Joseph Prince accuses Jesus of lying & in his reply to me, he went out of context (Sermon on the Mount & Salvation Doctrine) – By Rev George Ong (Dated 26 Dec 2023)

 

Announcement No 1

 

Joseph Prince was on a long holiday, and he didn’t preach for 5 consecutive Sundays.

 

Last Sunday, on 24 Dec 2023, he preached.

 

Not only that, he replied to me.

 

Please refer to the Appendix for details.

 

Announcement No 2

 

Note there is 1 video on Philip Lyn,

 

1 video on Zac Poonen

 

and 4 videos on Joseph Prince.

 

Announcement No 3

 

Don’t miss the insightful comments of 10 prominent Bible teachers:

 

Watchman Nee, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, DA Carson, James Montgomery Boice, John Piper, Arthur Pink, John Stott, John Macarthur, AW Tozer & Zac Poonen.

 

Announcement No 4

 

Don’t miss Point No 2, 4, 7 & 8 in the Appendix

 

4. Joseph Prince accused Jesus of lying when he said if Jesus had stayed on the mountain and didn’t come down, we are all finished as there would be no redemption for us.

 

7. Joseph Prince’s declaration that he has forgiven one of his critics in a previous sermon on 12 Nov 2023 is insincere and a bluff.

 

8. In Joseph Prince’s hit back against his critic, he has gone out of context.

 

Excerpt No 1 from the Article

 

In conclusion, I hope Joseph Prince doesn’t chicken out like a church mouse

 

after being thrashed by 10 well-respected Bible teachers and my exposure of his real character.

 

Hope he doesn’t back off this Sunday.

 

I am looking forward to another reply of his.

 

Excerpt No 2 from the Article (located in the Appendix)

 

2. If Joseph Prince cannot even comprehend the difference between perfection and commitment, how in the world can he be a world-renowned grace teacher?

 

Joseph Prince said in his sermon 2 days ago, on 24 Dec 2023:

 

“And, since we are on that,

 

none of us can follow His (Jesus) teachings.

 

… None of us can do it.

 

None of us.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Does Jesus expect us to be perfect (notwithstanding Matthew 5:48)

 

in every of our behaviour and obedience to Him?

 

Of course not!

 

But does Christ expect total commitment and our entire allegiance to Him?

 

He certainly does!

 

But just because we are not perfect,

 

does not mean that we can escape all the commitments that Jesus requires of us.

 

This is exactly what Joseph Prince does

 

– using the excuse that we are not perfect

 

to free us from all our commitments to Jesus

 

– that just because it is hard to do,

 

means we don’t have to do,

 

hence, concocting a feel-good and false theology of salvation

 

that has deceived and hooked the millions.

 

And by the way, I wonder whether Joseph Prince

 

really believes in his grace teaching?

 

If Joseph Prince does, he should have said to the people (but he doesn’t):

 

“Hey, I know it’s tough to wholly follow Jesus and fully obey Him, especially in the Sermon on the Mount.

 

But that’s where we need the grace of God to empower us to do that which is humanly impossible.”

 

(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.)

 

Please click here

 

to view the entire video.

 

In a Sunday sermon aired on YouTube 2 days ago, on 24 Dec 2023, Joseph Prince said;

 

Please click here to view the 2-minute video:

 

“This is beautiful Jesus.

 

He Himself said later on I am the bread of life.

 

He that eats me will never die.

 

Believe thou this?

 

Jesus didn’t come to set an example.

 

Primarily, that’s not the purpose for which He came,

 

to give us an example or teaching that we should adopt

 

and follow and pattern ourselves after.

 

No.

 

He came that you might eat Him.

 

He came to be the bread of life.

 

Unless you feed on Him, unless you appropriate Him,

 

there’s no life in you.

 

Many of us we want to follow Jesus.

 

Oh, I like His teaching. I want to follow His teachings.

 

His teachings, trying to follow His teachings cannot save you.

 

It is death at the cross and His resurrection that saves you.

 

And, since we are on that,

 

none of us can follow His teachings.

 

You know, He says,

 

“Love your enemies.”

 

Um! We got problem loving our relative.

 

So, if you go by His teaching to justify yourself,

 

we are all done for.

 

You know Jesus preached the Sermon on the Mount.

 

Thank God after He preached the Sermon on the Mount,

 

He came down to where the people were.

 

If He didn’t come down, we are all finished.

 

He came down so that one day He knows

 

He’s going to come back to us by His Holy Spirit, lived in us,

 

and live out the Sermon on the Mount for us

 

as we rest in Him.

 

None of us can do it.

 

None of us.

 

And if you criticise me for saying that,

 

there you go,

 

He (Jesus) says also say in the Sermon on the Mount,

 

‘Don’t criticise your neighbour.

 

Judge not that you be not judged.’”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

A point-by-point rebuttal against what Joseph Prince said

 

is found in the Appendix.

 

The main aim is to reveal the true character of Joseph Prince.

 

In a sermon, Pastor Dr Philip Lyn (Skyline SIB, Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia) said;

 

Please click here to view the 1-minute-and-20-second video:

 

“And today, I’d like to do an introduction to the Sermon on the Mount,

 

perhaps, the greatest sermon in history.

 

Firstly, let’s address this fundamental question.

 

Who is the Sermon on the Mount addressed to?

 

Was addressed to Christians.

 

It (Sermon on the Mount) is really for Christians because Jesus was addressing His disciples.

 

It is God’s way of life for Christians living under the Lordship of Christ.

 

What’s our reaction to this (Sermon on the Mount)?

 

And many people, including Christians when they come across the Sermon on the Mount, what’s their reaction?

 

Their reaction is some feel absolutely disgusted by it.

 

Some feel condemned by it.

 

There are people who argue with it.

 

They ridiculed it. They criticised it.

 

They said this is silly. This is idealistic.

 

Jesus didn’t mean what he said.

 

If He did, there must be other explanations for this.

 

Impossible for people to live this life.

 

Martyn Lloyd-Jones had this to say.

 

He said,

 

‘If you find yourself arguing with the Sermon on the Mount, or criticising it,

 

then either your interpretation of it is wrong

 

or there’s something wrong with you.’

 

Listen to this,

 

either your interpretation of the Sermon on the Mount is wrong,

 

or there is something not right with your heart;

 

if you find yourself criticising it, arguing with it, ridiculing it,

 

consigning it to idealism.”     

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Philip Lyn made the point that the Sermon on the Mount was written for Christians,

 

as opposed to Joseph Prince’s stand, it is not for the Church.

 

Philip Lyn quoted Martyn Lloyd-Jones who said:

 

‘If you find yourself arguing with the Sermon on the Mount, or criticising it,

 

then either your interpretation of it is wrong

 

or there’s something wrong with you.’

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

The above aptly describes Joseph Prince

 

as he couldn’t accept that the Sermon on the Mount

 

is for the Church of today.

 

In a sermon, Zac Poonen said;

 

Please click here to view the 30-second video:

 

“False prophets

 

are those who will devalue the Sermon on the Mount

 

and says, that’s not important.

 

You know there are believers who say that,

 

they called themselves believers,

 

who say that the Sermon on the Mount is not for us.

 

Who is it for?

 

It’s amazing how when people want to get out of obedience to a commandment,

 

they say that’s not for us.

 

That’s for somebody else.

 

But when it comes to the New Testament,

 

the things that Jesus taught,

 

the things the Apostles taught, that’s New Covenant.

 

You can’t write that of as for somebody else.

 

So, the false prophets are those who say,

 

that’s not for us.” 

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

I believe if Zac Poonen ever comes face to face with Joseph Prince,

 

he would have no hesitation in calling him out as a false prophet

 

as Joseph Prince teaches that the Sermon on the Mount is not for the Church today.

 

Let me feature the insightful writings of 10 prominent Bible teachers, and all 10 spoke against Joseph Prince’s false doctrine of salvation and several on the Sermon on the Mount:

 

Watchman Nee, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, DA Carson, James Montgomery Boice, John Piper, Arthur Pink, John Stott, John Macarthur, AW Tozer & Zac Poonen.

 

In ‘Interpreting Matthew,’

 

Watchman Nee wrote:

 

“A third error surrounding Matthew 5-7

 

is that many contend that the Sermon on the Mount

 

is addressed to the people in the future kingdom,

 

and hence, it has no relationship to us today.

 

This, too is a grave mistake,

 

for when the future millennial kingdom begins,

 

the earth shall be full of righteousness and peace.

 

It shall be the golden age of the world.

