Joseph Prince falsely accuses 12 Church Fathers, especially Martin Luther, John Calvin & John Wesley as Antinomians & lied he isn’t one – By Rev George Ong (Dated 27 Feb 2024)
Featured YouTube Comments:
@ginalau134
“Someone from this New Creation Church
told me years ago
halfway through preaching, Joseph Prince paused
and said God sent a message to him
to ask the congregation to invest in gold!
My goodness!
If you are a true Christian,
you would know who is the one actually whispering to him!
I mean God asking the congregation to invest in gold
in the midst of teaching His words??
I found it so hard to believe.
So, I seek confirmation from another member of New Creation Church
if really such an event happened.
She told me indeed.
I asked her so did she invest in gold after hearing that?
She replied no.
Just when I thought this lady has got some wisdom in her,
her reply almost made me fell off my chair.
She said she didn’t invest
because she didn’t know how to!”
George Ong’s comments:
This story was confirmed by an Ex New Creation Church member,
who said she heard the same thing mentioned by Joseph Prince.
@ginalau134
“An ex-colleague of mine attends this New Creation Church
and all our office people knew
that he has extramarital affair with a China woman.
I told him that was so wrong!
It’s adultery.
He said it is ok.
God loves us, and we are just like naughty little children
that misbehave at times.
God will forgive us!
Many people attend this New Creation Church
because they will not be convicted of their sins!
Another one told me,
we should not try too hard not to sin
because we are saved by the grace of God
as Joseph Prince said.
No amount of effort will earn us a ticket to heaven.
It is by God’s grace that we are saved.
Sounds correct.
But the most outrageous part follows.
She then went on to say:
‘that’s why Pastor Joseph Prince says, for example,
if you have the urge to smoke, just go and smoke.
After that, come back and repent will do.’
She said Pastor Joseph Prince
also said he can’t even guarantee
if he won’t commit adultery.
So, no one is perfect and we are saved by the grace of God!
That’s his forte … preaching half-truths to deceive people!”
George Ong’s comments:
Now you know why so many goats
are attending New Creation Church.
I mean, why not?
‘All my sins, including my sins of adultery, etc, are forgiven.
God is very forgiving and understanding.
Even when I sin and commit the sin of adultery,
the Holy Spirit will not convict me of my adulterous sins
but of how righteous I am before God.’
Friends, Joseph Prince, with his heretical doctrines,
are destroying lives and sending them to hell.
@papichoku2442
“When you see church members
displaying the photo of their lead pastor
in their homes or offices
which I know some New Creation Church members do,
you know there is a serious problem.
They are worshiping a man rather than God.”
@joyceliew4352
“I remember there was a year when Joseph Prince
gave out his personal poster of himself
resting beside a river.
Just imagine putting up a poster of your pastor
in your house, study room, bedroom…etc?
Reason of the poster was to encourage all
to be reminded to be planted by the river,
a picture of rest.
Joseph Prince always said: look to Jesus!
Actually, I think he meant to look to Joseph Prince.
Joseph Prince is a man,
who loves to draw attention to himself.
His pastors never fail to mention his name
whenever they preach,
giving Joseph Prince much glory all the time.”
George Ong’s comments:
I have always said that Joseph Prince is such a proud man.
But from this episode, he is also a vain man
who is not only satisfied to be seen every Sunday by his members,
but also every day in their homes and bedrooms.
The Bottomline:
Joseph Prince wants to be hero worshipped
by his congregation, and he is promoting it.
@siewkong0107
“I believe the churches in Singapore
should write to the National Council of Churches
to highlight the indiscretion of Joseph Prince’s teaching.
See Matthew 18:15-20.
The Lord has shown us how to deal with such issue.
I think leaders of National Council of Churches
should do something about it.”
Announcements:
No 1: There is 1 video each on RC Sproul, George Ong and Joseph Prince.
No 2: Don’t miss the many short, crisp and insightful quotes from the 12 Church Fathers:
Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Wesley, Charles Spurgeon, Arthur Pink, JI Packer, DL Moody, Billy Graham, David Pawson, John MacArthur, James Montgomery Boice & Martyn Lloyd-Jones.
No 3: It is strange that Joseph Prince didn’t preach last Sunday.
Please see “My Parting Shot to Joseph Prince,”
in the last part of this article
for this issue and 2 other issues.
Another issue:
why is Joseph Prince so silent about praying for Israel
in his worship services.
Excerpt No 1 from the Article:
In ‘Works of Martin Luther, Vol. 5,’
Martin Luther said:
“Those who are not of this sort
ought not to count themselves Christians,
and they ought not to be comforted,
as one comforts Christians,
with much talk about the forgiveness of sins
and the grace of Christ,
as the Antinomians do.
For they, rejecting
and not understanding the Ten Commandments,
preach much about the grace of Christ instead.
They strengthen and comfort those who remain in sins,
telling them that they shall not fear sins or be terrified at them,
since through Christ,
these are all done away.”
George Ong’s comments:
What Martin Luther described an Antinomian,
is exactly who Joseph Prince epitomised.
Martin Luther made the point that those Antinomians,
such as Joseph Prince,
who preached on the forgiveness and the grace of Christ
but rejected the Ten Commandments,
are not Christians in the first place.
If Joseph Prince isn’t a Christian to start with,
how can he be preaching the true gospel?
