Part 1: Why Bishop Philip Lim, the President of NCCS, who highlights my so-called ordination lapse is out of order and not in accordance with protocol, the very thing he accuses us of; his aim is to mar my character;
while Rev Dominic Yeo, the General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God remains strangely silent
Part 2: Joseph Prince is so slimy because he told only a small portion of the truth of what Martyn Lloyd-Jones said that seemed to support him, while hiding the other massive half of the truth that Lloyd-Jones also said that went head-on against his grace teachings.
Despite being aware that many of Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ teachings went against that of Joseph Prince, Bishop Philip Lim and NCCS have continued to support Prince, because of self-preservation.
To have the National Leaders of the Singapore Church act out of self-interest, instead of love for the sheep, is grievous to the core.
Important Announcement No 1:
Because of a change in WhatsApp policy, from now on,
I will not be able to inform all my 2,000 plus WhatsApp contacts
every time I release a YouTube Video or Article on my website.
The maximum number of times I can WhatsApp them
about my YouTube Videos
due to a broadcast limit,
is 3 times, maximum per month.
This means that if I were to feature my videos and articles
more than 3 times per month,
I cannot WhatsApp them without getting blocked.
This is for your info.
Important Announcement No 2:
Part 1 of this Article
was supposed to be featured in Jan 2026
by on-camera presentation.
But for some reasons, I had to bring it forward.
Obviously, because I am still overseas,
I cannot appear on camera for this Article.
This article was also sent to Rev Dr Ngoei Foong Nghian, General Secretary, National Council of Churches of Singapore (NCCS) office, and for the attention of the Executive Committee Members.
This article was also sent to the Alliance of Pentecostal & Charismatic Churches of Singapore (APCCS), for the attention of the Chairman, Rev Yang Tuck Yoong & Co Chairman, Rev Dominic Yeo (General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God of Singapore) and Council Members.
In my last article, I highlighted that Bishop Philip Lim
wrote a letter comprising 20 points to her constituent churches
and also, as an indirect reply to me and the team.
the 20 points of Bishop Philip Lim’s NCCS Letter
I responded to Point No 7.
In this Article, I will tackle Point No 5
5. Rev George Ong was ordained by the Assemblies of God Singapore (AOG). In the AOG denomination, an ordained pastor is required to renew his licence on an annual basis. We understand that in the case of Rev Ong, his licence has lapsed and presently he has no official affiliation nor accountability to the AOG Singapore that had ordained him for pastoral ministry.
Bishop Philip Lim, before I even begin, first things first.
Please don’t accuse me of being personal
just because I mention your name.
If that is being personal, then you too, is also guilty
because you too mention my name in your letter.
More so, since you are the one who sign the letter,
I would have to address you personally and specifically,
and NCCS, generally.
I am astonished that the comment
that my ordination has lapsed
came from Bishop Philip Lim, the President of NCCS.
Let me ask Bishop Philip Lim and NCCS,
are you the issuing authority of my ordination?
Yes or no?
Since you aren’t the issuing authority of my ordination,
aren’t you aware that it is improper for you
to bring this matter up,
and what is worse is that you did it publicly.
So, why did you bring up that my ordination has lapsed,
except with the intention
to mar and tarnish my character and integrity.
I am surprised that you, as a Bishop,
representing the National leadership of the Singapore Church,
NCCS
would resort to such a measure as this.
I am assuming that you, Bishop Philip Lim and NCCS
wouldn’t have dared to state this issue publicly
unless you have checked or communicated
with the Singapore Assemblies of God,
the body that ordained me.
There is every likelihood
that Bishop Philip Lim and NCCS have spoken
to the General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God,
Rev Dominic Yeo or/and his council members.
If this was the case,
I wish to ask Rev Dominic Yeo,
and also, Bishop Philip Lim, the President of NCCS,
who makes this issue public,
whether they are aware
that it was I who submitted the withdrawal of my ordination,
from the Assemblies of God about 11 years ago on 1 Sep 2014.
the Withdrawal Letter of my Credential
as an Ordained Minister
submitted to the Singapore Assemblies of God.
The circumstance that led to this was that I felt God’s call
to preach against the Pre-tribulation rapture doctrine,
a position held by the Singapore Assemblies of God.
I knew the Assemblies of God Council will call me up.
The then Assistant General Superintendent, Rev Robert Lum
and one council member notified me to meet me in 2014.
I had already submitted the withdrawal of my ordination
from the Assemblies of God on 1 Sep 2014, 11 years ago.
This is the first price I had to pay
for preaching against a false doctrine
– that I was prepared to give up my ordination
and my association with my denomination.
So preaching against the heretical doctrines of Joseph Prince
wasn’t the first price I had to pay.
Well, the Assistant General Superintendent, Rev Robert Lum
and Rev Mark Poh,
representing the Singapore Assemblies of God met me.
In the meeting, Rev Robert Lum informed me
that I can keep my ordination,
that I don’t have to give it up,
and that they would not remove my ordination.
as I had already submitted the withdrawal of my ordination
from the Assemblies of God,
and since I preached against the denomination’s doctrine.