 

There will not be violence or injustice.

 

And accordingly, it is called the Millennium Jubilee.

 

Yet, today, as you read the teaching on the Mount,

 

the environment of those

 

who are to keep the teaching

 

is quite different from that of the future kingdom age:

 

(a) “Blessed are the poor in spirit”

 

(or as in Luke’s version of this statement: “Blessed are ye poor” – 6.20).

 

Here is still poverty,

 

but in the millennium, there will not be poverty.

 

(b) “Blessed are they that mourn.”

 

They who mourn today

 

are blessed in the future.

 

Will there be any need for mourning in the millennium?

 

(c) Today, the world is full of striving,

 

Therefore, we need to be meek.

 

Today is the time to be hungry and thirsty after righteousness,

 

to be merciful and to be pure in heart

 

as well as to be peacemakers.

 

Today, we may be persecuted.

 

In the millennium, who will persecute?

 

These are today’s environments,

 

not those in the future.

 

Looking further into this whole question,

 

we can easily see that in that future day,

 

there will be no darkness on earth,

 

and hence, there will be no need for us believers

 

to be light or salt.

 

Then, too, only when the Bridegroom is absent

 

is there any need to fast.

 

Yet the teaching on the Mount teaches us to fast,

 

which clearly indicates that the Bridegroom

 

is not here.

 

Moreover, we read: “Thy kingdom come” (Matt. 6.10).

 

Will there be any need to ask for His kingdom to come

 

during the millennium?

 

For all these reasons,

 

we must conclude that the teaching on the Mount

 

is for today’s use,

 

enabling us to observe and keep it now.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Watchman Nee has given some excellent reasons

 

why the Sermon on the Mount is for this age

 

and not at a future age during the Millennial reign

 

when Jesus comes back to rule

 

that Joseph Prince tries to deceive the church.

 

In ‘Interpreting Matthew,’

 

Watchman Nee wrote:

 

“When Satan tempts people,

 

he transforms himself into an angel of light (2 Cor. 11.14).

 

His most successful tactic

 

is to mix false teaching with good morals.

 

Such false prophets will emerge for the purpose

 

of changing the men of the kingdom of the heavens

 

by changing the Lord’s demand on them.

 

Whatever lowers His demands

 

and makes them easy

 

are the works of the false prophets.

 

Throughout the centuries

 

there have been false prophets in the Church

 

who have attempted to change the teaching on the Sermon of the Mount.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Watchman Nee said that a false prophet is one who tries to lower the demands of Christ

 

and attempts to change the teaching in the Sermon on the Mount.

 

As this is exactly what Joseph Prince does,

 

he qualifies himself to be a false prophet.

 

In ‘Studies in the Sermon on the Mount,’

 

Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:

 

“Let me, then, try to summarize it in this way.

 

Here are some negative tests to apply.

 

If you find yourself arguing with the Sermon on the Mount at any point,

 

it means either that there is something wrong with you

 

or else that your interpretation of the Sermon is wrong.

 

I find that very valuable.

 

As I read this Sermon, something hits me and I want to argue with it.

 

Well, I repeat, it means either that my whole spirit is wrong and I am not living and exemplifying the Beatitudes:

 

or else I am interpreting that particular injunction in a wrong and false way.

 

It is a very terrible sermon, this Sermon on the Mount.

 

Be very careful as you read it, and especially when you talk about it.

 

If you criticize this Sermon at any point,

 

you are really saying a great deal about yourself.

 

Let us, therefore, in the words of James,

 

‘be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath’.

 

Again, if our interpretation makes any injunction appear to be ridiculous,

 

then we can be certain our interpretation is wrong.

 

… Such an interpretation, I repeat, must be wrong,

 

for nothing that our Lord ever taught can be ridiculous.

 

Finally, if you regard any particular injunction in this Sermon as impossible,

 

once more your interpretation and understanding of it must be wrong.

 

Let me put it like this.

 

Our Lord taught these things,

 

and He expects us to live them.

 

His last injunction, you remember, to these men whom He sent out to preach was,

 

`Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

 

teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.’

 

Now, here in this Sermon are those very things.

 

He meant them to be taught, He meant them to be practised.

 

Our Lord Himself lived the Sermon on the Mount.

 

The apostles lived the Sermon on the Mount,

 

and if you take the trouble to read the lives of the saints down the centuries,

 

and the men who have been most greatly used of God,

 

you will find that, every time,

 

they have been men who have taken the Sermon on the Mount not only seriously but literally.

 

You read the life of a man like Hudson Taylor and you will find he literally lived it, and he is not the only one.

 

These things were taught by the Lord and were meant for us, His people.

 

This is how the Christian is meant to live.

 

So, we must not only take the injunctions of the Sermon seriously.

 

We must also check our particular interpretation in the light of the principles I have given.

 

Beware of the spirit of arguing against them;

 

beware of making them ridiculous;

 

and beware of so interpreting them as to regard any one of them as impossible.

 

Here is the life to which we are called,

 

and I maintain again that if only every Christian in the Church today were living the Sermon on the Mount,

 

the great revival for which we are praying and longing would already have started.

 

Amazing and astounding things would happen;

 

the world would be shocked,

 

and men and women would be drawn and attracted to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

 

May God give us grace to consider this Sermon on the Mount and to remember that we are not to sit in judgment on it…”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ warning

 

that we should never ridicule the Sermon on the Mount

 

and make it impossible to obey,

 

is what Joseph Prince is guilty of.

 

Lloyd-Jones further warned

 

that for anyone to ridicule and argue against the Sermon on the Mount,

 

which is what Joseph Prince did,

 

it’s either his interpretation is wrong

 

or there’s something wrong with him.

 

In ‘Studies in the Sermon on the Mount,’

 

Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:

 

“Then the next view I want to mention is what we may call the `dispensational’ view of the Sermon on the Mount.

 

… and which teach a dispensational view of the Sermon on the Mount,

 

saying that it has nothing whatsoever to do with modern Christians.

 

They say our Lord began to preach about the kingdom of God,

 

and the preaching of the Sermon on the Mount was in connection with the inauguration of this kingdom.

 

Unfortunately, they continue, the Jews did not believe His teaching.

 

So, our Lord could not establish the kingdom, and therefore, almost as a kind of afterthought, the death on the cross came in,

 

and as another afterthought, the whole Church and the whole Church age came in, and that will persist up to a certain point in history.

 

Then our Lord will return with the kingdom

 

and again, the Sermon on the Mount will be introduced.

 

That is the teaching; it says, in effect,

 

that the Sermon on the Mount has nothing to do with us.

 

It is meant ‘for the kingdom age’.

 

It was meant for the people to whom He was preaching; it will be meant again in the millennial age.

 

It is the law of that age and of the kingdom of heaven,

 

and has nothing whatsoever to do with Christians in the meantime.

 

Now, obviously this is a serious matter for us.

 

This view is right or else it is not.

 

According to this view, I need not read the Sermon on the Mount;

 

I need not be concerned about its precepts;

 

I need not feel condemned because I am not doing certain things;

 

it has no relevance for me.

 

It seems to me that the answer to all that can be put like this.

 

The Sermon on the Mount was preached primarily and specifically to the disciples.

 

‘When he was set, his disciples came unto him: and he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying. . .’

 

Now the whole presupposition is that it is preached to them.

 

Take, for instance, the words which He spoke to them when He said,

 

‘We are the salt of the earth’;

 

‘Ye are the light of the world.’

 

If the Sermon on the Mount has nothing to do with Christian people now,

 

we must never say that we are the salt of the earth, or that we are the light of the world,

 

for that does not apply to us.

 

(But) It applied to the first disciples;

 

it will apply to some people later on.

 

But (as dispensationalism argues), in the meantime, it has nothing to do with us.

 

We must likewise ignore the gracious promises in this Sermon.

 

We must not say that we must let our light so shine before men that they may see our good works and glorify our Father which is in heaven.

 

If the whole Sermon on the Mount is inapplicable to modern Christians, all that is irrelevant.

 

But clearly, our Lord was preaching to these men and telling them what they were to do in this world,

 

not only while He was here, but after He had gone.

 

It was preached to people who were meant to practise it at that time and ever afterwards.

 

Not only that.

 

To me, another very important consideration is that there is no teaching to be found in the Sermon on the Mount

 

which is not also found in the various New Testament Epistles.

 

Make a list of the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount; then read your Epistles.

 

You will find that the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount is there also.

 

Now all the Epistles are meant for Christians today;

 

so if their teaching is the same as that of the Sermon on the Mount,

 

clearly its teaching also is meant for Christians today.