And how can those who supposedly accept Christ
through Joseph Prince’s grace message
be really saved?
Excerpt No 2 from the Article:
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:
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.
Excerpt No 3 from the Article:
In ‘An Expositional Commentary on Romans Volume 1-4.’
James Montgomery Boice wrote:
“Two studies back,
I began to explain the final paragraph
of Romans 3 (vv. 27- 31),
… “Well, then,” such a person might argue,
“if salvation is apart from law, as you say,
Doesn’t the doctrine of salvation by grace
set God’s law aside
and thus, show it to be worthless?”
And if it does that,
Shouldn’t your gospel be rejected
as being quite false?
Aren’t we obliged to reject any doctrine
that would nullify the revealed law of God?
Paul’s reply is that the gospel of grace
does not nullify God’s law.
God forbid that it should!
If it did that,
it would be a false gospel,
one rightly to be rejected.
But it does not nullify the law of God.
On the contrary,
it establishes the law
and is, in fact,
the only thing that does or could establish it.”
George Ong’s comments:
James Montgomery Boice wrote that
grace does not nullify the law of God (Rom 3:27-31).
He further wrote that any grace doctrine
that nullifies the law of God
(which is what Joseph Prince teaches),
is a false Gospel and one rightly to be rejected.
This proves that Joseph Prince’s gospel of grace
that does away with the law,
is categorically a false gospel.
which does not save.
Excerpt No 4 from the Article:
Joseph Prince is undoubtedly, a true-blooded Antinomian.
But he has the cheek and the shamelessness
to deny he is an Antinomian.
And for an Antinomian like Joseph Prince
to deny he is an Antinomian,
just as a thief who denies he is a thief,
is not only a blatant lie
but hypocrisy of the highest order.
Excerpt No 5 from the Article:
In conclusion, let me highlight again
the great importance of what Dr Roland Chia wrote.
Dr Roland Chia,
Chew Hock Hin Professor of Christian Doctrine
Trinity Theological College, wrote:
“The truth is that Joseph Prince’s doctrines of the Bible (especially the Old Testament),
God’s moral laws (especially the Ten Commandments),
grace, confession and repentance of sin,
healing, salvation, and holy communion
lie outside the boundaries of orthodoxy.
They are antithetical
to the teachings of Scripture
and the Church throughout the centuries,
including the early Church Fathers,
the sixteenth century Reformers
and contemporary orthodox theologians.
Taken as a whole,
what Prince presents as sound doctrine
is in fact heresy.”
For Dr Roland Chia to write that
“They (Joseph Prince’s teachings) are antithetical
to the teachings of Scripture
and the Church throughout the centuries,
including the early Church Fathers,
the sixteenth century Reformers
and contemporary orthodox theologians,”
must set the alarm bells ringing.
If you have been observant,
you would have noticed that
this is what I have been trying to do
in my many previous articles, and also this article.
I have deliberately and relentlessly surfaced
how the teachings of Joseph Prince
contradict that of the Church Fathers,
particularly, those in the Reformation period
and the contemporary orthodox theologians.
Here, we are not talking about just one of two, or even several,
but a whole host of them.
And, of course, it goes without saying
that the teachings of these Church Fathers
are anchored on the scriptures,
and they represent a wide spectrum
of different theological persuasions.
That being the case,
anyone, who is theological informed and biblically honest
would come to the conclusion,
like Dr Roland Chia, myself and many others did,
that Joseph Prince is undoubtedly a heretic.
Any other verdict
would be to go against plain common sense,
theological imperatives and sound doctrine.
(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.)
In a Sunday sermon aired on YouTube,
18 Feb 2024, 2 Sundays ago, Joseph Prince said;
Please click here to view the 1-minute-and-20-second video:
“Alright, now, watch this church.
What is the greatest commandment?
You must love God with all your heart,
all your soul, all your mind, all your strength.
Now, every time someone tells me that right,
I asked the question, have you done it?
You know until today, I have not found an answer.
Nobody can say yes, I have done it.
Now, you say I do my best.
The law doesn’t understand that.
Okay, sorry, ah.
You are a true Antinomian
when you bring down the law to your level.
A true Antinomian, Antinomos,
actually, someone who is against the law.
I am not against the law.
I am for the law for the reason God gave the law.
By the law is the knowledge of sin.
I am consistent.
I am telling you,
if you come under the law in any way,
you are under a curse.
For as many as are of the works of the law
are under the curse.
For as many as are of the works.
You don’t even have to break it.
The moment I say I take my stand on the law,
you are under the curse.
Because the law, listen carefully,
the law curse just one sin, one violation, the law curse.
The law does not understand I bend down
and understand that you are trying your best.
No, you cannot play around with the law.
So, the true Antinomians
are people who actually preach
you can keep the law.”
George Ong’s comments:
Joseph Prince said:
“Alright, now, watch this church.
What is the greatest commandment?
You must love God with all your heart,
all your soul, all your mind, all your strength.
Now, every time someone tells me that right,
I asked the question, have you done it?
You know until today, I have not found an answer.
Nobody can say yes, I have done it.”
George Ong’s comments:
The above question that Joseph Prince asked
is like him asking a similar question
and then providing his own answers,
“Is there anyone here who is a perfect husband?
Nobody can say he is a perfect husband, right?
Since nobody can be a perfect husband,
let’s just forget about even trying to be husbands.”
This is how Joseph Prince argues nonsensically.