So, based on what the then Assistant General Superintendent
on behalf of the Assemblies of God had told me,
I continued to use the title “Reverend” from 2014 onwards
for the past 11 years since 2014.
Assuming that it was Rev Dominic Yeo or his council members,
who told Bishop Philip Lim and NCCS
that my ordination has lapsed,
may I ask Rev Dominic Yeo when it has lapsed?
If it has lapsed 10 years ago,
why didn’t Rev Dominic Yeo, or any council member
from the Assemblies of God Council
tell me or write to me about it,
even though they are well aware,
that I have been using the title ‘Reverend’ publicly and openly
for the past 11 years.
If it has lapsed 10 years ago,
why didn’t Rev Dominic Yeo or any council members
write to inform me
but only surfaced it now,
when it was brought up by Bishop Philip Lim and NCCS?
Is it only because
I have chosen to take on NCCS
for not acting against the heresies of Joseph Prince?
Is that the real reason?
This must be the reason as it is Bishop Philip Lim from NCCS,
and not Rev Dominic Yeo, from the Assemblies of God,
who brought up the issue, publicly.
Since the Assemblies of God is the issuing authority
of my ordination, it is their interest,
and more importantly, it is their responsibility
to write to me and inform me that my ordination has lapsed
and therefore, I cannot use the title Reverend anymore.
How could Rev Dominic Yeo and the Assemblies of God,
the issuing authority of my ordination have allowed me
to use the title reverend illegally
without informing me for the past 10 years.
For the past 10 years,
nobody from the Assemblies of God said anything,
then, suddenly, now, it becomes a problem.
Has Rev Dominic Yeo and the Assemblies of God Council
been “sleeping” for the past 10 years.
How is it that Bishop Philip Lim and NCCS,
who is not the issuing authority of my ordination
is involved now, and are interested in the issue,
while Rev Dominic Yeo and the Assemblies of God
who is the issuing authority
of my ordination is totally silent?
I find this extremely strange.
How can Rev Dominic Yeo,
being the General Superintendent
of the Singapore Assemblies of God
not be interested to know
whether I am using the ordination that is issued by them
legally or illegally?
How could Rev Dominic Yeo have allowed me
to use the title “Reverend” illegally for 10 years
without notifying me?
Rev Dominic Yeo,
you mean you as the General Superintendent,
you are not bothered about whether a minister
is using the ordination issued by your organisation illegally,
and allowing this state of affairs to continue for how long?
For a lengthy 10 years,
and then suddenly, you finally woke up to the seriousness of it
– and worst of all, you dare not mention it yourself to me,
but you had to do it through a non-partisan and third party,
Bishop Philip Lim, the President of NCCS?
If my ordination lapsed 10 years ago,
Rev Dominic Yeo should have told me then.
If not the 2nd year, then certainly the 3rd year;
if not the 4th year, then surely the 5th year,
the 6th year, 7th year, 8th year, 9th year, 10th year,
nothing, nothing, nothing was heard
from Rev Dominic Yeo and the Assemblies of God.
Then suddenly…11 years later,
Rev Dominic Yeo finally woke up and decided to bring this up,
not by himself, but presumably, through Bishop Philip Lim.
But why wait until 11 years later,
then bring up the issue?
I would tell you why.
First, it is because I had the guts
to contend against the Chairman of APCCS,
Rev Yang Tuck Yoong (recently, 2025)
and Rev Dominic Yeo is the Co Chairman of APCCS.
Second, it is because I had the courage
to contend against NCCS
for not acting against Joseph Prince.
I’d tell you these are the reasons
why my ordination which wasn’t a problem
for the last 11 years,
now suddenly becomes an issue.
I can say with much certainty that if I hadn’t done that;
if I had not contended against APCCS, NCCS and Joseph Prince,
Rev Dominic Yeo and his General Council will still be silent,
and my ordination will still remain a non-issue.
And this issue about my ordination
will never have been brought up.
Rev Dominic Yeo and the council,
would have taken my ordination to be proper,
as the saying goes, “Silence means consent.”
Since Bishop Philip Lim, from NCCS
is the one that makes this issue public,
I now ask Bishop Philip Lim to produce a letter
from the Singapore Assemblies of God Council
that my ordination has lapsed.
And if it has lapsed, since when has it lapsed?
If it has lapsed 10 years ago,
why no one from the Assemblies of God council
had raised this issue until recently.
Let me repeat:
it was I who had written to withdraw my ordination
from the Assemblies of God.
– 11 years ago in 2014.
And it was they who told me
that I could keep the ordination.
Since Rev Dominic Yeo and not even a single one
from the Assemblies of God Council
had raised the ordination issue
even though they are aware
I had used the title publicly and openly for the past 11 years
I had rightly assumed
that the ordination stays with me all this while.
If not, the Assemblies of God,
being the issuing authority of my ordination
would have and should have stepped in
to inform me 10 years ago
as it is in their interest and responsibility to do so.