 

That is a weighty and important argument.

 

But perhaps I can put it best like this.

 

The Sermon on the Mount is nothing but a great and grand and perfect elaboration of what our Lord called His `new commandment’.

 

His new commandment was that we love one another even as He has loved us.

 

The Sermon on the Mount is nothing but a grand elaboration of that.

 

If we are Christ’s, and our Lord has meant that word for us, that we should love one another even as He loved us, here we are shown how to do it.

 

The dispensational view is based on a wrong conception of the kingdom of God.

 

This is where the confusion arises.

 

I agree, of course, that the kingdom of God, in one sense, has not been established on the earth yet.

 

It is a kingdom which is to come; yes.

 

But it is also a kingdom which has come.

 

‘The kingdom of God is among you’, and ‘within you’;

 

the kingdom of God is in every true Christian, and in the Church.

 

It means ‘the reign of God’, ‘the reign of Christ’; and Christ is reigning today in every true Christian.

 

He reigns in the Church when she acknowledges Him truly.

 

The kingdom has come, the kingdom is coming, the kingdom is yet to come.

 

Now we must always bear that in mind.

 

Whenever Christ is enthroned as King, the kingdom of God is come,

 

so that, while we cannot say that He is ruling over all in the world at the present time,

 

He is certainly ruling in that way in the hearts and lives of all His people.

 

There is nothing, therefore, so dangerous as to say that the Sermon on the Mount has nothing to do with modern Christians.

 

Indeed, I will put it like this: it is something which is meant for all Christian people.

 

It is a perfect picture of the life of the kingdom of God.

 

Now I have no doubt at all in my own mind that that is why Matthew put it in his Gospel at the beginning.

 

It is agreed that Matthew was writing his Gospel especially for the Jews.

 

That was his set desire.

 

Hence, all this emphasis upon the kingdom of heaven.

 

And what was Matthew out to emphasize?

 

Surely it was this.

 

The Jews had a false, materialistic conception of the kingdom.

 

They thought the Messiah was one who was coming to give them political emancipation.

 

They were looking forward to someone who would deliver them from the bondage and yoke of the Roman Empire.

 

They always thought of the kingdom in an external sense, a mechanical, military, materialistic sense.

 

So, Matthew puts the true teaching concerning the kingdom in the very forefront of his Gospel,

 

for the great purpose of this Sermon is to give an exposition of the kingdom as something which is essentially spiritual.

 

The kingdom is primarily something ‘within you’.

 

It is that which governs and controls the heart and mind and outlook.

 

Far from being something which leads to great military power, it is to be ‘poor in spirit’.

 

In other words, we are not told in the Sermon on the Mount,

 

‘Live like this and you will become Christian’;

 

rather we are told,

 

‘Because you are Christian live like this.’

 

This is how Christians ought to live;

 

this is how Christians are meant to live.

 

Here let me just put one last question.

 

Having considered the people to whom the Sermon on the Mount applies, let us ask ourselves this:

 

Why should we study it?

 

Why should we try to live it?

 

Let me give you a list of answers.

 

The Lord Jesus Christ died to enable us to live the Sermon on the Mount.

 

He died. Why?

 

‘That he might … purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works,’

 

says the apostle Paul-the apostle of grace (see Tit. ii. 14).

 

What does he mean?

 

He means that He died in order that I might now live the Sermon on the Mount.

 

He has made this possible for me.

 

The second reason for studying it is that nothing shows me the absolute need of the new birth, and of the Holy Spirit and His work within,

 

so much as the Sermon on the Mount.

 

These Beatitudes crush me to the ground.

 

They show me my utter helplessness.

 

Were it not for the new birth, I am undone.

 

Read and study it, face yourself in the light of it.

 

It will drive you to see your ultimate need of the rebirth and the gracious operation of the Holy Spirit.

 

There is nothing that so leads to the gospel and its grace

 

as the Sermon on the Mount.

 

Another reason is this.

 

The more we live and try to practise this Sermon on the Mount,

 

the more shall we experience blessing.

 

Look at the blessings that are promised to those who do practise it.

 

… If you want to have power in your life and to be blessed, go straight to the Sermon on the Mount.

 

Live and practise it and give yourself to it, and as you do so the promised blessings will come.

 

‘Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.’

 

If you want to be filled, don’t seek some mystic blessing; don’t rush to meetings hoping you will get it.

 

Face the Sermon on the Mount and its implications and demands, see your utter need, and then you will get it.

 

It is the direct road to blessing.

 

… We claim to believe that the Son of God has come into the world and has sent His own Holy Spirit into us,

 

His own absolute power that will reside in men and make them live a quality of life like His own.

 

He came, I say, and lived and died and rose again and sent the Holy Spirit

 

in order that you and I might live the Sermon on the Mount.

 

Do not say it has nothing to do with us.

 

Why, it has everything to do with us!

 

If only all of us were living the Sermon on the Mount,

 

men would know that there is dynamic in the Christian gospel;

 

they would know that this is a live thing; they would not go looking for anything else.

 

They would say, ‘Here it is.’

 

And if you read the history of the Church,

 

you will find it has always been when men and women have taken this Sermon seriously and faced themselves in the light of it,

 

that true revival has come.

 

And when the world sees the truly Christian man,

 

it not only feels condemned, it is drawn, it is attracted.

 

Then let us carefully study this Sermon that claims to show what we ought to be.

 

Let us consider it that we may see what we can be.

 

For it not only states the demand;

 

it points to the supply, to the source of power.

 

God give us grace to face the Sermon on the Mount seriously and honestly and prayerfully

 

until we become living examples of it, and exemplifiers of its glorious teaching.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Martyn Lloyd-Jones has masterfully demolished the dispensational and false view of Joseph Prince

 

that states that the Kingdom of God and the Sermon on the Mount is not for Christians but the Jews,

 

and because they had rejected it when Christ came the first time,

 

they would be reinstated for the Jews as constitution of the laws of the Kingdom,

 

when Jesus comes back the second time.

 

Lloyd-Jones had marvellously clarified that we aren’t saved

 

because we can carry out the injunctions in the Sermon on the Mount (for that would be salvation by works),

 

but because we are saved,

 

we have the power of the Holy Spirit and His grace

 

to carry out what seem to be impossible in the Sermon.

 

In ‘Studies in the Sermon on the Mount,’

 

Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:

 

“Love your neighbour, even if it means loving your enemy.

 

‘Do good to them that hate you.’

 

And our Lord, of course, not only taught it, but He did it.

 

There we see Him dying upon the cross, and what has He to say about those men who condemned Him to that, and who drove in the cruel nails?

 

These are the blessed words that come from His holy lips:

 

‘Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.’

 

It also became the teaching and the practice of the apostles everywhere in the New Testament.

 

How foolish to say that the Sermon on the Mount

 

does not apply to Christians now

 

but refers to the future, when the kingdom comes.

 

No, it is for us now.

 

Paul says: ‘If thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink’, which is exactly the same teaching.

 

It is everywhere.

 

And the apostles not only taught it; they lived it.

 

Look at that wonderful man, Stephen, being stoned to death by cruel, foolish enemies.

 

These were his last words:

 

‘Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.’

 

He has reached the level of his Master;

 

he is loving, as God in heaven loves this sinful world.

 

And, thank God, the saints throughout the centuries have done the same.

 

They have manifested the same, glorious, wonderful spirit.

 

Are we like that? This teaching is for us.

 

We are meant to love our enemies and to do good to them that hate us

 

and to pray for those that despitefully use and malign us; we are meant to be like this.

 

I go further; we can be like this.

 

The Holy Spirit, the Spirit of love and joy and peace, is given to us,

 

so that, if we are not like this, we are without excuse

 

and we are doing great dishonour to our great and gracious Lord.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Martyn Lloyd-Jones pointed out that loving your enemies in the Sermon on the Mount

 

has already been modelled by Christians before us, such as Paul and Stephen.

 

That being the case, Lloyd-Jones said it would be foolish to say that the Sermon is not applicable to us now

 

because it is meant for a future age when the kingdom comes.

 

Thus, I have unveiled the foolishness of Joseph Prince as this is exactly what he taught.

 

In ‘Studies in the Sermon on the Mount,’

 

Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:

 

“In this Sermon, beginning with the Beatitudes, He (Jesus) has given an account of His people.

 

He has stated what they will be like in general, and given a more detailed account of how they will act.

