Sadhu Sundar Singh – Hindu Mystic in Sheep’s Clothing

Sadhu Sundar Singh -

Sadhu Sundar Singh and His So Called Christian Exploits with Emanuel Swedenborg

I have come across quite a few ‘Christian’ websites who think that Sadhu Sundar Singh was truly a man of God.  I’ve spent hours and hours reading about his life and his beliefs and I will say this;  if someone knocks on your door dressed in a yellow robe preaching Jesus Christ, don’t open the door!!

On the surface it would appear that Sundar Singh was truly a man of God, he was ostracised by his family for ‘converting’ to Christianity after he had a vision of Jesus Christ in his bedroom, he was Baptised, he took on the life of a Sadhu, barefoot, roaming from village to village preaching and he spent many a month in prison or thrown into a well for preaching the Gospel, until one day he just vanished into thin air (not in a mystic kinda way…no he left for a trip to Tibet and was not seen again).

However, under the surface we find a man who could not let go of his Hindu background, incorporating Hindu mystic teaching and ideas with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I will now briefly analyse his life and his teachings:

“…he decided to become a sadhu, so that he could dedicate himself to the Lord Jesus. As a sadhu, he wore a yellow robe, lived on the charity of others, abandoned all possession and maintained celibacy. He was convinced that this was the best way to introduce the Gospel to his people since it was the only way which his people were accustomed to. In addition, he also wanted to be free to devote himself to the Lord.” [1]

A Sadhu is a Hindu who devotes his entire life to his religion and forsakes all the worldly pleasures.  When one becomes truly born again you will abandon ALL things that are not glorifying to God, you abandon the sin in your life.  The things you did before you were truly born again you repented of and you will not go back to them.  Sundar Singh didn’t do that, he kept the Hindu Holy Man name Sadhu and the Holy Man robes.  The only reason for this was because it was supposedly easier for him to approach people and spread the Gospel.

This does not make sense?  If he was truly Christian he would not have kept the Holy Man ‘Sadhu’ or continued to wear the robes.  This name and the robes represented the lifestyle of a Hindu Holy Man who followed after Hindu gods.  Why could he not dress like a normal Indian person.  You will see why, later…

I wrote this article on Sundar Singh because right now Todd Bentley from Freshfire Ministries, running the Lakeland Revival recently had a vision of Sundar Singh in Heaven telling him about meditation:  contemplative prayer and soaking, etc.

Todd Bentley never abandoned his worldly lifestyle either with all his metal style t-shirts, recent tattoos and piercings.  Dressing like the world to try attract the world is the excuse.

Sundar Singh’s vision of Christ:

“But with the death of his beloved mother when he was only fourteen years old, his life had changed dramatically. The young Sundar grew increasingly despairing and aggressive. Convinced that what Jesus had taught was completely wrong, he tore the Bible apart and burned it. He even threw stones at preachers and encouraged others to do likewise. His hatred of the local missionaries and Christians culminated in the public burning of a Bible which he tore apart page by page and threw into the flames.”

“Three days after he burned the Bible in front of his father, he woke up at three in the morning and went out into the moonlit courtyard for the ceremonial bath observed by devout Hindus and Sikhs before worship. He then returned to his room and knelt down, bowed his head to the ground and pleaded that God would reveal himself.  Yet nothing happened. He was thinking of throwing himself in front of the train that would pass at 5 a.m. every morning behind their house, in the hope that he would find peacefulness in his future reincarnation.”

“He repeated his prayer once again. He lifted his head and opened his eyes, and was rather surprised to see a faint cloud of light in the room…He then thought that it might be an answer to his prayer. While watching the light, he suddenly saw Jesus’ figure in the radiance. To his sheer amazement he saw not the face of any of his traditional gods, but of Jesus the Christ.”

“Jesus Christ was there in the room, shining, radiating an inexpressible joy and peace and love, looking at him with compassion and asking, “Why do you persecute me? I died for you …”[Acts 9:1-5] At that time, Sundar realised that Jesus was not dead but alive. Sundar fell on his knees before Him and experienced an astonishing peacefulness which he had never felt before. The vision disappeared, but peace and joy lingered within him.”

So what we have here is not Jesus Christ appearing to dear ol’ Sundar, but an ‘angel of light’ as an impostor of Jesus Christ.  This ‘angel of light’ said to Sundar ‘Why do you persecute me? I died for you …” and then ‘peace and joy’ lingered within him.  Sundar soon after that began a life of spreading the simple message of love and peace and rebirth through Jesus.   I still have yet to read anywhere where Sundar actually says he accepted Jesus Christ as his saviour by repentance of sin.  Why do I say that is was an ‘angel of light’ that appeared to Sundar and not Jesus Christ?  Because if it was Jesus Christ, Sundar would not have believed, preached or delved into the following:

  • He would frequently converse with the deceased for wisdom and guidance.
  • His communication with the ‘other side’ did not just stop at deceased ‘Christians’ but he conversed with dead unbelievers as well.
  • He believed that the dead could receive Christ after death:

“With regard to the doctrine of reincarnation and transmigration also, I have conversed with Swedenborg and some other Hindu saints who, after entering into the spiritual world, have accepted the Lord as the only true God and Saviour and also those who have not yet accepted Him. They all say that reincarnation is impossible . . .” [5]

  • Sundar seems to have ties with Swedenborgia – New Church (another Cult) in which Swedenborg (the visionary who established this diabolical church) also had visions very similar to Sundars.  Sorry, I should say that Sundar’s visions are very similar to Swedenborg’s. Whether Sundar had read Swedenborg’s books and then mimicked his visions we will never know.   Whatever it is, it’s fishy to say the least:

emanuel swedenborg - Sundar Singh

“. . .  I want to say that after my book on the “Visions of the Spiritual World” was published, some friend sent me a copy of “Heaven and Hell,” and I was glad to see that this wonderful man of God [Swedenborg] also had similar experiences. I should very much like to read about this seer and saint.” [6]

  • Sundar believed that all angles and demons were once men, yet contradicts himself elsewhere by making a distinction between angels and humans that they are not the same.
  • Sundar believed that those who have gone to heaven (the redeemed) can act as angels on earth.
  • Sundar conversed with Swedenborg in the spiritual realm:

“I saw him several times [in a spiritual realm] some years ago, but I did not know his earthly name. His name in the spiritual world is quite different just according to his high position or office and most beautiful character. He is exceedingly happy and always busy in helping others.”[7]

“Yes, I have talked with the venerable Swedenborg and some other saints and angels about the hells, although I am unable to explain adequately all that they told me . . .”[8]

  • Sundar went to Sweden and viewed Swedenborg’s tomb at a Cathedral:

Swedenborg Tomb / Sundar Singh -“Sundar Singh’s second tour to the West took place in 1922. During the month of April he visited Uppsala, Sweden, where he was the guest of Archbishop Nathan Soderblom (whose contacts with, and impression of, the Sadhu I have discussed at some length elsewhere.)[3] Among other things, Soderblom took him on a sightseeing tour, in the course of which he entered Uppsala Cathedral and saw the tomb of Swedenborg. Later Soderblom was to write that Sundar Singh had been impressed by three things in the Cathedral — the shrine of Sweden’s patron saint, St. Erik; a medieval cope bearing, an embroidered picture of the birth of Christ, and Swedenborg’s tomb, “For Swedenborg like him was a visionary.”[4]

Sundar Singh on Buddhism:

“Regarding the Buddha, he said that he respected him for the strength of his intellect and the purity of his life; but in the Sadhu’s opinion he was lacking in humility and for that reason did not attain knowledge of God. Had he truly longed for God, he would have gone to the Sannyasi whom he had first met. For it is only through humility that we can know God.” [1]

Really?  Is that so.  So he respects a demonic entity for its intellect and PURITY of life and then says because it lacked humility it would never attain knowledge of God.  Oh please…you gotta be a complete twit to fall for that one!

Sundar Singh on ‘How to enter Heaven’:

“Nobody will be allowed to enter into Heaven who has not a face like Jesus Christ. That is the only ticket, otherwise we shall find ourselves out of place there. Only those who follow Him will feel at home there.” [1]

No where is this in the bible.  Not a single scripture to back this up.

Sundar Singhs ‘Universalism’ Beliefs:

“However bad and evil-living a man may be, there is in man’s nature a divine spark … this spark of the divine is never extinguished … If this divine spark or element cannot be destroyed, then we can never be hopeless for any sinner… The Creator Himself will not destroy it (man’s soul)… even though many wander and go astray in the end, they will return to Him in Whose image they have been created; for this is their final destination.” [2]

But here’s the best quote of them all by Sundar Singh himself:

“In regard to Hinduism, Sadhu Sundar Singh, the mystic and Sikh follower of Christ in the early 1900s, had an interesting personal perspective. ‘Hinduism has been digging channels,’ he wrote. “Christ is the water to flow through these channels there are many beautiful things in Hinduism; but the fullest light is from Jesus Christ”


What Todd Bentley (Lakeland Revival) – Freshfire Ministries had to say:


todd bentley freshfire ministries - Sundar Singh“Is your life astonishing, filled with prophetic visions and encounters with the Lord? Are you a sign and a wonder? In a vision, Todd saw the Glory Cloud of Revelation–the cloud of Isaiah 11:1, 2 and Revelation 4:5 come upon the church body. Also in the same vision, the Lord showed him an old Punjabi saint by the name of Sundar Singh, who lived in India and evangelised throughout the world over a hundred years ago. The Holy Spirit spoke to Todd about a new release of prophetic revelation coming. In the first part of this prophetic teaching article, Todd teaches about the river of revelation available to every believer and the need for a life wholly dedicated, consecrated, and devoted to the Lord. Part 2 will examine the significance of Sundar Singh in Todd’s vision, as an example of the extraordinary relationship God wants us to have with Him, a life of devotion, humility, daily discipline, contemplative prayer, and daily soaking in, and seeking of God’s manifest presence. This style of Christian living will see us through the most violent shaking or trying times.”