Moreover, all credentialled members
were always sent the annual renewal form
for credential renewal,
but I don’t remember ever receiving any form from them,
for the past 11 years
after I had met the then Assistant General Superintendent
when he told me I could keep my ordination in 2014.
Also, one of the reasons for the Assemblies of God
to grant the renewal of ordination
is for one to show proof
that one has always been in the ministry.
As for me, I had always been super busy in the ministry,
since I became a Pastor in 1994,
and then as an itinerant minister since 2001 till today.
Remember, I had already left the Assemblies of God,
and written to withdraw my ordination,
and yet they told me I can keep my ordination.
So, it does not make any sense for me
to renew my ordination, year after year,
as after all,
I had already resigned from the Assemblies of God,
and there was zero contact
between me and the Assemblies of God
for the past 11 years, even today.
There were zero correspondence between me
and the Assemblies of God
for the past 11 years, even today.
And I had not received any letters from them,
or received the annual credential renewal form from them
that the Assemblies of God sent
to all credentialled ministers annually
to renew their credentials
for the past 11 years, even today.
So it was under such circumstances that I had assumed
that my ordination stays
since they had not taken it away from me
even though I had already resigned
from the Assemblies of God.
And if my ordination had lapsed,
Rev Dominic Yeo and the council
should and they must inform me.
And because they didn’t say anything for the past 11 years,
I had rightly assumed that my ordination stays
because as the saying goes,
“Silence means consent.”
Rev Dominic Yeo, are you aware
that by acting through a third party,
Bishop Philip Lim and NCCS,
about the lapse of my ordination,
is a grossly improper thing for you to do?
So, if Rev Dominic Yeo and the Assemblies of God
had not acted for the past 10 years
and wishes to act now,
please write officially to tell me
that my ordination has lapsed 10 years ago.
and please also explain why
you didn’t act until now, 11 years later.
If I received an official letter from Rev Dominic Yeo,
then I will not use the title, ‘Reverend’ anymore.
But my website’s name and YouTube Channel since 2020,
are unlikely to be changed
as the ramifications of a change may be too massive.
Having the title ‘Reverend’ is finally not important to me.
Or else, I wouldn’t have prepared to give it up
over my calling in 2014.
Finally, the main issue with NCCS
is over the issue of whether Joseph Prince is a heretic.
Bishop Philip Lim and NCCS
is very clearly using my ordination issue
to sidetrack the main issue
and to mar my character
as they cannot prove that Joseph Prince is not a heretic.
Even if I am using the title ‘Reverend’ illegally,
or even if I am a cat,
but if I can prove that Joseph Prince is a heretic,
and if NCCS is honest and objective,
they would have to listen to me,
even though I had used the title “Reverend” illegally,
and even if I am a cat.
So, this proves that this ordination issue
is only a side issue to mar my character
and to detract from the main issue
– whether Joseph Prince is a heretic,
which NCCS has not proven that he isn’t, publicly,
but we have.
Last, Bishop Philip Lim,
by publicly mentioning my ordination has lapsed
even though you are not the issuing authority
of my ordination,
shows that you are not following protocol,
and you are out of order, procedurally,
the same issues you are crying over and are accusing us of.
The least you could do is to produce an official letter
from Rev Dominic Yeo,
the General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God, Singapore
that states that my ordination lapsed 10 years ago,
which you didn’t.
As the highest office bearer of NCCS,
this is unbecoming of you to act in that improper way
– expecting others to do
what you have not exemplified yourself.
My final issue is whether my sacrifice
by my resignation from the Assemblies of God is worth it all.
Thank God, it has been worth it,
as there were 830 testimonies
by Bishops, Senior Pastors, Pastors, Elders, and believers,
who were convinced by me in seminars I conducted
that the Post-tribulation rapture doctrine is true
while the Pre-tribulation doctrine is false.
Part 2: Joseph Prince is so slimy because he told only a small portion of the truth of what Martyn Lloyd-Jones said that seemed to support him, while hiding the other massive half of the truth that Lloyd-Jones also said that went head-on against his grace teachings.
Despite being aware that many of Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ teachings went against that of Joseph Prince, Bishop Philip Lim and NCCS have continued to support Prince, because of self-preservation.
To have the National Leaders of the Singapore Church act out of self-interest, instead of love for the sheep, is grievous to the core.
In a sermon on 2 Nov 2025, last Sunday,
Joseph Prince said:
Please click here to view the video:
“If I preach like that, right?
Do your best.
Do your best not to sin.
And when you sin, alright?
I tell you, confess it completely,
make sure that God forgives you,
and then from then on, don’t sin.
Do your best. Do good.
As much as you can, do good.
And when you die, right? You go to heaven.
You will never have this accusation.
So what you’re saying is that,
let’s sin more that grace may abound.
Never.
You will never be accused of that.
Paul will never be accused of that.
This guy called JP will never be accused of that.
Not many men of God, down through the years,
even from the time of Martin Luther,
Martin Luther got it, but from then on,
not many men of God.