 

The Sermon is a description of Christian people,

 

people who have received the Holy Spirit;

 

not of natural man striving to make himself right with God,

 

but of God making His people anew.

 

He has given us the gift of the Holy Spirit, the promise made to Abraham,

 

‘the promise of the Father’, and having received this promise,

 

we become people conformable to this pattern.

 

The Beatitudes are true of all who are living the Sermon on the Mount,

 

of all who are Christian.

 

That does not mean that we are sinless or perfect;

 

it means that if we look at the general tenor of our life it corresponds to this, or as John puts it in his first Epistle:

 

‘He that is born of God does not continue the practices of sin.’

 

There is this difference.

 

Look at a man’s life in general.

 

As you look at the believer

 

he conforms to the Sermon on the Mount.

 

He wants to live it and he does his utmost to do so.

 

He realizes his failure, but prays to be filled with the Spirit;

 

he hungers and thirsts after righteousness,

 

and he has the blessed experience of the promises being realized in his daily life.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

While Martyn Lloyd-Jones said that the Sermon on the Mount describes what a Christian is,

 

Joseph Prince asserts that the sermon isn’t for Christians because it is impossible to be obeyed.

 

Imagine the damage Joseph Prince has done to the very words and teachings of Jesus.

 

While Christ does not expect us to be perfect all the time,

 

He demands that we be committed to live such a life as portrayed in the Sermon on the Mount.

 

In ‘Hard to Believe, The High Cost and Infinite Value of Following Jesus,’

 

John MacArthur wrote:

 

“According to Jesus,

 

it’s very, very difficult to be saved.

 

At the end of Matthew 7:14, He said of the narrow gate,

 

“There are few who find it.”

 

I don’t believe anyone ever slipped and fell into the kingdom of God.

 

That’s cheap grace, easy-believism, Christianity Lite,

 

a shallow, emotional revivalist approach:

 

“I believe in Jesus!”

 

“Fine, you’re part of the family, come on in!”

 

No.

 

The few who find the narrow gate have to search hard for it, then come through it alone.

 

It’s hard to find a church or preacher – or a Christian – who can direct you to it.

 

The kingdom is for those who agonize to enter it, whose hearts are shattered over their sinfulness,

 

who mourn in meekness,

 

who hunger and thirst and long for God to change their lives.

 

It’s hard because you’ve got all hell against you.

 

One of Satan’s pervasive lies in the world today is that it’s easy to become a Christian.

 

It’s not easy at all.

 

It’s a very narrow gate that you must find and go through alone, anguished over your sinfulness and longing for forgiveness.

 

Somebody might say this sounds like the religion of human achievement.

 

Not so.

 

When you come to brokenness, the recognition that you, of yourself, cannot make it through the narrow gate,

 

then Christ pours into you grace upon grace to strengthen you for that entrance.

 

In your brokenness, His power becomes your resource.

 

Our part is to admit our sin and inability and plead for mercy and power from on high.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

John MacArthur said that the real experience of the grace of Christ

 

is when we feel we are totally helpless to meet Christ’s demands of us for true salvation

 

and cry to Him for help.

 

Conversely, Joseph Prince by making things easy to become a Christian

 

is not only preaching cheap grace,

 

but also to perpetuate this satanic lie that has deceived many.

 

In ‘The Divine Conquest,’

 

AW Tozer wrote:

 

“Those present-day teachers who place the Sermon on the Mount in some other dispensation than this

 

and so release the Church from its teachings,

 

little realize the evil they do.

 

For the Sermon on the Mount gives in brief

 

the characteristics of the kingdom of renewed men.

 

The blessed poor who mourn for their sins and thirst after righteousness

 

are true sons of the kingdom.

 

In meekness, they show mercy to their enemies;

 

with guileless candor, they gaze upon God;

 

surrounded by persecutors they bless and curse not.

 

In modesty, they hide their good deeds.

 

They go out of their way to agree with their adversaries and forgive those who sin against them.

 

They serve God in secret in the depth of their hearts and wait with patience for His open reward.

 

They freely surrender their earthly goods rather than use violence to protect them.

 

They lay up treasures in heaven.

 

They avoid praise and wait for the day of final reckoning to learn who is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

AW Tozer said that those (such as Joseph Prince),

 

who tries to consign the Sermon on the Mount

 

to another dispensation other than this,

 

is doing an evil thing.

 

This is because the Sermon on the Mount

 

is a portrayal of what a Christian ought to be.

 

In ‘Faith Beyond Reason,’

 

AW Tozer wrote:

 

“We must meet any condition He (Jesus) lays down.

 

This is the child of God, the believer in Christ

 

who will meet any condition the Lord lays down,

 

even to the forsaking of relatives and friends.

 

“You are getting radical,” you protest.

 

Maybe so, but did you ever read the words of Jesus,

 

“If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:26)?

 

Jesus is asking us to place our love for Him, our Savior,

 

before that of wife, husband, children.

 

And if we do not, He will not have us.

 

That is the sum of the teaching of Jesus on this subject.

 

“It is cruel – terribly cruel,” you object.

 

The living God demands our love and our loyalty, and we call that demand cruel?

 

Let us get it straight.

 

Jesus Christ does not just offer us salvation

 

as though it is a decoration or a bouquet or some addition to our garb.

 

He says plainly:

 

“Throw off your old rags, strip to the skin!

 

Let me dress you in the fine clean robes of My righteousness – all Mine.

 

Then, if it means loss of money, lose it!

 

If it means loss of job, lose it!

 

If it means persecution, take it!

 

If it brings the stiff winds of opposition, bow your head into the wind and take it – for My sake!”

 

To receive Jesus Christ as Lord is not a passive, soft thing – not a predigested kind of religion.

 

It is strong meat!

 

It is such strong meat that God is calling us in this hour to yield everything to Him.

 

Some want to cling to their sinful pleasures.

 

In our churches in this deadly, degenerate hour,

 

we are guilty of making it just as easy as possible for double-minded people.

 

“Just believe on Jesus and accept Him, and then you can be as you were before.

 

You can do what you did before,

 

as long as you don’t get drunk and run after women.

 

Everything else is all right. Amen!”

 

This is the kind of marginal Christianity that is being passed along in too many circles.

 

As a result, we have a religion that is not much better than paganism.

 

I think I would rather follow Zoroaster and kneel twice a day to the rising and setting sun

 

than to be a half-baked Christian

 

who insists on “believing” for salvation

 

and then does as he pleases,

 

violating the lordship of the Savior.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

AW Tozer has the guts to speak straightforwardly what many don’t

 

– that believing in Jesus for salvation

 

and costly discipleship in making Jesus Lord

 

must go together.

 

In ‘What Is Saving Faith,’

 

John Piper wrote:

 

“For example, there is no doubt in my mind

 

that love to Christ is absolutely necessary for final salvation.

 

I could point to Jesus’s words,

 

“Whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me” (Matt. 10:37),

 

or to Paul’s words,

 

“If anyone has no love for the Lord, let him be accursed” (1 Cor. 16:22).

 

These, and many others, show that such spiritual affections

 

are necessary for final salvation.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

John Piper had biblically brought up

 

that our love for Jesus

 

as concrete evidence of saving faith

 

must be present for one to be truly saved. 

 

In ‘Basic Christianity,’

 

John Stott wrote:

 

“Christianity is far more than accepting a series of statements about Jesus, true though they are.

 

We may believe everything there is to believe about Christ, and admit that we are indeed sinners in need of his salvation,

 

but this does not make us Christians.

 

We have to make a personal response to Jesus Christ,

 

committing ourselves totally to him as our Saviour and Lord.

 

… Jesus never concealed the fact that his religion included a demand as well as an offer.

 

Indeed, the demand was as total as the offer was free.

 

His offer of salvation always brings with it the requirement that we obey him.

 

… He never lowered his standards or changed his conditions to make his call easier to accept.

 

He asked his first disciples, and he has asked every disciple since, to give him their thoughtful and total commitment (Mark 8:34-38).

 

Nothing less than this will do.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

John Stott asserted that when we take up Christ’s offer to believe in Him,

 

it has to be coupled with meeting His demands to totally commit to Him as our Lord and Saviour.

 

Then and only then can we call ourselves Christians. 

 

In ‘Christ’s Call to Discipleship,’

 

James Montgomery Boice wrote:

 

Bonhoeffer wrote,

 

The call to follow implies that there is only one way of believing on Jesus Christ,

 

and that is by leaving all and going with the incarnate Son of God.