Similarly, he is also arguing
that since no one can love God perfectly,
everyone is now excused from even loving Him
by our simple devotions and actions of love.
That from henceforth, no one is to love God at all
(because he has pronounced it to be under law),
just because we cannot love Him
with all their heart, soul, mind and strength.
In the same way,
just because nobody can be a perfect husband
doesn’t that mean every man
will have to give up being a husband and forgo marriage.
It also doesn’t mean that every man
cannot aim towards being a perfect husband?
The same goes for loving God with our whole being.
More so, we have the Holy Spirit to empower us
and the grace of God to strengthen us.
It seems that Joseph Prince,
who preaches so much
about the power of the Holy Spirit
and super abounding grace of God
in many of his sermons,
has suddenly forgotten about them
and throw them out the window.
Joseph Prince, what’s happening?
“Hey Joe, of course, I know, Lah.
You are a master twister of truth
Those teachings that flow with your grace doctrine,
you straightaway invoke
the power of the Holy Spirit and the grace of God.
But those that go against your grace doctrine,
you just ‘act blur’ and pretend
that there is no Holy Spirit
and God’s grace to help us.”
What is Joseph Prince’s picture of God
regarding loving God
with all our heart, soul, mind and strength?
To him, God is probably a tyrant and a rather ungracious God
who would come down hard on him,
each time he fails to love God that way.
That is why Joseph Prince is so afraid even to try.
What is our picture of God?
To us, God is our heavenly Father who loves us so much
that He would bear with our weaknesses and failures.
And each time, we stumbled and failed
in our attempts to love Him that way,
He is so full of grace and is always there to help us
in our attempts to love Him in a deeper way.
As long as we are sincere and honest,
and aren’t taking Him for a ride,
God will not despise our efforts to love Him,
and He will help us along the way
with the power of His Holy Spirit,
and by the strength of His matchless grace.
And in our imperfect but sincere attempts
to love God that way,
He is looking forward to that day of glory
when we can love Him perfectly.
George Ong’s comments:
Joseph Prince said:
“Now, you say I do my best.
(to love God with all my heart, mind, soul and strength)
The law doesn’t understand that.
… if you come under the law in any way,
you are under a curse.
For as many as are of the works of the law
are under the curse.
… The law does not understand I bend down
and understand that you are trying your best.”
What Joseph Prince is driving at
in this sermon and his other sermons
is that we are trying to be saved by the law.
(And if we really did,
of course, we will come under a curse.)
This is his straw man strategy
that he keeps using against us
– that we obey the law
because we are trying to be saved by it.
In a teaching session, George Ong said;
Please click here to view the 1-minute-45-second video:
“Now Joseph Prince uses this deadly strawman strategy
to misrepresent our views
so that his people
have the wrong understanding of our teaching.
How he misrepresent our views?
He will say something like this:
These people, they teach that you must obey the law to be justified.
No, no, we never teach that you must obey the law to be justified.
And he says, these people they have rejected grace
because they say you must obey the law to be saved.
We have never done that.
You see he uses this strawman strategy to misrepresent,
strawman strategy is one where purposely misrepresent, distort our view.
Tell me, Joseph Prince,
which evangelical church (in Singapore) will preach this,
that we are saved by the law?
Which evangelical Pastor (in Singapore) will preach
that we are justified by the law?
He cannot quote me anyone.
It’s just his straw man.
If any evangelical Pastor or church
preached that we are saved by the law,
this guy is a heretic.
So, what is our position?
Our position is that we are not saved by the law.
We are not justified by the law.
But after we are justified,
after we are saved by the righteousness of God in Christ,
we must obey the law under sanctification.
I will go on to say,
if anybody claims that he is saved,
but refuses to obey the law,
teaches against it,
I don’t think he is saved.
So, I say again.
We are not saved by the law.
But after we are saved,
we must obey the law.
That’s the position of Reformation fathers
and also the evangelical church.”
George Ong’s comments:
So, Joseph Prince’s strategy has always been
to falsely accuse us of obeying God’s law
in order to be saved or justified.
Joseph Prince keeps misrepresenting our doctrinal stand
time and again by repeating a lie.
The lie is, that we are preaching salvation by the law,
which is heresy,
and hence, we have rejected God’s way of being saved by grace.
He does that so he can tarnish our credibility
in our criticism against his grace theology,
and to poison his members
with this so-called false theology
of being saved by law of ours.
We did say we must obey God’s laws,
but we have never said that we are doing it to be saved
or be justified by the law.
We obey God’s laws not to be justified
but because we are justified.
We obey God’s laws,
not as part of justification but as part of sanctification.
We believe that every true believer, after they get saved,
must obey God’s laws as part of sanctification,
or, his faith is suspect.
So, you have to be aware that Joseph Prince’s strategy has always been
to falsely accuse us of obeying the law under justification
when he perfectly knows we are legitimately doing it under sanctification.
That’s the lethalness of his crafty strategy
– to twist our obedience to the law
from the basis of sanctification to that of justification.
Hence, I hope you are now being made aware
of Joseph Prince’s deadly strategy
that he constantly employs against us,
so you will not be deceived the next time
when you stumble upon such arguments of Joseph Prince
in his books or his sermons.
George Ong’s comments:
Joseph Prince said:
“Okay, sorry, ah.
You are a true Antinomian
when you bring down the law to your level.