Have said things like, the great theologian and pastor,
Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones.
And I’ve quoted before, here and there,
trying my best to like, not verbatim,
but paraphrase what he said.
But I’m going to show you right now what he said,
in terms of the gospel of grace.
You want to see it? Okay.
“First of all, let me make a comment.
To me, a very important and vital comment.
The true preaching of the gospel of salvation
by grace alone, always,
always leads to the possibility of this charge
being brought against it.
There is no better test as to whether a man
is really preaching the New Testament
gospel of salvation than this.
That some people might misunderstand it
and misinterpret to mean
that it really amounts to this.
That because you are saved by grace alone,
it does not matter at all what you do.
You can go on sinning as much as you like
because it will redound
all the more to the glory of grace.
That is a very good test of gospel preaching.
If my preaching,
(and the preaching of JP, that’s added, right?)
If my preaching and presentation of the gospel
of salvation does not expose it
to that misunderstanding,
then it is not the gospel.”
Okay? Don’t take my photo lah.
Eh, you got permission or not?
Oh, you’re taking the screen.
Okay, no problem then.
If you want a photo, you must take a nice one.
Yeah, okay.
All right. That’s Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones,
pastor of the Westminster Chapel in London.
The world is crying for the gospel
and they’re not hearing it.”
By surfacing just one quote from Martyn Lloyd-Jones,
Joseph Prince wants to give the impression
that Martyn Lloyd-Jones supports his grace teachings.
But even for that one quote,
did you realise that Joseph Prince
dared not reveal the title of the book
where he got Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ quote from?
Let me give you the title of the book
where Joseph Prince took the quote from?
It was taken from
‘Exposition of Romans Chapter 6, The New Man,’
sermons delivered by Martyn Lloyd-Jones.
(I have a hard copy of the book)
I would tell you why
Joseph Prince dared not quote the source of this book.
This is because there are plenty of teachings
that Martyn Lloyd-Jones shared in his many books
and in the book,
‘‘Exposition of Romans Chapter 6, The New Man,’
that contradicted Joseph Prince’s teachings.
So, Joseph Prince is afraid to give the title of this book,
for fear that his congregation
may buy it and start to read the book,
and discover the many teachings of Martyn Lloyd-Jones
that went against his teachings.
You see how slimy this guy is.
I will now produce 13 proofs in this video
that Joseph Prince has hidden from you
about Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ teachings that contradicted his.
There are more proofs in the Article on my Website: 30 proofs.
These 30 proofs are not even exhaustive
as many more could be found on my website.
Proof No 1
In a sermon, ‘Not Under Law but under Grace’,
based on John 1:17
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“If grace doesn’t enable me to keep
and to live the law of God,
then it just means
that the devil has triumphed over God.”
George Ong’s comments:
Going by what Martyn Lloyd-Jones said,
this means that Joseph Prince
who teaches against obeying the law,
is a tool of the devil.
By his teaching that with the advent of grace,
the law is no longer to be obeyed,
Joseph Prince is effectively helping the devil
to triumph over God.
Proof No 2
In ‘an Exposition of Ephesians 4:17 – 5:17, Darkness and Light,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“It is one of the most subtle, dangerous heresies
that can ever be offered to men and women.
… and the argument
that the law has got nothing to do with us
is a case of the devil appearing as an angel of light.”
George Ong’s comments:
Do you know what that means?
That means, according to Martyn Lloyd-Jones,
Joseph Prince who teaches
that the law has got nothing to do with us
is not only promoting a dangerous heresy,
but he comes from the devil himself
appearing as an angel of light.
In ‘Great Doctrines of the Bible,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“Repentance must be there;
faith must be there.
If one is missing, it is not conversion.
Both are essential.”
George Ong’s comments:
By Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ opinion
of what true conversion entails,
Joseph Prince only-believe gospel cannot save
as repentance is missing from the salvation equation.
Proof No 4
In ‘Great Doctrines of the Bible,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“There is also that teaching in 1 Corinthians 11
in connection with the Communion Service,
to which we referred in the last lecture,
that because some people do not examine themselves,
they are weak and sickly.
Illness is a part of God’s process of discipline.
This does not mean that every time we are taken ill,
we are of necessity being punished for sin.
But we may be.
There is also no doubt that death, like illness,
is one of the means that God uses to sanctify us.”
George Ong’s comments:
What Martyn Lloyd-Jones said
that God can use sickness and even death to chastise us
goes against Joseph Prince’s teaching
that God will never use sickness to do the job.
Proof No 5
In a sermon, ‘Not Under Law but under Grace’,
based on John 1:17
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said,
“If grace doesn’t enable me to keep
and to live the law of God,
then it just means
that the devil has triumphed over God.”
George Ong’s comments:
This means that Joseph Prince
who teaches against obeying the law,
is a tool of the devil.
By his teaching that with the advent of grace,
the law is no longer to be obeyed,
Prince is helping the devil to triumph over God.
Proof No 6
In ‘Spiritual Depression,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“Now this is a method that God has often employed,
so that those who say that it is never God’s will
that any of us should be sick or weak
are simply denying the Scriptures.