“In this same vision, where I saw the Glory Cloud of Revelation cover believers, I also saw an old saint by the name of Sundar Singh who lived in the latter part of the 1800’s and early 1900’s in India. Then, the Holy Spirit spoke to me about this new release of prophetic revelation coming upon the church, similar to the anointing that was upon this man. It stirred my curiosity, and so I studied the life of Sundar Singh, and discovered that this early Punjabi evangelist experienced profound prophetic visions and encounters.

The Lord Himself regularly visited Sundar Singh. During these visitations, he would ask questions of the Lord and receive direct answers. At the Master’s Feet is a record of these question and answer times with the Lord. Sundar spoke to the Lord as Moses did face-to-face with God, as a friend speaks to a friend. In his writings, Singh describes his visions and experiences, but we also learn that he was humble, faithful, repentant, and spent much time in the presence of the Lord. This has come to be known as the Christian Contemplative Tradition.”


“Sundar Singh spent at least two hours daily in reading the Scriptures, meditation and prayer. He would arise at 5:00 am and finish by 7:00 or 8:00 depending on what his schedule was for the day. He often spent the whole day or night in prayer. His discipline was to read one chapter of the Bible, rapidly at first reading, then to return to reread passages or verses that were more suggestive to him. These he would linger with and meditate on for as long as it was fruitful for him to do so. Next, he would enter into a period of ‘recollection’ for twenty minutes or so. This was a time of silence, in which he would allow the Lord to speak to him in some way. With his own mind and heart quieted, he opened his mind and his heart to hear what the Lord would have to say to him or just simply enjoy companionship with his Lord. Often this period of silence would extend into a deeper state called ‘contemplation’ in which he enjoyed complete rest and refreshment in the love of God.

Often during times of contemplation, he entered into experiences of ecstasy. He regarded these experiences as the same as St. Paul’s entrance into the ‘third heaven’. During his latter years, they occurred frequently, as often as ten times a month. About these experiences he said, ‘I never try to go into ecstasy; nor do I advise others to try. It is a gift to be accepted, but it should not be sought; if given, it is a pearl of great price.

Anyone who contemplates the heavenly calling of the apostle Paul and his being caught up into the third heaven, and again into Paradise, will lift up his voice to God and say: Glory to God who surely gives great gifts to men!”  —

So Todd had a vision of Sundar Singh sent by God did he?  I think absolutely not and I rest my case!  But then this story is kinda old news considering that 8 months after writing this article, Todd Bentley had to slip out the back door because of a then pending separation from his wife.  Todd was having an affair with another woman during the Revival.  Todd is now divorced and seeing the new lady in his life.  Shocking!!!  And people will still try tell you after all this that ‘God was definitely at Lakeland healing everyone’.   OK, but which god?  The one that invented adultery?


[ 2] Meditations on Various Aspects of the Spiritual Life in the chapter “Finally All Men Will Return to God”
[3] Cf. Sharpe, “Nathan Soderblom, Sadhu Sundar Singh and Emanuel Swedenborg,” cited in note 1 above.
[4] Soderblom, Sundar Singh’s budskap urgivet och belyst (Stockholm 1923), p. 129.
[6] Reproduced in letter from J. Goddard to the Editor of The New-Church Messenger (February 29, 1928), p. 140.
[7] Reprinted in The Helper (January 2, 1929), p. 5.
[8] 1bid.
[5] 1bid., p. 217.
Elijah List: , June 21 2006
Elijah List:, June 22 2006
Freshfire:, June 21 2006
Freshfire:, June 20 2006
Links In A Golden Chain: © Copyright 1996, by Kathryn Lindskoog
At the Master’s Feet, Sundar Singh: , 4 June 2006
Please share:

Deborah (Discerning the World)

Deborah Ellish is the author of the above article. Discerning the World is an internet Christian Ministry based in Johannesburg South Africa. Tom Lessing and Deborah Ellish both own Discerning the World. For more information see the About this Website page below the comments section.

Name or Username
Terms and Conditions

After commenting you have 15 minutes to EDIT your comment. Click the gear comment-gear at the bottom right corner of the comment box, then click EDIT.

Recent Comments Section: The last page of most recent comments is displayed first. Please read all previous comment pages if there are any. Thank you.
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

You quote SSS:

Nobody will be allowed to enter into Heaven who has not a face like Jesus Christ. That is the only ticket, otherwise we shall find ourselves out of place there. Only those who follow Him will feel at home there.

Then you write:

No where is this in the bible. Not a single scripture to back this up.