 

… Obedience is essential to discipleship,

 

… Yet many supposed followers think they can pick and choose where God’s commands are concerned,

 

obeying when they wish and disobeying what they wish.

 

This is not discipleship.

 

It is not even faith in Jesus as one’s Savior.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

James Montgomery Boice highlighted

 

that faith in Jesus and obedient discipleship

 

are 2 sides of the same coin of true salvation.

 

Both are needed, and one cannot do without the other.

 

In ‘Christ’s Call to Discipleship,’

 

James Montgomery Boice wrote:

 

“Blessed are the poor in spirit.” (Matt 5:3)

 

… As I once wrote in an exposition of the Sermon on the Mount,

 

Being poor in spirit is … to be spiritually bankrupt before God.

 

It is the mental state of the man who has recognized something of the righteousness and holiness of God,

 

who has seen into the sin and corruption of his own heart and has acknowledged his inability to please God…

 

The first of the eight beatitudes is one of the strongest statements in the Bible

 

of the great doctrine of justification by faith in Jesus Christ alone.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

James Montgomery Boice has shown that injunctions in the Sermon on the Mount,

 

does not lead to salvation by works,

 

rather, it underpins the key doctrine of justification by faith in Christ alone. 

 

In ‘Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount And His Confrontation with the World,’

 

DA Carson wrote:

 

“The authentic Jesus makes demands that are personal and costly (Matt 8:18–22).

 

… The two vignettes in these verses, then, teach us that the authentic Jesus makes demands that are often personal and costly.

 

That is why Jesus can elsewhere tell parables the point of which is that would-be disciples ought to count the cost

 

before they promise too much (Luke 14:25-35).

 

Certainly, Paul understood that following Jesus entailed costly decisions.

 

They may not be the same for every Christian;

 

but for him they involved shame, pain, suffering, privation, and large-scale rejection (1 Cor. 4:8-13; 2 Cor. 11:21-33)

 

– even being considered “the scum of the earth, the refuse of the world.”

 

This point is frequently misunderstood by evangelicals,

 

precisely because we have (rightly) stressed

 

the importance of justification by grace,

 

the freedom of God in giving salvation.

 

Our works do not save us;

 

we can be acquitted before the bar of God’s justice

 

and declared righteous in his presence

 

solely on the basis of God’s grace given us in Christ Jesus.

 

But does that mean

 

there is no cost for us to consider at all?”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

DA Darson clearly taught that true saving faith

 

does not only comprise one aspect – faith in Jesus,

 

but it must also fulfil another aspect of costly discipleship

 

– the cost of following Jesus. 

 

If one or the other is missing,

 

no one can claim that he possesses true saving faith.

 

In ‘Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount And His Confrontation with the World,’

 

DA Carson wrote:

 

“… misunderstood the nature of salvation in the Scripture.

 

But on the other hand,

 

those elementary truths do not mean

 

that there are no costs at all, no personal demands.

 

Biblical salvation is paid for by someone else:

 

in that sense it is free.

 

But individual appropriation of it

 

entails repentance, personal death to self-interest,

 

principial submission to the lordship of Jesus Christ.

 

These are not meritorious acts.

 

They are, finally, evidence of the grace of God in the Christian life,

 

but they are no less personal or costly for that.

 

… failed to see that salvation that has been paid for, and is therefore free,

 

nevertheless, works in our lives so powerfully

 

that it transforms us, confronts our will,

 

demands our devotion and allegiance,

 

and calls forth our deepest commitment.

 

In concrete terms, the “costs” Christians pay in the West,

 

as compared with those paid by many Christians in the world,

 

are very small.

 

Principally, however,

 

they are exactly the same for all Christians:

 

death to self-interest, a daily “dying” that can be quite painful.

 

… in one sense, our salvation costs us absolutely nothing;

 

in another, it costs us not less than everything.

 

The former is true because Jesus paid it all;

 

the latter is possible because Jesus enables us to respond to his upward call.

 

Those who stress the latter and neglect the former

 

may never learn that salvation is by grace alone;

 

those who stress the former and neglect the latter

 

may buy into a cheap facsimile of grace

 

that knows little of the biblical gospel

 

and less of biblical holiness.

 

The authentic Jesus makes demands

 

that are personal and costly.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Be warned that Joseph Prince,

 

in trying to escape the cost of discipleship and following Jesus,

 

is promoting cheap grace that has no saving power.  

 

In ‘Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount And His Confrontation with the World,’

 

DA Carson wrote:

 

“This is the place to pause and reflect on the threats Jesus has been issuing.

 

In (Matt) 7:13f. he promises destruction for those who travel the broad way.

 

This is followed first by a picture of a fire burning up unproductive branches (Matt 7:15-20),

 

and then by a categorical rejection of the disobedient (Matt 7:21-23).

 

These are now capped by likening a man who hears Jesus’s words and who does not practice them,

 

to a house shattered, pulverized and swept away by a vicious storm.

 

The question will not be restrained:

 

Is Jesus trying to frighten people into the kingdom?

 

In one sense, of course, the answer must be yes.

 

Some people may well be drawn to Christ because of the attraction of forgiveness;

 

others may feel the first stirrings of desire to follow him when they first glimpse the immensity of his love

 

or the integrity of his life,

 

or when they experience the shame engendered by his scrutiny.

 

But not a few will come

 

only because they see that the issues with which Jesus is concerned are eternal issues

 

– ultimately, nothing less than heaven and hell.

 

… There is a heaven to be gained and a hell to be shunned.

 

If you are sleeping soundly in a house

 

desperately threatened by rising flood waters,

 

you may thank me for pounding at your door to rouse you.

 

At the very least,

 

you are not likely to accuse me of frightening you into safety.

 

Frighten you I shall,

 

effect your removal to a safe place I may attempt:

 

but you would not accuse me

 

of “frightening you into safety.”

 

If you were so attached to your home you could not bear to leave it, you might conceivably choose to stay with it and run the risk of perishing;

 

or if you remained honestly oblivious to the danger you might dismiss me as a fool.

 

But while I tried to frighten you to safety,

 

you would not accuse me of doing so.

 

Similarly, Jesus concludes the Sermon on the Mount

 

by honestly attempting to frighten men and women

 

into the kingdom, into salvation.

 

You may not believe that a hell exists.

 

In that case, you may dismiss Jesus as a liar or a fool.

 

Alternatively, you may be so attached to your sin

 

that even the threat of final and catastrophic judgment

 

may not induce you to leave it.

 

But you will be foolish indeed

 

if you simply accuse Jesus of frightening you into the kingdom.

 

The real issue is the truth behind Jesus’s words,

 

the truth which prompts Jesus’s warning.

 

Either there is a hell to be shunned, or there is not.

 

If there is not, then Jesus’s entire credibility is shattered,

 

for he himself speaks twice as often of hell as of heaven.

 

… My chief concern, however, is not to wax polemical on the subject of judgment and hell,

 

but to assist others in coming to a straightforward understanding of the Sermon on the Mount.

 

The Sermon ends with the threat of judgment.

 

The four sections which make up the conclusion of these three chapters concur in this theme.

 

In fact, these four paragraphs, despite the diversity of their metaphors, each stresses two unyielding themes.

 

The first is that there are only two ways,

 

one which ends in the kingdom of God

 

and the other in destruction.

 

The second theme is that the former way

 

is characterized by obedience to Jesus and practical conformity to all his teaching.

 

These pronouncements ought to instill in us a holy fear.

 

Which one of us stands unashamed beside the precepts of the Sermon on the Mount?

 

Do not these threats of judgment prompt poverty of spirit, which is the first of the kingdom’s norms?

 

We do well to remember that Paul is writing truth when he insists that men are saved only because Christ acted as their substitute and died in their behalf.

 

Christianity is not simply a moralistic religion of high ideals.

 

High ideals – indeed, the highest – it has;

 

but it also presents a crucified yet risen Savior who forgives repentant men

 

and then gives them life to grow to meet those ideals.

 

We ought not forget that Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount

 

must be taken in the context of his entire Gospel.

 

It is not for nothing that his Gospel begins with a prophecy concerning Jesus which stresses his function as a Savior:

 

“She [Mary] will give birth to a son, and you [Joseph] are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21).

 

Within this context, the Sermon on the Mount

 

does not press men and women to despair,

 

still less to self-salvation.

 

Rather, it presses men and women to Jesus.

 

The Sermon on the Mount reflects no malicious glee at the prospect of perdition, no cheer at consigning so many to destruction.

 

The warning is, in fact, entreaty.