God’s will is more important
than the health of man’s body,
and if a man will not submit himself
and subject himself to the positive teaching of the Word,
then God will certainly deal with that man,
and He may very well send an illness upon him
and lay him aside in order to make him think.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones has categorically demolished
Joseph Prince’s teaching
that it is always God’s will to heal
as that is compromising the sovereign will of God itself.
Proof No 7
Studies in the Book of Hebrews,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“But danger comes in with this, as with everything else,
when some people think the gospel
is nothing but the way to produce healing.
They talk about nothing else,
and you are given the idea that the gospel of Jesus Christ
is simply the way and the mechanism for being healed.
That view too is psychology
clothed with Christian terminology,
masquerading as the gospel.
But it is not the gospel of Jesus Christ.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones has unveiled
that Joseph Prince’s Health & Wealth gospel
that must produce healing
is not the true gospel
as it is not the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Proof No 8
In ‘Exposition of Romans Chapter 14:1-17, Liberty and Conscience,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“The moral law, the Ten Commandments in particular,
has been laid down for all time.
… the moral law has never been abrogated,
and is to be perpetually observed.”
George Ong’s comments:
The assertion of Martyn Lloyd-Jones’
that the moral law in the Ten Commandments
have never been abrogated
and is to be perpetually observed,
goes head-on against Joseph Prince’s teaching
that they have been made obsolete.
Proof No 9
In ‘Great Doctrines of the Bible,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“But I am anxious to emphasise this aspect:
that as the result of this new covenant
we are no longer under law but under grace (Rom 6:14).
… It does not mean
we do not have to keep the Ten Commandments.
They still apply to us.
… Our Lord died for us in order to enable us
to live the law and to keep it,
not to give us licence to sin.
That is the terrible sin of antinomianism,
one of the most dangerous heresies
that can ever afflict the people of God.
… That is why I denounce the terrible sin of antinomianism.
The man who says,
‘I’m no longer under law, I’m under grace…’
George Ong’s comments:
When Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“That is the terrible sin of antinomianism,
one of the most dangerous heresies
that can ever afflict the people of God.
… That is why I denounce the terrible sin of antinomianism.
The man who says,
‘I’m no longer under law, I’m under grace…’”
he is, in no uncertain terms,
describing the sinful doctrine of Antinomianism
that rejects the keeping of the Ten Commandments
that Joseph Prince is pushing for.
Proof No 10
In ‘Life in God, Life in Christ, Volume 5, Studies in 1 John,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“People are more likely to proclaim what they really are,
whether they are Christians or not,
by what they say about the commandments
and what they do about them
than in any other single respect.
To the non-Christian, the commandments are very heavy.
The commandments of God to non-Christians are a yoke;
they feel they are a task and a burden,
and in their heart of hearts,
they hate God because of this,
and they would be very glad to be emancipated out of it all.
But not to the Christian;
His commandments, says John,
are not a task and a terrible duty
to the one who really is born again
– His commandments are ‘not grievous.’
So here is the test that we must all put to ourselves:
what is our attitude to the commandments of God?
… Is it my desire to keep the commandments of God;
do I recognise that they are essentially right,
and do I long to conform to them increasingly?
These are the questions,
and it is my answer to them
that really proclaim whether I am a Christian or not.”
George Ong’s comments:
Going by what Martyn Lloyd-Jones said
that one way to tell whether you are a Christian or not
is by our attitude
to the obedience of God’s commandments,
Joseph Prince, who not only does not obey,
but he also demolishes these commandments
by his teaching they are no more applicable
in the New Covenant
is certainly not a believer.
Proof No 11
In ‘Children of God, Life in Christ, Volume 3, Studies in 1 John,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“God gave His law to man.
He intended that that law should be carried out,
that it should be honoured and obeyed.
Let me go further and say this:
no one can ever be with God
and spend eternity with Him
unless they have honoured the law.
God’s law must be kept,
and without fulfilling it there is no fellowship with Him
and no hope of spending eternity with Him.
… Merely to be forgiven is not enough;
we have to keep the law of God.
George Ong’s comments:
Going by what Martyn Lloyd-Jones said,
Joseph Prince who teaches against the obedience to God’s laws,
has no hope of spending eternity with God.
Those who choose to follow him
would end up in the same destiny.
Proof No 12
In ‘Studies in the Sermon on the Mount’,
Martyn Lloyd-Jones wrote:
“The whole purpose of grace, in a sense,
is just to enable us to keep the law.
… Therefore, if your so-called grace
(which you say you have received)
does not make you keep the law,
you have not received grace.
You may have received a psychological experience,
but you have never received the grace of God.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said if grace does not enable us
to keep the law,
then we have never received grace at all.
The big shock of eternity is that the one (Joseph Prince)
who preaches grace on the world’s stage
and is a so-called expert on grace,
has never received grace at all
and will be doomed for all eternity.