How could you not be aware of what Jesus himself said – “I am the way … No one comes to the Father except by becoming like me”? (Jn14:6) OK I have paraphrased it very slightly to make its meaning clear. But he says plenty elsewhere “be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect” and “Except your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes …” etc. Until you make this your life’s aim and progress in that endeavour you will never be “considered worthy of the age to come” (Lk20:35)

So yes, unless you conform your life so that you look like Jesus or “Have his face” you will not be allowed to enter Heaven. You should remember that SSS wrote in Urdu and was translated to English, so to get the meaning correct you need to understand the Urdu expression that translates to “have someone’s face”. SSS became sufficiently like Jesus that after a visit from him to their house children thought they had met with Jesus. What a compliment – SSS obviously “had Jesus’ face”!

If you imagine that someone else’s righteousness can be “imputed” to you (a totally unbiblical concept, the only thing ever “imputed” was faith, and that was Abraham’s own faith!) then you will be just as disappointed as the foolish virgins who didn’t have oil of their own when the bridegroom came. It is by following Jesus so that His righteousness becomes your own righteousness – so that you “have his face” in translation from SSS – that you will be allowed into the wedding banquet.


So you think I have changed Jesus’ meaning!? Recall that he has just been asked the way to the Father’s house, and he has just assured them that they already know the way. So then he makes it plain “I am the way” and makes it quite explicit by saying there is no other way to the Father than the way they already know – Jesus himself – the way he is (I am the way). So in order to come to the Father, the-way-they-are must become conformed to the-way-Jesus-is. This is the way he has been demonstrating and they have been “following” as disciples for ~4 years already. The whole Jesus sect became known as “the Way” (Ac9:2,19:9&23) and Paul admitted that he himself had become a “follower of the Way” (Ac24:14&24).

Obviously “following him” means listening to and obeying him and since he lived what he preached, it means imitating his lifestyle – becoming like him – having a like mind with Christ (Phils2:2). He said to take his yoke and learn from him – because it was the same yoke he himself wore and he could testify that it was easy and light. It must be a way that they already knew so it cannot include anything to do with him dying for sin or something – because at the time when he said those words the last thing they could imagine happening was that he might die.

If you disagree with this meaning, what other meaning would you like? Jesus is the path – so he must lay down while they walk on him!? Jesus is the way so they must literally “follow him” by tagging along behind where ever he goes!? What do you think Jesus wanted his disciples to understand when he said “I am the Way … to come to the Father”?

On your other points – surely it is obvious to you that John in Revelation is only referring to the words of that actual prophecy. It is a bit late to add anything to Revelation once it has been mass printed! In case you didn’t know, Revelation was not the last book written as John himself wrote his gospel shortly after Revelation and John’s first epistle was written later still being the covering letter to accompany his gospel.

There is a major difference between never having sinned (which is not possible for most) and being “cleansed from all unrighteousness” so that we sin no more. This is possible for all, and is in fact necessary and the only way in which to ever come to the Father. It doesn’t need to be completed in this life as Jesus has many mansions in which you may continue to progress towards perfection in your life there.

Of course many Catholics are “followers of the Way” such that they resemble Jesus to varying degrees. How could they not be? You grow in the likeness of that which you love, and if they love and serve Jesus they can’t help but grow in his likeness. Mother Theresa grew far more into Jesus’ likeness than almost all others. But she was not quite perfect. Otherwise she would not have died but would have been translated as were Enoch and Elijah (who obviously did achive perfection within their life on earth).

Since God intervened to rescue SSS miraculously from accidental death many times, and since as far as we know he was not martyred (in which God rarely intervenes), it seems very likely that SSS was also one who achieved perfection within his earthly life and so was translated without seeing death.

I wonder if you are aware of what happened to some insolent youths who mocked Elisha after Elijah’s translation? (2Ki2:23) I wouldn’t be in your shoes in bad mouthing God’s truest servants like the Sadhu and Mother Theresa! It might not be regarded lightly by our heavenly audience.


Dear Deb,

I don’t know where you get the idea that Catholicism is a Babylonian Pagan religion. Remember that prior to the reformation Catholicism was pretty much all there was. So are you saying that before the reformation there were no Christians at all. That everyone who tried to follow Jesus before the reformation were really all Babylonian Pagans! Seems hard to believe don’t you think?

Remember protestantism is really just a rather modern branch of that same Babylonian Paganism – so what do you think is the main change or essential new ingredient that means your religion is not simply a continuation with variation of Babylonian Paganism?

I do appreciate that “Babylon the Great, the Mother of Prostitutes, etc” of Revelation 17 is indeed Rome – the city that sits on 7 hills. But this is not the Roman Catholic church but is rather the Roman Empire! Remember the dragon with seven heads that tried to devour the baby church as soon as it was born – I think this also is a picture of the Roman Empire of the first century that tried with enormous persecution to destroy the fledgling church but failed. I think it is almost certain that Nero of Rome was the beast whose number is six hundred and sixty six (“Nero Caesar” = 666 using Greek->Hebrew transliteration or 616 using Latin->Hebrew). Maybe you could point me to something that might substantiate your claim about Roman Catholicism?

