interceed for the man, renew contact with him to the purpose of letting him see the light and God helping you, he'll be back to where God wants him to be in no time.
God bless you!

I agree with you here.

trekkie:

does being a minister make him infallible?

No , I didn't say that

character nothing to do with calling?  this is the reason why the church is sick today. remember many are called but few are chosen. what do you think is the reason for this? many have been called by God but their character let them down and they end up outside of God's plan.

I agree. I never justify wrong character . I only said it is wrong to say a man is of the devil becausevof a mistake . So long as he had not denied christ and God still uses him .

look at saul for example. i am glad though that you at least admit that a minister ought to be an example in GOOD CHARACTER. i am not saying that Good character is the qualification for God's initial call on a man's life but in order to maintain the calling. that's why jesus rejected those who claimed to have performed miracles in his name and why did he reject them? he called them "you who practice  lawlessness" matt 7:23.

Okay, I agree with you

you are wrong sir.
1 Chronicles 16:17-22
17 And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute,
To Israel for an everlasting covenant,
18 Saying, "To you I will give the land of Canaan
As the allotment of your inheritance,"[/b]19 When you were few in number,
Indeed very few, and strangers in it.

20 When they went from one nation to another,
And from one kingdom to another people,
21 He permitted no man to do them wrong;
[b]Yes, He rebuked kings for their sakes,
22 Saying, "Do not touch My anointed ones,
And do My prophets no harm."

There is no new story here . The question remains are they prophets? . No who are the prophets ? The patriachs of course. The statement was made on behalf of isreal on account abraham. They were the children of the prophets.

Acts 3:25
25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

So the generic use does not take away the primary and specific use. It's like the use of the terms "sons of God"

To be anointed has to do with the oil. All Israel were not anointed with oil into office. So being called anointed in generic terms on the account of their ancestors doesn't nullify the specific office the use of the term is meant for primarily.

A good example you should look at is the rebellion of Korah. He and his group came to Moses saying "we are all holy" they were dealing with the generic at the expense of the specific , they died for it.

Numbers 16:3-5
3 And they gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said unto them, Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the Lord is among them: wherefore then lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the LORD? 4 And when Moses heard it, he fell upon his face: 5 And he spake unto Korah and unto all his company, saying, Even to morrow the Lord will shew who are his, and who is holy; and will cause him to come near unto him: even him whom he hath chosen will he cause to come near unto him.


So we can say we are all anointed, but there are ministers in offices we submit to by the virtue of the office. They are anointed over others.

We can all teach, but that doesn't make us teachers (it's an office), we can all evangelise but that doesnt make us evangelists, we can all prophesy but that doesn't make us prophets (it's an office) we are all sent by God but that doesn't make us Apostles.

1 Corinthians 12:29
29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? . . .

We should not keep making the rebellious mistake Korah and his company made. The reason David didn't kill Saul was not based on the generic but on the specific. Saul was anointed by oil into an office.

The same things goes for the church in parallel terms .

@joagbaje
That is not scriptural he can't be an empty vessel if christ dwells in him and he is filled with the spirit. He may function in a limited grace but cannot be empty. Can you prove this scripturally?
Empty Vessel not in literal terms. this is what i mean
many have been called by God but their character let them down and they end up outside of God's plan.-from trekkie

in any case, not to make the thread derail too far, i think the poster by this time should have been able to deduce a couple of things and act in the best possible way. all the best to him!

trekkie:

@joeagbaje
i like your analysis. look i will be the first to tell you to respect anointed leaders.

I'm gladto hear that. Because many people seem to be in the dark over such basic truth.

what i am saying is that the passage "touch not mine anointed" does not refer to specific prophets. that passage talks about anointed ones and prophets. you point out prophets but what about anointed ones.

I understand your position. You are talking from the context of the particular verse. I agree with you. But that didn't make them anointed or make them prophets. The statement was made on the ground of their lineage. Their fathers patriachs and prophets who's children they are.

Besides there are two major uses of the word "anointed". If david used it generally for the people ,it didnt take away thr fact that the word staands for a men in office even if the word was used generally by David. He himself indicated in the scriptures that the anointed stands for men in office. those who quote that scripture Quote It based on the principles it represent.

If you don't agree , I will like to ask you a question. On what account did David refuse to kill Saul.



Is it on the fact that Saul was a Jew and thereby was anointed or because of the office. Look these scriptures again.


1 Samuel 26:8-9
8 Then said Abishai to David, God hath delivered thine enemy into thine hand this day: now therefore let me smite him, I pray thee, with the spear even to the earth at once, and I will not smite him the second time. 9 And David said to Abishai, Destroy him not: for who can stretch forth his hand against the Lord'S anointed, and be guiltless?

2 Samuel 1:14-16
14 And David said unto him, How wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thine hand to destroy the Lord'S anointed? 15 And David called one of the young men, and said, Go near, and fall upon him. And he smote him that he died. 16 And David said unto him, Thy blood be upon thy head; for thy mouth hath testified against thee, saying, I have slain the Lord'S anointed.

now to the point i am really trying to make. , if i in love seek to restore a leader who has derailed from the teachings of christ the purpose is not to buck against God's institution, but to strenghten it. The bible says "rebuke not an elder harshly but entreat him as a father" we have permission to politely talk to our leaders about what we think may be wrong. we could be wrong and when we are shown the light, all we need to do is to say sorry i did not know. but to bring out "touch not mine anointed" each time we try to correct our pastors who may be erring that's why it SEEMS as if the church worships pastors rather than God. christ has come and made us brethren and if brethren are denied the opportunity to go direct to the pastor to speak, then they are left with no choice than to gossip about his wrong doings behind him, helping no one and such pastors are carefully pampered by their fellow ministers straight into hell.
i like referring to the bible as a living book . remember when peter was eating with the gentiles until the jews came and he then tried to distance himself as if he was not previously eating with the gentiles. why did paul not say "touch not mine anointed" and keep quiet. no peter was corrected and in open church! but because peter was humble, teachable like the christians of those days, the church remained intact. and please don't tell me that it was because it was apostle to apostle so they were on equal footing. other brethren were there.

I love what you said . I never said people should be quiet . There are biblical ways to handle issues in the kingdom. If you read my post well you will see that.

The reason paul could rebuke Peter was the fact that it was Pauls congregation , and he had right to protect his sheep. From pollution since the error was done openly, it had to be corrected openly . The second thing was the fact that Paul was an apostle . You will never find a recommendation in the word of God for men to rebuke their leader.