Proof No 13
In ‘Exposition of Romans Chapter 7:1-8:4, The Law Its Functions and Limits,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“Therefore, the question follows,
‘Is the Law then the cause of that death?’
The answer is given immediately,
‘God forbid’
– let it not even be mentioned,
it is unthinkable.
What then is the explanation of what he has been saying?
… What he (Paul) is really saying is this:
‘It is not the Law that killed me, but sin.
God forbid that anyone should say
that I am teaching that the Law was death unto me.
It was not;
it was not the Law that killed me,
it was sin that killed me.’
So, we can translate it thus,
‘Sin is the cause’;
or ‘Sin became death unto me’;
or ‘Sin was allowed to produce,
and to lead to, this result of death to me’.
That is patently the meaning of the statement,
and it cannot carry any other meaning.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ conclusion that it is not the law
but sin that kills us,
is totally at odds with Joseph Prince,
who keeps harping on the blasphemous tune
that it is God’s law that kills us.
Proof No 14
In ‘Walking with God, Life in Christ, Volume 2, Studies in 1 John,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“I feel at times we ought to put the Ten Commandments
in the forefront of our preaching.
… The test whereby we know we are His is this:
are you keeping His commandments?
… I have the Ten Commandments
and the Sermon on the Mount
which apply to me,
and I have the whole moral, ethical teaching
of the New Testament.
Those are His commandments
and I have to keep them.
… You cannot walk with God
without keeping His commandments.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said
the test of whether we belong to God
is whether we are obeying God’s commandments.
He added that if we don’t keep God’s commandments,
we cannot claim to be walking with Him.
This only indicates that Joseph Prince
who teaches against the Ten Commandments
is not only not walking with God,
but he does not belong to Him.
In short, Joseph Prince
isn’t a Christian in the first place.
Proof No 15
In ‘Life in Christ, Volume 3, Children of God, Studies in 1 John’,
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“Or let me put it like this:
we know that we are children of God
when we are deeply aware of sin within.
I emphasise that deliberately.
It is only the children of God
who realise that they have a sinful nature.
The unregenerate, the natural men and women,
are not aware of a sinful nature.
They may admit that they do certain things
which they should not do,
but begin to tell them that they have a sinful nature,
that they are dead in trespasses and sins,
and they will hate you and begin to defend themselves;
they hate preaching that condemns them.
… No, it is only the children of God
who realise that they have an utterly sinful nature.
It is only a saint like Charles Wesley who says,
‘Vile and full of sin I am.’
It was Saint Paul who said,
‘For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh),
dwelleth no good thing’ (Romans 7:18).
It is the Christian who cries out and says,
‘O wretched man that I am!
who shall deliver me from the body of this death?’ (Romans 7:24).
George Ong’s comments:
Did you notice the way Martyn Lloyd-Jones
described how true believers ought to be ‘sin-conscious’
in that they are aware of their sins,
is the opposite of what Joseph Prince said
that we are not to be sin-conscious
but righteousness conscious
– that when we sin, it’s not us
but our flesh who sinned
– a total denial of personal responsibility when we sin.
Proof No 16
In ‘Life in God, Life in Christ, Volume 5, Studies in 1 John,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“The second danger is what you might call
the danger of antinomianism,
and it has led many Christians into grievous error…
They say,
‘I am free from the law.
Because I am now a Christian,
I am no longer under the law but under grace,
and the commandments have nothing to do with me;
I have finished with them.’
… The Ten Commandments are the commandments of God
to men and women at all times and in all places,
and they have never been reduced or modified.
… He (Apostle John) tells us that in a sense
the difference between the Christian and the non-Christian
comes out more clearly,
perhaps, with regard to this question
of keeping the commandments
than anywhere else.
… To the non-Christian,
the commandments are very heavy.
The commandments of God to non-Christians are a yoke…
But not to the Christian;
His commandments, says John,
are not a task and a terrible duty
to the one who really is born again
– His commandments are ‘not grievous.’
So here is the test that we must all put to ourselves:
what is our attitude to the commandments of God?
… is it my desire to keep the commandments of God;
do I recognise that they are essentially right,
and do I long to conform to them increasingly?
These are the questions,
and it is my answer to them
that really proclaim whether I am a Christian or not.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said that one can tell the difference
between a Christian and a non-Christian
by his or her attitude towards the obedience to God’s laws.
To the Christian, it is the desire to keep God’s laws,
but to the non-Christian, it is a task and a yoke.
Joseph Prince who not only treats
the obedience to God’s laws as a yoke,
as he said it is impossible to obey them,
but what is worse is,
he teaches against obeying them,
which categorically reveals himself as an unbeliever.
Proof No 17
In ‘Studies in the Sermon on the Mount,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“Certain things always characterize the Christian…
The Christian is a man who of necessity
must be concerned about keeping God’s law.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said
keeping the law
represents one key characteristic of being a Christian.
This shows that Joseph Prince
who teaches against the law of God
isn’t a Christian in the first place.
Proof No 18
In ‘Born of God,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“I am saying that Christ through the Spirit
enables us to fulfil the law.