I think it would be worth defining just what you think a Christian is. In my view it is someone who actually tries to follow Jesus – such that they actually do things that he said they should do, and refrain from doing things that he said they shouldn’t do, because he said to. People that behave in the way Jesus would have them behave without knowing what he said (eg Old Testament saints) can hardly be called Christians because they are not “following” Christ. But they must be in the same position before God as those who do. “To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honour and immortality, he will give eternal life” (Rom2:7). So I think finding acceptance by God without knowing about Jesus is not so difficult, and is certainly not the impossibility that I suspect you think it is!


Dear Deb,

Thanks for all the references. I appreciate the time you took to reply. However I am sorry to have to say that I think your Catholic=Paganism idea is a house of cards built on thinner evidence than the faked moon landing (If you also believe the moon landing was faked then I am very sorry for you!). The Acts passage suggests quite strongly that Simon Magus genuinely repented.

We read that he was “amazed” at the signs that accompanied the apostles – which suggests that the “miracles” he could induce were of a much lower quality. He was again amazed and strongly desired to be able to produce the effect of the Holy Spirit – which as miracles go is really unimpressive being pretty much only subjective. This all suggests that Simon’s own “miracles” were little more than conjuring trickery – and thus he had no more real power than any other mortal, but just cleverness. He may have had an invisible helper or two in decades past, but at pentecost their unsanctioned activity was pretty much shut down so by the time of his altercation with Peter he would probably have had to resort to trickery to produce miracles. As for all the other myths and legends which might refer to the same guy ([see wikipedia]), well which ones do you believe! They are so contradictory that most must be fiction and maybe they all are. To imagine that a guy like this could end up dominating the Roman world is a bit like imagining that someone like Yuri Geller or James Randi could take over America with their tricks.

Universal studios – are they also also a pagan religion based just because they use the word Catholic (albeit in a different language). It is not reasonable to think that because someone used what is a common word that they must have deep connections with something else that uses the same common word!

You can’t worship something you don’t even know about. Worship is an attitude of mind which upholds as “worthy” something that is known and perceived as worthy and gives it praise. It is not possible to “give worth” to something you don’t think is worthy any more than it is possible to “believe” something you know is not true.

Being “born again” is a metaphor – a bit like having “your robe washed in the blood of the lamb”. It doesn’t happen physicaly and so you have to interpret the expression, and different people will interpret it differently according to their experience. In any case whereas you can choose to “follow Christ” and thereby “become a follower of the Way” and therefore a Christian, you cannot choose to be born again. It happens how and when the Spirit chooses and a Christian may not even recognise that it has already happened to them because they are not sensitive to, or familiar with, the symptoms. If one cannot remember one’s physical birth, why should one remember one’s spiritual birth. So being “born again” and “made a new creature” are not useful descriptions of someone that is a Christian because they are metaphors that have no well defined meaning.

As far as we know Jesus had no “born again” conversion experience, but he definitely was “born again” or “born of the Spirit” because he further says “we speak of what we know and testify what we have seen”. In his case and for many others born into Christian families, they simply grow into spiritual life by constantly seeking and following the Father’s will.

Jesus gave us a sure guide to determine someone’s standing before God – “You will know them by their fruits.” (Mat7:17) He says just as you cannot “gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles”, even so “a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.” (Mat7:18) You are calling trees that clearly bear good fruit “bad trees”, so you are clearly wrong!


Dear Deb,

“How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” The answer is obvious that he cannot. So the “born again” expression must be understood as a metaphor instead.

Can a virgin become pregnant and have a child. Of course she can – by artificial (or miraculous) insemination. So this is a real physical event. This is not a metaphor.

Do you own a robe? Have you washed it in the blood of a lamb? Is it white from being washed in blood? These things are obviously not physical! Why can’t you see this!

Most things in John’s visions in Revelation are metaphorical. This should be really obvious. Does Jesus really have a sword coming out of his mouth? Can stars (ie suns which are a million times larger than the earth) really be thrown down onto the earth! Besides which in the very introduction says “what must soon take place” (Rev1:1). So if it was soon for the readers for whom it was written, it is long past for us! (So no “coming Tribulation” I think)

Hebrews 10:19 is speaking of (1) entering the holy of holies by (2) the blood of Jesus. Clearly (1) the holy of holies is long gone since it was part of the temple which was destroyed in 70AD by the Romans, and (2) Jesus’ blood is also long gone having disappeared in the tomb along with his dead body. So of course it is a metaphor! How is it that you can’t see this?!!! I really don’t understand how anyone can be so …..!

Even though Jesus was pre-existent, he can still be born. And just as he can be born of a woman, he can also be born of the Spirit (which is what it means to be born again). And having been born of the Spirit he must then grow in the Spirit: “And the child grew and became strong in spirit … and the favour of God was upon him” (Lk2:40).