 

May God grant his people a spirit of contrition which petitions him for grace and forgiveness by Jesus Christ,

 

and a growing conformity to the norms and perspectives of the kingdom.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

DA Carson has rightfully postured

 

that the high ideals to be obeyed in the Sermon on the Mount

 

does not press us to despair but hope

 

because we now have Christ, who not only forgives,

 

but also empowers us to live the Sermon. 

 

In ‘Studies in the Scriptures, Annual Volume, 1932,’

 

Arthur Pink wrote:

 

“From the human viewpoint, things are now in a bad state in the industrial and social realms.

 

Sad is it to see so many able-bodied men anxious for work, but unable to obtain employment.

 

But from the spiritual viewpoint, things are in a far worse state in the religious realm.

 

Sad is it to see the anti-Christian cults flourishing on every side,

 

but far more grievous is it for those who are taught of God to discover that much of the so-called, “Gospel,”

 

which is now being preached in many “Fundamentalist churches” and “Gospel halls,”

 

is but a Satanic delusion.

 

The devil knows that his captives are quite secure

 

while the grace of God and the finished work of Christ

 

are “faithfully” proclaimed to them,

 

so long as the only way in which sinners receive the saving virtues of the atonement is unfaithfully concealed.

 

Whilst God’s peremptory and unchanging demand for repentance is left out,

 

whilst Christ’s own terms of discipleship (i.e. how to become a Christian, Act 11:26) in Luke 14:26-27, 33 are withheld,

 

and whilst saving faith is frittered down to a mere act of the will,

 

blind laymen will continue to be led by blind preachers, only for both to fall into the ditch.

 

… Now, the popular answer which is being returned to them

 

is, “Nothing more is required from any sinner than that he simply believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.”

 

In the preceding articles of this series, we have sought to show that such a reply is misleading, inadequate, faulty, and that,

 

because it ignores all the other Scriptures which set forth what God requires from the sinner.

 

It leaves out of account God’s demand for repentance (with all that that involves and includes)

 

and Christ’s clearly-defined terms of discipleship in Luke 14.

 

To restrict ourselves to any one Scripture term of a subject, or set of passages using that term,

 

results in an erroneous conception of it.

 

… So, they who limit their thoughts on how to be saved to the one word, “Believe,” are easily misled.

 

Diligent care needs to be taken to collect all that Scripture teaches on any subject

 

if we are to have a properly balanced and accurate view thereof.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Arthur Pink stressed that to produce a balanced and accurate view of salvation,

 

all relevant verses must be taken into account on the issue of salvation.

 

The tendency by some quarters, such as Joseph Prince

 

to cherry pick some verses to the exclusion of others,

 

have only led to a false view of the gospel that cannot save.

 

In ‘Studies in the Scriptures, Annual Volume, 1932,’

 

Arthur Pink wrote:

 

“So LIKEWISE, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath,

 

he cannot be my disciple” (Luk 14:31-33),

 

which means he cannot be a Christian – see Matthew 28:19, Acts 11:26.

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Arthur Pink has stated that a Christian must be a disciple,

 

as opposed to Joseph Prince who doesn’t believe in being disciples

 

because he teaches against the existence of it.

 

In conclusion, by now, you ought to realise

 

that all 10 Bible teachers are against Joseph Prince’s false salvation doctrine,

 

and several are also against his Sermon on the Mount teaching.

 

This is why I have, time and again, proven

 

that Joseph Prince is indeed a lone ranger,

 

who is both deceptive and dangerous.

 

Flee from this wolf in sheepskin false prophet before it’s too late!

 

APPENDIX

 

Point-by-Point rebuttal of what Joseph Prince said in his sermon 2 days ago on 24 Dec 2023 and also his sermon on 12 Nov 2023:

 

1. The Half-truth teachings of Joseph Prince is what makes him a heretic.

 

Joseph Prince said in his sermon 2 days ago, on 24 Dec 2023:

 

“His teachings, trying to follow His teachings cannot save you.

 

It is death at the cross and His resurrection that saves you.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

The truth is for true saving faith,

 

both justification by faith that is based on the cross and resurrection of Jesus

 

and the discipleship teachings and demands of Jesus on His disciples

 

must be taken into account.

 

I have already highlighted this in the teachings of 10 prominent Bible teachers (see above):

 

Watchman Nee, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, DA Carson, James Montgomery Boice, John Piper, Arthur Pink, John Stott, John Macarthur, AW Tozer & Zac Poonen.

 

But what Joseph Prince perennially does is that he highlights just one side of the truth – faith in Christ,

 

but hides and even denigrates the other equally important half-truth – discipleship.

 

In ‘Voice of a Prophet,’

 

AW Tozer wrote: 

 

“This is the danger of hearing partial truth.

 

This is what makes heretics.

 

… there is only partial truth being expounded.

 

The reason is because someone is only hearing the partial voice of God.

 

… Because, you see, the part you do not hear

 

can destroy.”

 

In ‘Voice of a Prophet,’

 

AW Tozer wrote: 

 

“That is my definition of heresy.

 

Heresy is presenting truth

 

but conveniently leaving out some of the truth.”

 

In ‘Experiencing the Presence of God, Complied and Edited by James L. Snyder,’

 

AW Tozer wrote:

 

“I must point out that in the Scriptures there are certain basic truths

 

upon which other truths are built.

 

… No truth stands by itself,

 

but always in relationship with other truths of God’s Word.

 

This is where heresy begins to develop

 

when men separate one truth from another truth.”

 

2. If Joseph Prince cannot even comprehend the difference between perfection and commitment, how in the world can he be a world-renowned grace teacher?

 

Joseph Prince said in his sermon 2 days ago, on 24 Dec 2023:

 

“And, since we are on that,

 

none of us can follow His (Jesus) teachings.

 

… None of us can do it.

 

None of us.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Does Jesus expect us to be perfect (notwithstanding Matthew 5:48)

 

in every of our behaviour and obedience to Him?

 

Of course not!

 

But does Christ expect total commitment and our entire allegiance to Him?

 

He certainly does!

 

But just because we are not perfect,

 

does not mean that we can escape all the commitments that Jesus requires of us.

 

This is exactly what Joseph Prince does

 

– using the excuse that we are not perfect

 

to free us from all our commitments to Jesus

 

– that just because it is hard to do,

 

means we don’t have to do,

 

hence, concocting a feel-good and false theology of salvation

 

that has deceived and hooked the millions.

 

And by the way, I wonder whether Joseph Prince

 

really believes in his grace teaching?

 

If Joseph Prince does, he should have said to the people (but he doesn’t):

 

“Hey, I know it’s tough to wholly follow Jesus and fully obey Him, especially in the Sermon on the Mount.

 

But that’s where we need the grace of God to empower us to do that which is humanly impossible.”

 

3. Joseph Prince is tantamount to accusing Jesus of lying when he said none of us can follow His teachings. 

 

Joseph Prince said in his sermon 2 days ago, on 24 Dec 2023:

 

“And, since we are on that,

 

none of us can follow His teachings.

 

If none of us can follow Jesus’ teachings, as Joseph Prince claims,

 

why did Jesus say the narrow road to eternal life is only for the few who would make it (Matt 7:14)?

 

Why did Jesus say that we are to strive to enter the narrow gate and walk the narrow road of salvation that many will try to enter but couldn’t (Lk 13:24)?

 

Why did Jesus say that the Christian life is one of reproach, persecution, suffering, and possible martyrdom (Matt 5:10; 24:9, Mk 13:13; Lk 21:17; Jn 15:19-20)?

 

Why did Jesus say that we must take up the cross and follow Him and give up everything before we can be His disciples (Lk 14:27, 33)?

 

If none of us can follow His teachings,

 

why would Jesus say all that (and these 4 are only a sampling of the many things He said in the four gospels)?

 

Jesus isn’t asking for perfection but commitment.

 

Anyone who is serious and sincere about his faith

 

can commit to follow Jesus all the way and obey His teachings.

 

And as we commit to follow Christ’s teachings,

 

we will inch more and more towards perfection. 

 

Joseph Prince by claiming that we cannot follow Jesus’ teachings

 

is not only saying that Jesus has wasted His precious time teaching us,

 

but more soberly, he is tantamount to saying that Jesus had lied.

 

4. Joseph Prince accused Jesus of lying when he said if Jesus had stayed on the mountain and didn’t come down, we are all finished as there would be no redemption for us.

 

Joseph Prince said in his sermon 2 days ago, on 24 Dec 2023:

 

“Thank God after He preached the Sermon on the Mount,

 

He came down to where the people were.