A true Antinomian, Antinomos,
actually, someone who is against the law.
I am not against the law.
I am for the law for the reason God gave the law.
By the law is the knowledge of sin.
… So, the true Antinomians
are people who actually preach
you can keep the law.”
George Ong’s comments:
Joseph Prince is again telling a half-truth.
It is true that he is not against the law
from the viewpoint of justification.
But he is definitely against the law
from the viewpoint of sanctification.
And that’s what makes him an Antinomian.
Joseph Prince has to be against it
as he doesn’t even believe in sanctification
– though he lied that he believed in progressive sanctification
and even put up the doctrine of progressive sanctification
on his church’s website.
As for the details, please see the Article,
by clicking on the link below,
So, in theory,
Joseph Prince said he believes in Progressive Sanctification (he lied),
but in practice, he doesn’t,
and he is treating sanctification
in much the same way as justification.
But what cannot be stomached is that
Joseph Prince has committed 2 misdemeanours
First, Joseph Prince lied that
since he isn’t against the law
(which he is, under sanctification),
by extension, he isn’t an Antinomian,
when he said:
“A true Antinomian, Antinomos,
actually, someone who is against the law.
I am not against the law.”
Second, Joseph Prince falsely accused
12 Church Fathers (and every Church Father)
of being Antinomians
when he said:
“… So, the true Antinomians
are people who actually preach
you can keep the law.”
As I shall unfold to you, these 12 Church Fathers
all believed and taught that we must keep or obey the law
not from the viewpoint of justification (which would be heresy),
but from the viewpoint of sanctification (which is orthodoxy).
When I mentioned these 12 Church Fathers,
they are effectively representative of all Church Fathers.
1. Joseph Prince lied that he isn’t against the law; hence, he isn’t an Antinomian.
Martin Luther coined the term Antinomianism
to describe those who teach that
since salvation is a free gift of God’s grace,
obeying God is unimportant, and particularly,
the need to obey God’s moral laws
in the Ten Commandments is abrogated.
Luther called them Antinomians:
anti means against, and nomos means law.
So, this means Antinomians are against all laws,
including the moral laws in the Ten Commandments of God.
A simple definition of Antinomian
is a person who believes that Christians are released by grace
from the obligation of observing God’s moral laws.
That aptly describes what Joseph Prince is teaching
– if you read his books and follow his teachings,
his passionate pursuit is to teach that New Covenant believers
are no longer required
to obey the moral laws in the Ten Commandments of God
because they have become obsolete.
To put it starkly, what Joseph Prince teaches,
is in essence, Antinomianism, pure and simple!
The heresy of Antinomianism,
which Luther fought against in his day,
has continued and survived today in many forms
and especially in the teachings of Joseph Prince.
Joseph Prince is indeed a true-blooded Antinomian.
But in his recent sermon on 18 Feb 2024, 2 Sundays ago,
and on several occasions in his other sermons and books,
he has openly denied that he is an Antinomian.
In ‘Destined To Reign’, Joseph Prince wrote:
“One of the things which I have been accused of
is being an antinomian (someone who is against the law of Moses).”
How could Joseph Prince ever deny that?
How could Joseph Prince, who is an Antinomian,
and who teaches Antinomianism in broad daylight,
deny that he is an Antinomian?
This is absolutely repulsive and grossly revolting!
It is like a thief who keeps denying he is a thief
when he is being caught time and again for the act of stealing.
What defines a thief is the act of stealing.
In the same way, what defines an Antinomian at its core
is the teaching that the moral law in the Ten Commandments
is no longer relevant to New Covenant believers
by virtue of grace
– and that’s the core of Joseph Prince’s grace teachings.
RC Sproul, an experienced theologian,
has accurately described what constitutes
an Antinomian and Antinomianism.
In a sermon, RC Sproul said;
Please click here to view the 15-second video:
“Because we’re living in a time
– since the Reformation
– unprecedented Antinomianism,
the idea that the law of God,
particularly the moral law of God in the Old Testament
has no relevance whatsoever
for the New Testament Christian.”
What RC Sproul described about Antinomianism
is exactly what Joseph Prince teaches.
Joseph Prince is undoubtedly, a true-blooded Antinomian.
But he has the cheek and the shamelessness
to deny he is an Antinomian.
And for an Antinomian like Joseph Prince
to deny he is an Antinomian,
just as a thief who denies he is a thief,
is not only a blatant lie
but hypocrisy of the highest order.
How could Joseph Prince ever deny he is an Antinomian
when it is so patently obvious
that the core of what he teaches
is pure and unadulterated Antinomianism
– that New Covenant believers
are no longer required to obey the moral law of God
in the Ten Commandments
as they have become obsolete.
Joseph Prince has absolutely no ground
to deny that he is an Antinomian,
as the freedom from the moral law of God (Ten Commandments)
for New Covenant believers by virtue of grace,
is what he is constantly crusading for,
which is the core definition of what an Antinomian is.
Let me surface the writings of 3 Church Fathers,
Martin Luther, John Wesley and Martyn Lloyd-Jones
to prove to you that Joseph Prince is an Antinomian.
In ‘Works of Martin Luther, Vol. 5,’
Martin Luther said:
“Those who are not of this sort
ought not to count themselves Christians,
and they ought not to be comforted,
as one comforts Christians,
with much talk about the forgiveness of sins
and the grace of Christ,
as the Antinomians do.