Isaiah 64:6 is not speaking of people who bear good fruit. Rather it is speaking of a people who are “carried away” with “iniquities” and unrepentant – “we have sinned – and in these ways we continue” (v5). The few “righteounesses” that they do (like sacrificing animals or attending church) are indeed as filthy rags because the rest of their lives and their hearts are evil.

I think the current Pope appears to be a practicing Christian – one of the best Popes yet.

By following Jesus, I simply mean believing what he said – that God is our Father and all humans are our brothers and sisters. And then living accordingly – primarily to please God and secondarily to love our brothers and sisters as ourselves. You don’t need the Bible to do either of these things. Everyone has a pretty good idea of how people might behave in heaven with their Creator watching, and so we should behave that way here and now. Indeed if your Bible seems to disagree with this principle (eg not healing someone on the Sabbath) then that part at least should be disregarded.

If you try to live this way because Jesus said to, then you are a Christian. If you have scarcely heard of Jesus but try to live this way because you believe in God and want to please your Creator, then while you couldn’t be called a Christian, you are just as “born again” as any Christian might be and will be welcomed into the life hereafter.

Hope this answers your questions sufficiently. Since I am tired of this sometimes rather silly exchange, I might take a break for a while.


When you speak of something as being physical (eg washing a robe in blood) but are actually meaning something spiritual, then this is obviously a metaphor as any robe you wear does not need washing – rather it is your heart and will that needs washing. It is representative and symbolic, not actual and literal. Literal blood is red and so “washing” something in it is not going to make it clean and white is it! If something gets blood on it then you need to wash it in water to make it clean again.

What “is sown a natural body, … is raised a spiritual body.” (1Cor15:44) “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (v50). Jesus’ resurrection body was not made of flesh and blood or it would not have been able to appear and disappear, pass through walls, etc. So no bodies with flowing blood in heaven I think, and certainly no sprinkling of physical blood around the place! (Have you thought how he would get the blood out? – would he slit a wrist and wave his arm around? pierce his jugular and shake his head? He wouldn’t want to puncture his abdomen too deep or turdy stuff from his intestines might come out also! Would he put a band-aid on after to stop the bleeding?)

I don’t believe the earthly temple is a copy of anything in heaven. If the curtain separating people from the holy of holies in the physical temple had to be torn in half and the temple’s complete destruction foretold by Jesus and executed by the Romans, why would you want a copy of that obviously deficient and obsolete structure in heaven?

God does not desire sacrifice but mercy (Mat9:13, 12:7, Hos6:6), listening and obedience (Sam15:22), and heart repentance (Ps51:16-17). Micah summarises God’s requirements as acting justly, loving mercy, and walking humbly with Him (Mic6:8). In the light of these enlightened prophets calling Israel away from their ancient sacrificial system, why ever would you want to retrogress back to that darkness again?! If sacrifices were obviously deficient way back in Hosea and Micah’s day, then more modern sacrifices must also be deficient, including sacrificing a human (Jesus).

Apart from the obvious contradictions, if you want to take the OT representation of God seriously, then what do you think of the fact that the first offspring of every womb including every firstborn son was forfeit to the LORD and either had to be killed as a sacrifice, or if human then it should be ransomed to save it from being sacrificed? (Exod13:12-15 & 34:19-20) This means that Jesus’ life was already forfeit and Jesus himself had need to be ransomed! This we find happening in Luke 2:23-24. So if Jesus’ life was already forfeit such that it had to be ransomed, it doesn’t make sense that he could then be used as payment to ransom others. Or if it was in fact possible that a ransomed individual could be used to ransom more, then it means that everyone was really ransomed by the one first little payment of Joseph that ransomed Jesus!

Did Jesus’ blood also cleanse all women from the “uncleanness” of childbirth for all the children that have been born since the first Easter? I don’t think any of the Apostles suggested that it did. So why do you happily disregard this purification sacrifice (which was apparently important to remove Mary’s uncleanness after giving birth to Jesus) but are unwilling to regard the other sacrificial ceremonies (passover or whatever) as no longer relevant?

Jesus swept away all of the ceremonials of sacrifice and atonement and destroyed the basis of all this fictitious guilt and sense of isolation by declaring that man is a child of God. The creature-Creator relationship was placed on a child-parent basis. God becomes a loving Father to his mortal sons and daughters. All ceremonials not a legitimate part of such an intimate family relationship are forever abrogated.

The effort made by some New Testament writers to connect the new gospel teaching with the old Jewish theology (as in the atonement teaching) had the worthy motivation of trying to make the gospel of the kingdom more acceptable to disbelieving Jews. However it failed as far as winning the Jews, and has confused and alienated many honest souls in all subsequent generations. It seems to have found acceptance in early Christianity because it was also present in the mystery cults (eg Attis and Mithras) and the large number of early converts from these cults were happy to embrace it.