That is Christianity.
… And so my last word is this:
grace gives us the power to keep the law,
and grace alone does that.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said
Christianity is about having grace and the Holy Spirit
to empower us to keep the law.
That being the case,
Joseph Prince doesn’t even understand
what Christianity really is,
hence, his claim of being a Christian, is in serious doubt.
Proof No 19
In ‘Born of God,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“The difference between
non-Christians and Christians is this:
here are non-Christians really hating the law of God.
They try to keep it and fail,
and they find it a terrible burden;
it is ‘grievous’.
What of Christians?
Well, to Christians,
his commandments are not grievous.
Christians love the law of God.
They want to keep it;
they are given power to keep it.”
George Ong’s comments:
I cannot help but to conclude
that by the description of Martyn Lloyd-Jones
that Christians want to keep the law
because they are empowered to,
Joseph Prince is a non-Christian.
Proof No 20
In ‘Born of God,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“‘I will put my laws into their mind,
and write them in their hearts (Heb. 8:9–10).’
That is a description of Christianity.
Christianity does not do away with law
– and you see why I have been contending for that
all along?
The Christian does not say,
‘I’ve nothing to do with law,
I’m a Christian now.’
No, what Christianity,
what the grace of God, does
is put the law of God into your mind
and into your heart.
This is the difference.
The law is now within us
and not without us.
The law given through Moses was on ‘tables of stone’.
It is no longer there;
it is inside us.
So Paul, in writing to the Corinthians,
can put it like this:
Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men:
forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink,
but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart (2 Cor. 3:2–3).
It is exactly the same truth.
The law of Moses was outside us,
written on stone.
There it was, thundering at us
and saying,
‘This do, and thou shalt live’ (Luke 10:28).
But it is now inside me.
That is the difference between grace and law.
And what a wonderful difference this makes.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said
Christianity is not about doing away with the law
but about keeping it.
We can keep the law
because it is now written on the inside of us
on our hearts and minds.
But Joseph Prince falsely teaches
that with the dawning of the New Covenant,
the law is made obsolete.
Proof No 21
In ‘Studies in the Sermon on the Mount,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“Let me put it in this way.
The trouble with us is that we so often
have a wrong view of holiness at this point.
There is nothing more fatal
than to regard holiness and sanctification
as experiences to be received.
No; holiness means being righteous,
and being righteous means keeping the law.
George Ong’s comments:
Since Martyn Lloyd-Jones said that holiness
is about keeping the law,
Joseph Prince or his congregation
can never attain holiness
as he preaches against the keeping of God’s laws.
Proof No 22
In ‘An Exposition of Ephesians 5:18-6:9, Life in the Spirit,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“Any position which says ‘law only’
or which says ‘grace only’
is of necessity wrong,
because in the Bible you have ‘law’ and ‘grace’.
It is not ‘law or grace’,
it is ‘law and grace’.
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ position of law and grace
is diametrically opposed to Joseph Prince’s idea
of law or grace,
as according to Prince,
grace and law cannot co-exist in harmony.
Proof No 23
In ‘An Exposition of Ephesians 4:17 – 5:17, Darkness and Light,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“There are people who will argue,
‘But wait a minute;
are you not preaching the law to us?
You are to be a minister of grace,
and yet you seem to be preaching pure law.
You are reminding us of the Being and the character of God,
as expressed in the Ten Commandments
and in His moral law;
are you not just putting us back under the law?
… all we are asked to do as Christians
is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
We could not be saved under the law,
for the law made it impossible, saying,
“There is none righteous, no, not one.”
But now God has brought in another way
which makes it easier for us;
we are no longer confronted by the demands of the law
and the tremendous holiness of God.
It is just a matter of believing on the Lord Jesus Christ,
and we shall be saved.’
Now that is their argument,
but I am bound to say that
it is one of the most subtle, dangerous heresies
that can ever be offered to men and women.
… The answer to all this is perfectly clear
in the New Testament itself.
Christ is God, and He did not come into this world
to change God’s law;
He Himself says specifically in the Sermon on the Mount
that not one jot or tittle of the law shall pass away
until all be fulfilled.
He did not come to destroy the law or the prophets,
but to fulfil them.
… and the argument that the law
has got nothing to do with us
is a case of the devil appearing as an angel of light.”
George Ong’s comments:
Let me quote what Martyn Lloyd Jones said:
“it is one of the most subtle, dangerous heresies
that can ever be offered to men and women.
… and the argument that the law has got nothing to do with us
is a case of the devil appearing as an angel of light.”
What Martyn Lloyd-Jones described
is what Joseph Prince has been teaching all along
– that New Covenant people
have nothing to do with the law.
Hence, Joseph Prince is indeed preaching heresy
and is representing the devil,
who appears as an angel of light.
Proof No 24
In ‘Faith on Trial, Psalm 73,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“When a man asked Him (Jesus)
which was the greatest commandment of all,
He said,
‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God
with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind…
And the second is like unto it,
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself’ (Matt. 22:37, 39).