For they, rejecting
and not understanding the Ten Commandments,
preach much about the grace of Christ instead.
They strengthen and comfort those who remain in sins,
telling them that they shall not fear sins or be terrified at them,
since through Christ,
these are all done away.”
George Ong’s comments:
What Martin Luther described an Antinomian,
is exactly who Joseph Prince epitomised.
Martin Luther made the point that those Antinomians,
such as Joseph Prince,
who preached on the forgiveness and the grace of Christ
but rejected the Ten Commandments,
are not Christians in the first place.
If Joseph Prince isn’t a Christian to start with,
how can he be preaching the true gospel?
And how can those who supposedly accept Christ
through Joseph Prince’s grace message
be really saved?
In ‘Sermons of Martin Luther, Vol. 4,
Martin Luther said:
“Hence those foolish souls (Antinomians)
are entirely wrong,
who allege that the Law is not to be preached
under the New Testament dispensation…”
… But besides, we must bear in mind
that the doctrine of the Law
is not to be entirely done away with,
even in the case of those who are Christians,
… In the next place,
when we have received such grace and salvation,
have been baptized into Christ and believe,
his will is that we should afterwards live accordingly,
obey God and do what is commanded of us
in the Ten Commandments…”
George Ong’s comments:
Joseph Prince teaches his Antinomian doctrine
that New Covenant believers have nothing to do
with the moral law in the Ten Commandments,
whereas Martin Luther states that
the law in the Ten Commandments
have everything to do with us,
in that, we are required to obey them
after we become believers.
In ‘The Works of John Wesley, Volume 8, Addresses, Essays, Letters,
John Wesley wrote:
“Q. 18. Have we not also leaned towards Antinomianism?
A. We are afraid we have.
Q. 19. What is Antinomianism?
A. The doctrine which makes void the law through faith.
Q. 20. What are the main pillars hereof?
A.
(1.) That Christ abolished the moral law.
(2.) That therefore Christians are not obliged to observe it.
(3.) That one branch of Christian liberty is, liberty from obeying the commandments of God.”
George Ong’s comments:
What John Wesley had described
about what constitutes Antinomianism
is exactly what Joseph Prince teaches.
Joseph Prince’s core teaching is that
with the dawning of grace,
the Ten Commandments have been annulled,
and are no longer binding on New Covenant believers.
Hence, Joseph Prince can never deny
that he is an Antinomian,
which he shamelessly tried and lied,
when John Wesley has clearly described
the core of what Antinomianism is,
and the core Antinomian teachings of Joseph Prince
fit the bill entirely.
In ‘An exposition of Ephesians 6:10-13, The Christian Warfare,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“One extreme in this particular realm
is that which is commonly known as antinomianism,
which, according to the word’s literal meaning,
signifies opposition to the whole notion of law.
It virtually claims that our conduct and practice
are not related to the law of God.
It argues thus:
‘The Old Testament was concerned about morality, ethics, conduct, behaviour.
That was the law.
But under the Gospel, the situation is quite different.
The Gospel delivers us from law and sets us free.
The Christian is no longer under the law; he is a free man.’
The devil comes to a man who has seen this ‘truth’,
and presses him to such an extreme
that he becomes an antinomian…”
George Ong’s comments:
Because Joseph Prince refuses to see the truth,
he is now in the devil’s camp,
preaching the Antinomian heresies about God’s law.
So, from the writings of Martin Luther, John Wesley and Martyn Lloyd-Jones,
who wrote about what constitutes an Antinomian and Antinomianism
which they were sorely against,
Joseph Prince is undoubtedly an Antinomian.
2. Joseph Prince falsely accused 12 Church Fathers (and every Church Father) of being Antinomians
when he said:
“… So, the true Antinomians are people
who actually preach, you can keep the law.”
I will unfold 12 Church Fathers,
Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Wesley, Charles Spurgeon, Arthur Pink, JI Packer, DL Moody, Billy Graham, David Pawson, John MacArthur, James Montgomery Boice, Martyn Lloyd-Jones,
who preach that believers must keep the law
as part of sanctification,
but they are not Antinomians
that Joseph Prince falsely accused them.
In ‘Sermons of Martin Luther Vol. 1, Sermons on Gospel Texts, for Advent, Christmas & Epiphany,’
Martin Luther said:
“Whosoever now believes the Gospel
will receive grace and the Holy Spirit.
This will cause the heart to rejoice
and find delight in God,
and will enable the believer
to keep the law cheerfully…”
In ‘Sermons of Martin Luther Vol. 1, Sermons on Gospel Texts, for Advent, Christmas & Epiphany,’
Martin Luther said:
“Romans 8:24: “In hope were ye saved,” for ye are Jesuses or Saviors.
Behold, there is therefore no measure
to the dignity and honor of a Christian!
These are the super abundant riches of his goodness,
which he pours out upon us,
so that our heart may be free,
joyous, peaceable, and unterrified;
and willingly and cheerfully keep the law.”
In ‘Commentary on the Harmony of the Gospels, Vol. 1, p. 277,’
John Calvin wrote:
“We must not imagine that the coming of Christ
has freed us from the authority of the law,
for it is the eternal rule
of a devout and holy life,
and must, therefore, be as unchangeable…”
In ‘The John Calvin Collection, 12 Classic Works,’
John Calvin wrote:
“The law contributes
not only to the beginning of repentance,
but also to our continuing perseverance [in the Christian life].