God Himself said from heaven “This is my beloved Son, listen to him” (Mat17:5, Mk9:7, Lk9:35). But God never said that of Jesus’ followers – Paul & Co. So I suggest you listen to Jesus first and foremost and where his followers go beyond or differ from the message that Jesus instructed and trained them to teach, don’t replace Jesus’ gospel message with theirs! Jesus never said anything about his death until after Peter’s famous confession and shortly before he was due to make his last trip to Jerusalem (Mat16:21). Peter’s reaction shows that this was the last thing they expected and right until he had actually died they did not accept that it would happen. This proves that Jesus’ death formed no part of the gospel message which they had been trained to preach for several years and even trained a second generation of 70 evangelists to continue with (Lk10:1). So unless you can substantiate your theories of blood covering and what-not from Jesus’ own teaching, I am going to ignore them as tradition added by the very early catholic church that should be discarded.

I did not call you a name – I left a blank for you to fill in! I couldn’t make up my mind whether to call you “blind” or “uneducated” for not being able to identify obvious figures of speech at what I imagine should be elementary level English. I left a blank just to voice my frustration. Jesus called the church leaders of his day “blind guides” and I think that description fits you also since you present yourself as a teacher. So you can consider yourself called that – but kindly – because I really think you mean well!

The shedding of Jesus’ blood on the cross is obviously not a metaphor – the same as if get stabbed my blood gets spilt and makes a mess. But as soon as it is applied to cleansing in some way – then clearly it must be metaphorical because real blood does not make things clean but messy. Jesus spoke of eating his flesh and drinking his blood – clearly that must be metaphorical. It is by metaphorically eating his flesh and drinking his blood that we can be cleansed and purified – by absorbing his flesh-and-blood life into our own lives so that his life becomes ours and we start to behave as he behaved. In this way we “have the face of Jesus” to use SSS’s expression – which is also obviously a metaphor.

To me, Jesus is my creator and my elder brother. By his behaviour as a human clothed in flesh and sharing our blood, He showed us what his and our Father is like – absolutely lovely and pure light with no dark side at all (1Jn1:5). (That certainly means he needs no innocent blood to be shed to appease his anger!)

Say you or your spouse has grieved the other by unfaithfulness but you really want to stay together and be close again. That requires real forgiveness and is not easy (to say the least!) Our relationship with God is even closer and more loving than that of a spouse because he lives within our minds and shares our thoughts. So although forgiveness is not physical, it is real and literal. It is not a metaphor. To draw close and feel God’s love within, one needs to not grieve Him with ugly thoughts.

As for venerating Mary, I don’t see it as even relevant and it probably depends what you think “venerate” means. I don’t think Mary caught on to Jesus’ spiritual mission even after he died and rose again. She rather hoped he would be the Messiah that would free the Jews from Roman oppression. I think that is pretty disappointing for someone who could have been so close and understood so much, and could have even left us something in writing about his early years! If I imagined that Mary was this wonderful lady that never sinned and was Jesus’ closest confidant, then I would venerate her – as she would probably be worthy of it. I do venerate SSS as I think he is worthy, and I would be pleased if I could attain even a fraction of his spiritual stature.

I know I still sin. I still get satisfaction (and maybe even pleasure) from revenge type movies. You know the standard Hollywood fare where after literally getting away with the meanest murders possible the bad guy finally gets what is coming to him. The trouble is that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Eze33:22) and so neither did Jesus and if we are to “have his face”, neither should we! I find it difficult to “have the mind of Jesus” in this situation don’t you? But it must be possible – I am sure SSS saw no pleasure in revenge.

As far as priests go, I don’t know what the word should even mean in a Christian setting. If God is my Father and I am his child, where does a “priest” fit in to the family picture?


Hi I recently watched a prophecy video of Sandu about the houston flood which he prophesied would happen. Everything he was saying added up until he quoted Revelation disscussing 144,000k which he quoted not 144,000 but the number of 140,000. He stated this number more then once and obviously is a biblical big discrepancy.

It was a youtube video, regarding the houston flooding. He also says “my sons & daughters like hes talking in God 1st person to the congregation which is just off- Can you please look into this video. I would really like someones feedback.
Jonathan M.

Tom Lessing (Discerning the World)


Beware of Sadhu Selvaraj. He is not only a false prophet but also a necromancer.

When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations, the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee. (Deu 18:9-12)

I found this on the Internet written by someone who personally attended some of his conferences in America.

I would like to turn your attention to a doctrine taught by Sadhu Selvaraj which, in my opinion, should be a major reason for all Christians to genuinely reconsider whether or not his prophetic statements are of any value. The doctrine is that dead Biblical prophets or saints can and actually do help Christians achieve God’s purposes on Earth.

I was present in one of his gatherings in Manila a few years ago (I’ve forgotten the exact year) when, much to my surprise, he claimed that the prophet Joel was in our midst, imparting to him revelations he was supposed to tell the people. No, it wasn’t Joel Houston or Joel Osteen or Joel Lamangan. It was the prophet Joel son of Pethuel of the Bible he was talking about. It was the first time I heard someone claim that a Biblical prophet is personally and spiritually coming down from heaven to deliver a message through him.