The first thing, the most important thing in life,
is that we so know God
that we love Him with the whole of our being.
To be satisfied with anything short of that,
or with anything less than that
is to misunderstand the whole end and object
and purpose of Christian salvation.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said that
to be satisfied with anything short or anything less
than knowing that we are to love God
with the whole of our being,
‘is to misunderstand the whole end and object
and purpose of Christian salvation.’
This means Joseph Prince isn’t saved to begin with
as he doesn’t even understand the meaning of salvation
because he taught against
obeying the greatest commandment of Jesus.
Proof No 25
In ‘Romans, An Exposition of Chapter 10 Saving Faith,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“I should live to the glory of God with all my being;
I should love Him with all my heart, soul, mind and strength,
and my neighbour as myself.
God deserves it and God demands it.
So, if I am not giving it, I am a terrible sinner.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said that
one who disobeys the Greatest Commandment
is a terrible sinner.
If that is the case,
Joseph Prince must be the most terrible sinner
as not only does he disobey the Commandment himself,
but he is instigating multitudes of people
to disobey the same command
by deceiving them that
it is under the Old Covenant of Law.
Proof No 26
In ‘An Exposition of Ephesians 5:18-6:9, Life in the Spirit,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“Christianity does not do away with the Law
as a portrayal of life.
What it does is to add grace to it,
enabling us to carry out the Law.
George Ong’s comments:
To Martyn Lloyd-Jones,
grace is to empower us to obey the law,
but to Joseph Prince,
grace becomes an excuse
to be exempted from obeying the law.
Proof No 27
In ‘An exposition of Ephesians 6:10-13, The Christian Warfare,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
But listen to the voice of God!
He is speaking to you at that moment,
and this is what He is saying:
‘If we confess our sins’
– and this is for Christian people!
– ‘If we confess our sins,
he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins,
and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness’ (1 John 1:9).
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones by saying that 1 John 1:9
is for Christians
has exposed Joseph Prince’s heretical teaching
that 1 John 1:9 was written for unbelievers.
Proof No 28
In ‘Exposition of Chapters 2:1-3:20, The Righteous Judgment of God, Romans,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“… it does not matter to God
whether you are His child or not,
if you sin against Him, it is sin,
and He will punish you.
What a terrible thing it is not to realize this!”
… It is no use saying,
‘Because I am saved, it does not matter what I do’.
God’s judgment is always according to truth,
whether you are a believer or an unbeliever.
Sin is sin.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones has demolished
the false teaching of Joseph Prince
that Christians cannot be judged.
Joseph Prince’s teaching
that God will never judge New Covenant believers,
even though they sin against Him
is categorically refuted by Martyn Lloyd-Jones.
Proof No 29
In ‘Exposition of Romans Chapter 11, To God’s Glory,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“Let me say finally that every failure
to realize the truth of Romans 11:22
leads to a lack of godliness,
a lack of ‘the fear of the Lord’.
It leads to a lightness, a glibness, a superficiality, a self-contentment,
and finally, this ugly boastfulness.
… How often do you hear people talking about ‘the fear of the Lord’?
But, you see,
those are the terms that are used in the Bible.
Take for instance in that most lyrical book,
the Book of the Acts of the Apostles;
I read this in chapter 9 and verse 31:
‘Then had the churches rest
throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria,
and were edified;
and walking in the fear of the Lord,
and the comfort of the Holy Ghost,
were multiplied’.
Why is this so true of us today,
that there is not much evidence
of ‘the fear of the Lord’?
We all must be bright and breezy,
back slapping and happy.
That is not in the Bible!
‘The fear of the Lord’.”
George Ong’s comments:
Martyn Lloyd-Jones has rightly taught
that the Fear of the Lord
is taught in the New Testament in Acts 9:31.
This has nothing to do with worshipping God per se
(because Joseph Prince equates fearing God
to be the same as worshipping God
under the New Covenant)
that Joseph Prince tries to deceive us with
but fearing Him.
Proof No 30
In a sermon, ‘The Gift of Grace’ based on John 1:17,
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“The Ten Commandments
are a reflection of God’s holy character….”
“… If you resent the commandments of God,
don’t talk to me about heaven.
Don’t talk about spending your eternity
looking into the face of God.”
George Ong’s comments:
Joseph Prince has done
more than resenting the Ten Commandments;
he blasphemously asserted that God’s law,
which is a holy reflection of His character,
is to kill and condemn us.
So, how can such a man look forward
to a life of eternity with God?
In conclusion, from the teachings
of just one Church Father in Martyn Lloyd-Jones,
I have confidently proven that Joseph Prince is a heretic.
But why Bishop Philip Lim and NCCS can’t see it?
They can,
but they have chosen to protect the wolf
because of self-preservation.
For the National Leadership of the Singapore Church, NCCS,
to protect the wolf, Joseph Prince,
so, he could harm more sheep,
and come against us,
who have put our heads on the chopping board
to expose the wolf,
is a grievous sin and an abomination to the Lord.
Rev George Ong