 

If He didn’t come down,

 

we are all finished.”

 

In ‘Grace Revolution’, Joseph Prince wrote,

 

“Spiritually speaking,

 

if the King had stayed on the mountain, 

 

there would have been no redemption for us.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Joseph Prince is accusing Jesus of lying

that what He said in the Sermon on the Mount could not save us,

despite the fact that Jesus teaches that those who are poor in spirit, pure in heart, etc,

will inherit the kingdom of heaven (Matt 5:3-12).

 

Joseph Prince is accusing Jesus of lying

that what He said in the Sermon on the Mount could not save us,

despite the fact that Jesus teaches that those who obey and teach others to obey

will be great in the Kingdom of heaven (Matt 5:19).

 

Joseph Prince is accusing Jesus of lying

that what He said in the Sermon on the Mount could not save us,

despite the fact that Jesus teaches that those who walk the narrow way will find life (eternal) (Matt 7:14).

 

Joseph Prince is accusing Jesus of lying

that what He said in the Sermon on the Mount could not save us,

despite the fact that Jesus teaches that those who do the will of the Father will enter the kingdom of heaven (Matt 7:21).

 

Joseph Prince is accusing Jesus of lying

that what He said in the Sermon on the Mount could not save us, despite the fact that Jesus teaches

so that we can avoid hell (and make it to heaven)

by not being angry with another brother and calling him a fool (Matt 5:22).

 

Joseph Prince is accusing Jesus of lying

that what He said in the Sermon on the Mount could not save us, despite the fact that Jesus teaches

that we can avoid hell (and so make it to heaven)

by avoiding the sin of adulterous thoughts (Matt 5:29-30).

 

5. Joseph Prince’s Persistent & Unrepentant Double-talk.

 

Joseph Prince said in his sermon 2 days ago, on 24 Dec 2023:

 

Please click here to view the 11-second video:

 

“And, since we are on that,

 

none of us can follow His teachings.

 

You know, He says,

 

“Love your enemies.”

 

Um! We got problem loving our relative.”

 

But Joseph Prince said in another sermon;

 

Please click here to view the 7-second video:

 

“But does that mean the Sermon on the Mount is not relevant for us?

 

No. There are elements you read about it.

 

Love your enemies is still carried on in the New Covenant.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

One moment, Joseph Prince said that “Loving your enemies” is impossible to be obeyed as the Sermon on the Mount is not for the Church.

 

The next moment, he said the Sermon on the Mount is for New Covenant believers.

 

Imagine the plenty of times I have already caught him for double-talking,

 

and 2 days ago, he unrepentantly, committed the same sin again. 

 

6. Joseph Prince is talking rubbish and his ‘don’t-have-to-do-anything-but-just-rest-in-Jesus’ teaching is a heresy.

 

Joseph Prince said in his sermon 2 days ago, on 24 Dec 2023:

 

“He’s going to come back to us by His Holy Spirit, lived in us,

 

and live out the Sermon on the Mount for us

 

as we rest in Him.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

Why do we have to wait for Jesus to come back a second time to live in us and for the Holy Spirit

 

in order to live out the Sermon on the Mount?

 

Isn’t Jesus living in us right now?

 

Don’t we now have the Holy Spirit to empower us to obey the tough demands of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount?

 

Where in the Bible does it say as Joseph Prince does:

 

“He’s going to come back to us by His Holy Spirit, lived in us,

 

and live out the Sermon on the Mount for us

 

as we rest in Him.”

 

Nowhere!

 

Joseph Prince is just churning this out from his heretical imagination.

 

In ‘Exposition of Romans 8:17-39, The Final Perseverance of the Saints,’

 

Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:

 

“The New Testament never claims that the Christian life is an easy life;

 

and a teaching that maintains that the Christian can never be in a position in which he has no struggle, no fight, no difficulty at all,

 

and that all he has to do is to sit back passively,

 

is sheer heresy.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

What Martyn Lloyd-Jones had pointed out,

 

showed that Joseph Prince’s

 

‘you-don’t-have-to-do-anything-but-just-rest-in-Jesus’ feel-good teaching

 

that Christ will live out the Sermon on the Mount for you,

 

when He comes back

 

is, indeed, a heresy.

 

7. Joseph Prince’s declaration that he has forgiven one of his critics in a previous sermon on 12 Nov 2023 is insincere and a bluff.

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

To refresh your memory, please refer to a previous article,

 

Joseph Prince Slanders his Critics by Falsely Accusing Them of Character Assassinating him – By Rev George Ong (Dated 14 Nov 2023)

 

by clicking on the link below,

 

https://www.revgeorgeong.com/rev-george-ong-joseph-prince-slanders-his-critics-by-falsely-accusing-them-of-character-assassinating-him/

 

In that article, I made the point that Joseph Prince had slandered his critics

 

by falsely accusing them of character assassinating him.

 

I showed you just half of the relevant points of what he said in the sermon on 12 Nov 2023.

 

What I will be showing you now is the other half (together with the first) in which he said that he has forgiven his critics.

 

In a sermon on 12 Nov 2023, Joseph Prince said;

 

Please click here to view the 35-second video:

 

“And anyone preaches that we don’t understand,

 

so, we assassinate him, his character, I mean.

 

I have been assassinated,

 

my character have been assassinated.

 

I don’t know why it gets stronger and stronger by the grace of God.

 

Ya, it seems like people throw rocks right.

 

What do I do?

 

I don’t pay attention to those things.

 

I forgive the people involved

 

whenever I hear about someone,

 

I forgive the person.

 

I even take communion for the person or persons.

 

I take communion for them.

 

But you know what when I get up,

 

I move on. I move on.”

 

First, if Joseph Prince has really forgiven his critic, which he said he did in his 12 Nov 2023 sermon,

 

why did he launch another tirade against this critic when he said in his latest sermon 2 days ago, on 24 Dec 2023:

 

“And if you criticise me for saying that,

 

there you go,

 

He (Jesus) says also say in the Sermon on the Mount,

 

‘Don’t criticise your neighbour.

 

Judge not that you be not judged.’”

 

Obviously, Joseph Prince has not really forgiven his critic.

 

One who has forgiven his critic

 

will not rake up the same issue that he has already dealt with.

 

Prince is only trying to gain the moral high ground against his critics – that’s all – and it’s all for show.

 

If Joseph Prince doesn’t mean what he says – that he has forgiven his critic

 

how can you ever trust this man?

 

Second, this is the first time I ever heard of someone (Joseph Prince)

 

whom I have proven to be slandering his critic for character assassinating him in the article dated 14 Nov 2023,

 

to tell the world that he has forgiven the one whom he had slandered.

 

The one who was wronged (his critic)

 

ought to be the one to say to the accused (Joseph Prince)

 

that he has forgiven him

 

and not the other way round.  

 

Now, do you get the ‘humour’ of it all?

 

It is the accused (Joseph Prince)

 

who tells the world that he has forgiven the one

 

whom he has slandered.

 

Third, Joseph Prince said in the sermon on 12 Nov 2023:

 

“I forgive that person.

 

I even take communion for the person or persons.

 

I take communion for them.”

 

What?

 

Joseph Prince said that he takes communion for his critics!

 

Is Joseph Prince okay or not (Singlish)?

 

Doesn’t he know that partaking in the Holy Communion isn’t to remember his critics who are alive,

 

but to remember the death of Jesus for our sins and be grateful for what He has done for us.

 

This is the first time I have ever heard someone taking communion on the behalf of others – his critics.

 

What a twisted teaching!

 

Fourth, Joseph Prince said in his sermon on 12 Nov 2023:

 

“What do I do?

 

I don’t pay attention to those things (his critics).

 

… But you know what when I get up,

 

I move on. I move on.”

 

The truth is Joseph Prince has not moved on

 

as he is still paying attention to this critic

 

when he said in his latest sermon 2 days ago, on 24 Dec 2023:

 

“And if you criticise me for saying that,

 

there you go,

 

He (Jesus) says also say in the Sermon on the Mount,

 

‘Don’t criticise your neighbour.

 

Judge not that you be not judged.” (Matt 7:1)

 

I wonder why Joseph Prince is so fearful of this critic,

 

who is only one mere man

 

versus his entire entourage of staff,

 

tens of thousands of church members,

 

millions of supporters around the world

 

and huge financial resources at his bidding?

 

Why do I take the trouble to highlight all these?

 

It is to expose the real character of Joseph Prince

 

– that he is a double-faced man

 

– one who doesn’t mean what he say,

 

and what he says is just for show!