Apparently, this is a doctrine inseparable from Sadhu Selvaraj’s prophetic claims. In 10:16 of the first video above, he says:

“The armies of God will be stationed in this land. And they will wage war against the enemies of God. The kingdom of God, the angels of God and the saints of God—forget about the Catholic teaching of praying to the saints (I’m not talking about that right now. I’m talking to you about the true ministry of angels and the true ministry of the saints)—they will come down.”

Sadhu Selvaraj promises in the video that dead saints will personally come down to help Christians accomplish God’s work in the Philippines. He immediately footnotes that this is not about the Roman Catholic doctrine of praying to the saints. However, it is difficult for me to ignore how strikingly similar this claim is to the Roman Catholic saintly “apparitions” long-disputed by born-again Christians.

As Christians, we do not believe that the spirits of dead people can and should interact with anyone on Earth (Deuteronomy 18:10-12). This is one of the fundamental differences we have with Roman Catholicism.

Run as fast as you can in the opposite direction to that of Sadhu Selvaraj. He is a false prophet who wishes to look like a figure out of the Bible.

josep daniel

[Deleted by DTW – Let me introduce myself, I am a Christian, you are a Mystic with the power of Satan who claims to be a Christian. You follow the Ascended Master ‘Jesus Christ’, not Jesus Christ the Son of God. Speaking in Tongues (communication with demons) and Meditation catapults your mind into demonic spiritual realms where you are held captive by Satan. Please read article on The Biblical Holy Spirit vs. The False Unholy Spirit of Fire]

David Barnes

Paul claimed to be a Pharisee after conversion: “But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭23:6‬ ‭KJV‬‬


Hindu mystics or sadhus is one of the stages of life when men seek God but depending on ones calling one can start the process of renouciation quite early.
Its true many of Sadhu Sundar Singh teachings would seem out of place with europeanization of christianity it should be noted that God works in mysterious ways and we do not know what Sundar Singh really was but for us Christians of India we value him greatly as a man of God who did his share of work in vast and complex maze thats India

Tom Lessing (Discerning the World)

Hi Prakash.

There is no such thing as a “Europeanization of Christianity.” There is “One Lord, one faith, one baptism (referring to the baptism of the Holy Ghost and not the water baptism of John the Baptist).” (Ephesians 4:5). So, the bottom line is that Sadhu Sundar Singh’s teachings were out of place with the teachings of the One Lord Jesus Christ, and that, to say the least, is very dangerous.

Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds. (2 John 1:9-11)

We don’t evaluate a person’s spirituality on his works but what he believes (his doctrines).

JC Lequy
Dr. Carolyn L. Hilt

Today, I happened to tune in to the Jim Bakker show. Immediately, and that is no exaggeration, I was struck by this man who was sitting next to him dressed in a yellow robe. I had no idea who he was, but when he spoke, I was pricked in my heart that this was not a truthful person. I did not know this person, had never heard of him, but felt so strongly, i started investigating who in the world was he. All the words spoken were meant to put fear into you. There was no love of Christ manifested, no imploring people to turn their lives over to the Lord. It was hard and negative. There was no love evidenced. Then there was a break and the viewing audience was asked to purchase all of the tapes of this man. I shut off the TV feeling overwhelmed and did not know what I had just witnessed but knew strongly there was something wrong. The first thought I had was this man was going to be instrumental in bringing down Jim Bakker for a second time for opening himself to the teachings. The second thought was why was Jim so eager to embrace this man. I thought of the Bereans who searched the Scripture to see if the things the apostles told them was true. They searched daily. In all of the talking there were few if any Scriptures mentioned and in fact I would be hard-pressed to remember any of them. The thing that stood out in my mind was the constant imploring for people to purchase his tapes. I am concerned. I cannot endorse someone that seems to have multiple “conversion” experiences. One that I read mentioned he said he was at a meeting where science was discussed and evolution and the speaker talked about the Creator. He then said he felt a hand on his back propelling him forward. Another story mentioned the vision he had of Jesus. Others mentioned his anger and on and on. We are warned that in the later days that false prophets would arise and we need to be discerning and careful and not jump on the bandwagon in support until we have conviction that the person is true to the Gospel. I pray this man is not a false prophet and if he is that it will be revealed before many are hurt. Blessings in the Lord Jesus,


Frankly the arguments made in this article can be easily countered by applying common logic. You debate on a topical level, without truly digging deeper. I doubt you read much of Sundar Sign’s writings. If you did, you’d know he was a follower of Christ alone. FYI he wasn’t a Hindu before coming to Christ, but you’d know that if you knew his writings.

[Edited by DTW: No wonder you love Mosaïek Kerk.]

Tom (Discerning the World)

Hi Peter, There are many Christs in the world today, (false ones) and one needs to make very sure that you are not following a false one. Watch this video, if you will.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x