In ‘the Sermon on the Mount, Discourse 6, Sermons on Several Occasions (1810), pp. 75-76,’
John Wesley wrote:
“‘Think not that I am come to destroy the Law, or the Prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil’” [Matthew 5:17] …
The ritual or ceremonial law, delivered by Moses to the children of Israel,
containing all the injunctions and ordinances
which related to the old sacrifices and service of the temple,
our Lord indeed did come
to destroy, to dissolve, and utterly abolish…
But the moral law, contained in the Ten Commandments,
and enforced by the prophets,
He did not take away.
It was not the design of His coming
to revoke any part of this.
This is a law which never can be broken,
which stands fast as the faithful witness in heaven.”
In ‘The Sermons of Charles Spurgeon in Four Volumes, Volume 1: Sermons 1-200,’
Charles Spurgeon said:
“I will put my laws into their mind,
and write them in their hearts.” (Heb 8:10)
O you poor sinners,
I may exhort you to keep the law;
but, without the Spirit of God working within you,
nothing will come of it!
But if God puts his law into your hearts,
then you will keep it.”
In ‘The Sermons of Charles Spurgeon in Four Volumes, Volume 1: Sermons 1-200,’
Charles Spurgeon said:
“We become Christians with our own full assent and consent;
and we keep the law of God
not by any compulsion
except the sweet compulsion of love.
We do not keep it because we cannot do otherwise,
but we keep it because we would not do otherwise,
because we have come to delight therein,
and this seems to me the greatest wonder of divine grace.”
In ‘The Sermons of Charles Spurgeon in Four Volumes, Volume 1: Sermons 1-200,’
Charles Spurgeon said:
“The saint can say, “O how I love thy law!”
If we cannot say so, something is wrong with us.
… If God’s commands are grievous to you,
then you are a rebel at heart.
Loyal subjects delight in the royal law.
“His commandments are not grievous.”” (1 Jn 5:3)
In ‘The Law and the Saint,’
Arthur Pink wrote:
“When, then, our Lord said
that He had not come to destroy the Law,
He gave us to understand
that it was not the purpose of His mission
to repeal or annul the Ten Commandments:
that he had not come to free men
from their obligations to them.
… He expressly affirmed,
“Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the Law, till all be fulfilled.”
In these words, He announces the perpetuity of the Law.
So long as heaven and earth shall last,
the Law will endure,
and by necessary implication,
the lasting obligations of all men to fulfill it.”
In ‘The Law and the Saint,’
Arthur Pink wrote:
“Ye are not under the Law but under grace”. (Rom 6:14)
… “Not under the Law”
does not mean,
not under obligation
to obey the precepts of the moral Law;
but signifies,
not keeping the Law in order to be saved.”
In ‘1 John 1:1 – 3:1, An Exposition of the First Epistle of John, (1886-1952),’
Arthur Pink wrote:
“The soundness of our knowledge
is to be gauged by the obedience which it produces.
“He that saith, I know him,
and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar,
and the truth is not in him” (verse 4).
In those words, the apostle
declares that any knowledge of God
which issues not in obedience to Him
is worthless,
and that the lawless one
affirming a saving acquaintance with God
is a deceiver.
… John was also refuting the error of Antinomians,
who, under the guise of magnifying divine grace,
set aside the Law as the believer’s rule of conduct.”
In ‘Knowing God,’
JI Packer wrote:
“It is this: that,
while it is certainly true that justification frees one forever
from the need to keep the law,
or try to, as the means of earning life,
it is equally true that adoption
lays on one the abiding obligation to keep the law,
as the means of pleasing one’s newfound Father.
… Adoption puts law-keeping on a new footing:
as children of God,
we acknowledge the law’s authority as a rule for our lives,
because we know that this is what our Father wants.”
In ‘JI Packer Library,’
JI Packer wrote:
“Though we are not under the law
as a system of salvation,
we are divinely directed to keep it,
according to Christ’s exposition of it,
as the rule for our lives (1 Corinthians 9:21; Galatians 6:2).”
In ‘JI Packer Library,’
JI Packer wrote:
“The moral law for Christians,
the law of God’s present kingdom,
is the law found in the Ten Commandments
and the prophets,
now applied to the new situation.
Jesus has not abolished that law
but has merely filled out its meaning (Matthew 5:17-48).”
In ‘The Collected Works of D. L. Moody,’
DL Moody wrote:
“Some people seem to think
we have got beyond the commandments.
What did Christ say?
“Think not that I am come to destroy the Law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till Heaven and Earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law, till all be fulfilled.” (Matthew 5:17-18)
The commandments of God
given to Moses in the Mount at Horeb
are as binding today
as ever they have been
since the time they were proclaimed
in the hearing of the people.
… Jesus never condemned the law and the prophets,
but He did condemn those who did not obey them.
Because He gave new commandments,
it does not follow that He abolished the old.
… The people must be made to understand
that the Ten Commandments are still binding,
and that there is a penalty attached to their violation.
… Paul said:
“Do we then make void the Law through faith?
God forbid: yea, we establish the Law.” (Romans 3:31)
It still holds good.
The Commandments are necessary.”
In ‘Answers to Life’s Problems,’
Billy Graham wrote:
“The Ten Commandments are just as valid today
as they were when God gave them to Moses.