 

8. In Joseph Prince’s hit back against his critic, he has gone out of context.

 

Joseph Prince hit his critics with this verse:

 

“Judge not that you be not judged.” (Matt 7:1)

 

Let me show you why this is out of context

 

by alluding to what JC Ryle wrote

 

and also my write-up after his.

 

In ‘The Complete Works of JC Ryle,’

 

JC Ryle wrote:

 

“The first portion of these verses (Jud 7:1-5) is one of those passages of Scripture

 

which we must be careful not to strain beyond its proper meaning.

 

It is frequently abused and misapplied

 

by the enemies of true religion.

 

It is possible to press the words of the Bible so far

 

that they yield not medicine,

 

but poison.

 

When our Lord says, “Judge not,”

 

He does not mean that it is wrong, under any circumstances,

 

to pass an unfavourable judgment on the conduct and opinions of others.

 

We ought to have decided opinions:

 

we are to “prove all things;”

 

we are to “try the spirits.” (1 Thessalonians 5:21; 1 Joshua 4:1)—

 

Nor yet does He mean that it is wrong to reprove the sins and faults of others

 

until we are perfect and faultless’ ourselves.

 

Such an interpretation would contradict other parts of Scripture:

 

it would make it impossible to condemn error and false doctrine;

 

it would debar anyone from attempting the office of a minister or a judge.

 

The earth would be “given into the hands of the wicked” (Job 9:24)

 

Heresy would flourish:

 

wrong-doing would abound.”

 

George Ong’s comments:

 

JC Ryle has pointedly said that ‘judge not’

 

does not mean that one cannot contend against heresies.

 

If that was meant,

 

then heresies would flourish

 

and this is what Joseph Prince wants it to happen.

 

George Ong’s write-up:

 

“People have said and even lambasted me,

 

“George – You shouldn’t judge Joseph Prince.”

 

They base their argument on Matthew 7:1-2,

 

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”

 

Are they sure they have the right understanding of Matthew 7:1-2?

 

Are they saying that we mustn’t judge Joseph Prince

 

even though he is obviously twisting the word of God many times

 

and clearly teaching against the core doctrines of the Christian Faith?

 

Even though he is leading people to hell?

 

What kind of theology is that?

 

No wonder the false teachings of Joseph Prince have flourished largely unhindered

 

because of this ‘don’t judge people theology’. 

 

From what I have written about Joseph Prince

 

– Yes, I have judged him

 

and I have judged him as a wolf in sheepskin.

 

Their response should not be,

 

“George, you have no right to judge him,”

 

but whether all that I have said about him that he is a false teacher have been proven in all that I have written.

 

And they must prove to me why Joseph Prince is not a false teacher and that what I have said about him is wrong or unbiblical.

 

Are they saying we shouldn’t judge someone to see whether he is rightly teaching from the scriptures or he is teaching falsely?

 

When someone discredits the teachings of another as false, many in today’s tolerant world will voice out their strong objections,

 

‘Judge not, lest you be judged’.

 

These objections are often not due to an informed reflection of the scriptures

 

but a hasty reaction of an ignorant and overly tolerant world. 

 

A tolerant world that has become intolerant against intolerance – get my point?

 

Not tolerating people who are intolerant is a contradiction.

 

And anyone who dares to speak up for truth and against falsity

 

is now branded as an intolerant, self-righteous Pharisee

 

or an unloving, dogmatic conservative.

 

They (and unbelievably, even pastors, not just Joseph Prince) even invoke the Bible in Matthew 7:1-2 to make their point – “Judge not.”

 

They thought they are Biblical, but in reality, they are largely ignorant.

 

They ignorantly thought that is the proof text that will seal their argument about stopping one from judging another.

 

They thought Matthew 7:1-2 is used to support the fact that no one has the right to make any judgement on anyone on any grounds.

 

In making this judgement, they do not realise that they, too, are judging others who judge others. 

 

Just remember that Matthew 7:1-2 was given in the context of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew chapters 5-7).

 

If we are not supposed to judge, Jesus would be contradicting Himself

 

because He had judged the Pharisees sternly (Matt 5:20, etc) in the same context of the Sermon on the Mount.

 

What does Jesus mean when he tells us not to judge others, or we will be judged (Matt 7:1-5)?

 

First, let us consider what he does not mean.

 

The text cannot mean that we are not to judge under all circumstances because in the next passage, Jesus gave the following instructions:

 

Matthew 7:6 NIV

6 “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.”

 

The simple lesson is – don’t cast precious and valuable truths to people who are not ready.

 

Not only will they not appreciate it, they will also reject it, and they may even ‘bite’ you with it.

 

If we are to obey this command of Jesus, are we not to judge by making appraisals of others about their readiness for precious truths?

 

We cannot obey Jesus’ command unless we make a judgement on who are the ‘pigs’ and ‘dogs’.

 

If we do not judge by making an honest assessment of others, how are we to know who is ready and who is not?

 

We have to honestly say that so and so is not ready because he is extremely proud and unteachable.

 

Are we judging others when we make that kind of assessment?

 

About 10 verses down from Matthew 7:1-5 in Matthew 7:15-20,

 

Jesus instructed the apostles to judge leaders and teachers by their fruits.

 

If it is wrong to judge leaders and teachers (by their fruits),

 

how will we know whether they are true or false?

 

How can we tell whether one is a true shepherd or a wolf in sheepskin?

 

To judge whether someone is a wolf in sheep’s clothing requires informed, judicious and discerning judgement.

 

It is precisely because of the silence and absence of such a needed judgement from many (not every) bishops, pastors and elders in the church

 

that has led to many members of churches who have been deceived by false prophets, such as Joseph Prince.

 

What has contributed to such a sorry state of affairs is the wrong teaching that we should not judge leaders or teachers, and we should not touch the Lord’s anointed (advanced by Joseph Prince himself for his own interest). 

 

On the contrary, Jesus categorically instructed us to judge them by their fruits (Matt 7:15-20).

 

The key fruit or test that Joseph Prince is to be judged on is his teaching – whether he is teaching the Jesus of the Bible or his own version of Jesus.

 

After I’ve explained about what judging others does not mean, let’s see what Jesus really meant when he tells us not to judge:

 

Matthew 7:1-5 NIV

1 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. 3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. 

 

In context, Jesus was teaching the principle that we are not to judge others for the same sin we are committing.

 

This is particularly so when the same sin that we are committing is a much bigger flaw (plank)

 

than the one that is committed by our brother (speck) that we are correcting.

 

If we judge others for not observing the same standard of behaviour that we don’t exemplify,

 

we are in danger of being judged by God (Matt 7:1-2).

 

If we judge others for the same faults that we are guilty of, we have become hypocrites (Matt 7:5),

 

and we, indeed, have committed the kind of judgement that Jesus forbids (Matt 7:1-2).

 

To put it in practical terms, it is one brother who has not gotten over the sin of explosive anger (plank) to have the audacity to point out the sin of intermittent anger (speck) in another brother’s life.

 

To apply it to myself – if I am guilty of teaching false teachings, I would have no right to correct and contend against the false teachings of Joseph Prince (whom I don’t consider to be a brother-in-Christ but a wolf in sheepskin).

 

If I do, I will be guilty of hypocrisy (Matt 7:5).

 

So, Jesus wasn’t teaching that we are not to judge others.

 

He is stating the fact that one must first overcome and remove, say, the sin of anger first, by taking

 

“the plank out of your own eye,” (Matt 7:5a)

 

before he confronts another of the same sin and helping him

 

“to remove the speck from your brother’s eye” (Matt 7:5b).  

 

Jesus did not forbid addressing and judging the faults and flaws of others (Matt 7:5b).

 

If He did, He would have contradicted the rest of His teachings in the Sermon on the Mount about the need to judge others.

 

What Jesus is against are people who pinpoint the smaller flaws of others (speck),

 

when they don’t even attempt to deal with the bigger faults (plank) of their own.

 

The lesson is – we must first remove the sin in our life before removing the same sin from others.

 

Only when we have victory over the sin of covetousness do we have the privilege to challenge others to do the same.

 

Only when we have first removed the plank in our eyes do we have the authority to remove the speck in another’s eye.” 

 

Parting Shot!

 

Well, I hope Joseph Prince doesn’t chicken out like a church mouse

 

after being thrashed by 10 well-respected Bible teachers and my exposure of his real character.

 

Hope he doesn’t back off this Sunday.

 

I am looking forward to another reply of his. 

×
×

Basket