They reflect the moral character of God,
and they also provide
the foundation of right living with others.
God’s character does not change,
and neither does His moral will for us.
You will find that the New Testament
has much to say about these commandments.”
In two sermons regarding Hebrews 8:8-12,
David Pawson said:
“And I’ll write my laws in your heart,
and you will want to do them.
It won’t be a different law.
It will still be the Ten Commandments.
It will still be the old law,
but I will write it in your heart
and you will want to keep it.
… The cross hasn’t wiped out the commandments.
It has written them into peoples’ hearts.
The cross, in a certain sense
has not rendered commandments obsolete,
it has fulfilled them.”
In one of John MacArthur’s sermons, and commenting on Hebrews 8:13,
John MacArthur said:
“The moral law of God will never be obsolete…
because the moral law of God
is simply a reflection of His nature.
And He is immutable and unchanging
and His nature’s always the same.
It is important to understand
that the law of God never passes away.
It is critical for us to know the law of God
and to obey it.”
In ‘Exposition of Romans Chapter 2:1-3:20, The Righteous Judgment of God,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“In chapter 2:4 he is even stronger:
‘He that saith, I know him,
and keepeth not his commandments,
is a liar,
and the truth is not in him’
– one of the strongest statements in the whole of Scripture.
That is how the Apostle John preached sanctification, you see.
He did not appeal to people to accept something
which could be given as a gift;
he said,
‘If you say that you know Him,
and do not keep His commandments,
I have only one thing to say to you
– you are a liar, and there is no truth in you’.
In other words,
the New Testament Scriptures teach us everywhere
that no greater danger confronts anyone
who makes a profession of the Christian faith,
than what is called antinomianism.
And what does that mean?
… It is the tendency to say,
‘Well, of course, as long as I am saved
it does not matter what I do!’
Antinomianism.
Anti-law; anti the whole conception of commandments
and doing the will of God…”
In ‘Studies in the Sermon on the Mount,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“In the same way, people have a false view of grace.
They think that grace is apart from law
and has nothing to do with it.
That is what is called antinomianism…
… That is an absolutely wrong and false view of grace.
The whole purpose of grace, in a sense,
is just to enable us to keep the law.
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.
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.
What is grace?
It is that marvellous gift of God which,
having delivered a man from the curse of the law,
enables him to keep it
and to be righteous as Christ was righteous,
for He kept the law perfectly.
Grace is that which brings me to love God;
and if I love God,
I long to keep His commandments.
‘He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them,’
Christ said, ‘he it is that loveth me.’
We must never separate these two things.
Grace is not sentimental;
holiness is not an experience.
We must have this new mind and disposition
which leads us to love the law
and to desire to keep it;
and by His power
He enables us to fulfil the law.
That is why our Lord goes on to say in verse 19,
`Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.’
That was not spoken only to the disciples
for the three short years they were to be with Christ
until He died;
it is permanent and everlasting.
He enforces it again in Matthew vii, where He says,
`Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.’
What is the will of the Father?
The Ten Commandments and the moral law.
They have never been abrogated.”
In ‘Exposition of Romans Chapter 12, Christian Conduct,’
Martyn Lloyd-Jones said:
“Then the fourth danger is that of the people
who have not heeded this injunction at all.
It is the danger of antinomianism,
which, as we have seen,
is the view that Christians do not need to obey moral laws,
and I think there is a great deal of this at the present time.
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’.
There was grace in the Old Testament Law.
All the burnt offerings and sacrifices are indicative of that.
It was God who ordered them.
Let no one ever say that there was no grace in the Law of God
as given to Moses and the children of Israel.
It is ultimately based on grace, it is Law with grace in it.
And on the other hand,
we must never say that grace means lawlessness;
that is Antinomianism,
which is everywhere condemned in the New Testament.
… It is a tragic fallacy to think that when you have grace
there is no element of law at all,
but that it is a kind of licence.
That is a contradiction of the biblical teaching
concerning both law and grace.
There is grace in law, there is law in grace.
We are not ‘without law’ as Christians, says Paul,
‘but we are under law to Christ’ (1 Corinthians 9:21).
… I assert, therefore, that this modern idea
completely misunderstands both law and grace.
It is a complete muddle,
it is utter confusion;
indeed, it is not biblical at all.”
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.
In ‘An Expositional Commentary on Romans Volume 1-4.’
James Montgomery Boice wrote:
“Two studies back,
I began to explain the final paragraph
of Romans 3 (vv. 27- 31),
… “Well, then,” such a person might argue,
“if salvation is apart from law, as you say,
Doesn’t the doctrine of salvation by grace
set God’s law aside
and thus, show it to be worthless?”
And if it does that,
Shouldn’t your gospel be rejected as being quite false?
Aren’t we obliged to reject any doctrine
that would nullify the revealed law of God?
Paul’s reply is that the gospel of grace
does not nullify God’s law.
God forbid that it should!
If it did that,
it would be a false gospel,
one rightly to be rejected.
But it does not nullify the law of God.
On the contrary,
it establishes the law
and is, in fact,
the only thing that does or could establish it.”
George Ong’s comments:
James Montgomery Boice wrote that
grace does not nullify the law of God (Rom 3:27-31).
He further wrote that any grace doctrine
that nullifies the law of God
(which is what Joseph Prince teaches),
is a false Gospel and one rightly to be rejected.
This proves that Joseph Prince’s gospel of grace
that does away with the law,
is categorically a false gospel.
which does not save.
In conclusion, let me highlight again
the great importance of what Dr Roland Chia wrote.
Dr Roland Chia,
Chew Hock Hin Professor of Christian Doctrine
Trinity Theological College, wrote:
“The truth is that Joseph Prince’s doctrines of the Bible (especially the Old Testament),
God’s moral laws (especially the Ten Commandments),
grace, confession and repentance of sin,
healing, salvation, and holy communion
lie outside the boundaries of orthodoxy.
They are antithetical
to the teachings of Scripture
and the Church throughout the centuries,
including the early Church Fathers,
the sixteenth century Reformers
and contemporary orthodox theologians.
Taken as a whole,
what Prince presents as sound doctrine
is in fact heresy.”
For Dr Roland Chia to write,
“They (Joseph Prince’s teachings) are antithetical
to the teachings of Scripture
and the Church throughout the centuries,
including the early Church Fathers,
the sixteenth century Reformers
and contemporary orthodox theologians,”
must set the alarm bells ringing.
If you have been observant,
you would have noticed that
this is what I have been trying to do
in my many previous articles, and also this article.
I have deliberately and relentlessly surfaced
how the teachings of Joseph Prince
contradict that of the Church Fathers,
particularly, those in the Reformation period
and the contemporary orthodox theologians.
Here, we are not talking about just one of two or even several,
but a whole host of them.
And, of course, it goes without saying
that the teachings of these Church Fathers
are anchored on the scriptures,
and they represent a broad spectrum
of different theological persuasions.
That being the case,
anyone who is theological informed and biblically honest
would come to the conclusion,
like Dr Roland Chia, myself and many others did,
that Joseph Prince is undoubtedly a heretic.
Any other verdict
would be to go against plain common sense,
theological imperatives and sound doctrine.
My Parting Shot to Joseph Prince:
“Hey Joe,
There are 3 things I want to talk to you.
First, I noticed you no preach last Sunday, 25 Feb.
Quite strange, Leh.
You no preach for 2 Sundays on 4 & 11 Feb.
Then you preach 18 Feb.
But last Sunday, 25 Feb, you nowhere to be found.
What happened?
Sick or what?
If you sick, you sure keep top secret, one.
How can you who preach perfect health be sick?
Or, is it you can’t take pressure from Mr Pen,
in his articles, one by one shoot against you, last week,
that you need one solid week of Sabbath to recover.
But to be expected, Lah,
you may come up with your own so-called reason,
why you absent last Sunday on 25 Feb
if you preach on 3 Mar, this coming Sunday.
Second, I have chased you to name
which church fathers support your grace doctrine,
for example, your long life and good looks
through Holy Communion,
or your when your people sin, no need to confess sins, etc, etc.
Up till today, you have not named a single church father who support you.
Or which Singapore Pastor or Church
support your ‘Tien ah’ mocking God doctrine.
Or no need to love God with all your heart doctrine.
because you passed a law against it.
You say it’s law to love God,
and loving God is under Old Covenant.
Ah, so which Church Fathers support all these doctrines?
I ask again,
which Church Father back you up on all these doctrines?
Why you so silent?
Dumb, is it?
You too proud to admit
no Church Father would support all your rubbish teachings.
But I have shown you so many Church Fathers
that teach against your doctrine
in so many of my previous articles.
Also, in this article – 12 Church Fathers.
Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Wesley, etc.
So, what say you now?
Nothing to say, right?
Guilty, right?
Hey Joe,
say something against Dr Roland Chia, Leh.
He said many damaging things against you, you know.
Why your mouth stuck with something or what?
Why you don’t talk?
Scared of him, ah.
Don’t just come for me, Leh.
Easy to bully, is it?
What about 12 Church Fathers?
They all sabo (tage) your doctrine, you know.
Have courage, Mah, speak against them, Leh.
Martin Luther and the gang of 12.
Why come for me only, easy to makan (bully), is it?
Third, since Hamas attacked Israel on 7 Oct 2023
about 4 and a half months ago,
I no hear a single sound from you about Israel.
What happened?
You always talk big about Israel.
You talk so much about Israel,
that we must support them.
But almost 5 months past already,
why you so silent?
I don’t not even hear you leading a short prayer for Israel
in your worship service.
I don’t even hear you asking your congregation to pray for Israel.
Aiyah, I know Lah,
you will give excuse that don’t make situation worse.
But you mean,
pray for Israel in your worship service,
also cannot, Meh.
Also, pray for Palestinians, who suffer a lot,
in your worship service, also cannot, Meh.
Many churches pray for Israel and the Palestinians
in their worship services.
So, why you so special.
You scared of PAP people, is it?
Why you so scared of PAP?
Is it because you want to get on the good side of PAP,
always show PAP ministers and MPs
working with you and your church in your worship service,
giving impression you are close to them.
You mean something wrong to pray for Israel?
I know the reason, Lah,
You are a coward.
You talk so much about Israel here, there, everywhere.
And when they need you most, to pray for them,
you go into ‘hiding’,
Not even a single sound from you for Israel
for the last close to 5 months.
Hey Joe, you never changed, you know,
same in the case of Founder of Hyflux.
When Founder succeeded, you claim it’s you.
When business failed, you nowhere to be found.
Leader, cannot be like that, one.”
Rev George Ong