Title: Joseph Prince isn’t a believer – according to Steve Lawson’s teaching on the confession of sins in I John 1:9
Co-title: If Joseph Prince can’t even pass the test of simple logic, how can we trust him on Bible exegesis?
By Rev George Ong (Dated 24 Sep 2023)
1. Don’t miss Points 3 & 4:
If you already have a good grasp of this no-confession teaching of Joseph Prince, and you have limited time,
I recommend that you go straight to reading Point No 3 & 4.
especially Point No 4; don’t miss it.
2. As for Point No 2:
The good news is there is an offer for you to win a free trip to anywhere in the world.
The bad news is you won’t stand a chance of winning it.
3. Interesting bits in Point No 4:
In a sermon, Joseph Prince said:
“So, there’s no teaching; Paul addressed the most carnal church, Paul never one time in his Spirit-inspired letters and Paul wrote three fourths, he never one time said, ‘Confess your sins.’”
(This topic about Paul not mentioning ‘Confess your sins’ even once is easy to handle and retort. But because this isn’t my focus, I will leave it as it is, perhaps deal with it at another time.
Joseph Prince thought he had come up with an excellent argument to support his no-confession of sin doctrine.
This is nothing but an argument from silence, which is a rather weak argument, and it could even lead to ridiculous conclusions.
Do you know that Paul never mentioned the word ‘Trinity’ in all in his epistles?
So, I supposed Joseph Prince must have been teaching that Paul is against the Theology of Trinity.
I’m sure you are aware that the Bible never mentioned the word, ‘computers’ even once.
So, I supposed Joseph Prince does not believe in the existence of computers even though they are placed right before his very eyes.
Ridiculous, right – as can be seen from Joseph Prince’s argument from silence!
Try harder the next time, Joe.)
In the same sermon, Joseph Prince said:
“And in the entire New Testament, there’s only one verse that people build their whole life on, 1 Jn 1:9.”
(Regarding what Joseph Prince said that 1 John 1:9 is the only verse in the New Testament on confession of sin;
do you know that the David & Goliath story was only mentioned once in the entire Bible?
So, I suppose Joseph Prince does not believe in this story about David killing Goliath because it is mentioned only once.
Indeed, Joe, you need to try harder the next time!)
4. An Excerpt from the Article:
Joseph Prince’s teaching that when we sin, we don’t have to confess our sins, but our righteousness is part of his feel-good, cheap grace and easy Christianity that can only appeal to carnal people.
True Christians will never be deceived by such too-good-to-be-true teachings that will only bring destruction to those who are deceived by such teachings.
5. There are 2 videos on Steve Lawson & 1 video plus 7 short video clips on Joseph Prince.
6. This is Part 2 of the article that was featured on 18 Sep 2023,
Joseph Prince’s no-confession of sin teaching is a scam, as revealed by 70 eminent Bible teachers & Christian leaders:
To view, please click on the link below:
(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 sermon, Joseph Prince said;
Please click here to view the 20-second video:
“You are redeemed by the blood of Jesus.
Again, all these religious thoughts and all that.
You know, you got to find out your sin
before you can talk to God,
before God can hear you and all that.
You know and your unconfessed sin;
that’s why I’m telling you this kind of consciousness
can rob you of a prayer life.
You got to know that you are forgiven of all your sins.
Amen. And thank God for that.”
Joseph Prince teaches
that once we are redeemed by the Blood of Jesus,
all our sins are forgiven,
and we shouldn’t be bothered by religious thoughts
such as any unconfessed sin
throughout our Christian lives.
In a teaching sermon, Steve Lawson said;
Please click here to view the 1-and-a-half-minute video:
“Now, here’s our verse for this morning.
‘If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 Jn 1:9).’
What verse 9 is teaching us
is that one of the distinguishing marks of a true Christian;
and when I say a true Christian,
I mean not just one who goes to church
but is never been born again.
I mean one who actually knows the Lord.
A true Christian; one of the distinguishing marks
is he regularly confesses his sin to God.
An authentic believer
has an acute awareness of sin in his own life
because he has an acute awareness of the holiness of God.
Rather than being blind to a sin, he is convicted by a sin.
And he confesses his sin with humble contrition.
He is aware of sin in the world,
but more than that, he is aware of sin in his own life.
Pharisees are aware of everyone else’s sins
but are oblivious to their own sin.
But a true Christian
has a heightened sense of awareness of sin in his own life.”
Steve Lawson teaches the exact opposite of what Joseph Prince teaches.
While Steve Lawson said a true Christian
will have a heightened awareness of his sins,
Joseph Prince teaches that we are not to be sin-conscious.
Steve Lawson said that
according to 1 John 1:9,
one of the distinguishing marks of a true Christian
is that he regularly confesses his sins to God.
This means Joseph Prince,
who teaches against the confession of sins
to be forgiven by God
isn’t a Christian to begin with.
In fact, Prince teaches that 1 John 1:9
wasn’t written to believers
to confess their sins to be forgiven
but to unbelievers.
In the same sermon, Steve Lawson said;
Please click here to view the 1-minute video:
“Now, as we’re in first John verse 9,
He says, ‘If we confess our sins.’
Now, here’s what’s important.
I want you to understand this.
The verb confess is in the present tense,
which means there is to be the continual, ongoing
confession of sin in a true believer’s life.
It’s not just that you confess one time
when you enter into the kingdom,
and you never have to confess your sin again.
That would indicate that you’re not a true Christian
– that you’ve never have been born again.
So it’s just not a one-time confess sin
and I never have to confess sin again.
No, it is an ongoing throughout the Christian life.
And so, it is in the present tense.”
Steve Lawson said that for the true Christian,
confession of sin is not only a one-time thing
but an ongoing affair.
But Joseph Prince teaches that once your sins are forgiven
at the point of your salvation,
there is no need to ask for forgiveness
for the other sins that you will commit
in your Christian life.
Steve Lawson also said that for one
who confessed his sin once and never confessed his sins again,
isn’t a true Christian or has ever been born again.
Again, Steve Lawson has revealed
that Joseph Prince isn’t a believer in the first place
as Prince doesn’t believe that a Christian
needs to confess his sins on a regular basis
in order to be forgiven.
1. Joseph Prince’s teaching that 1 John 1:9 was not written to believers but to unbelievers is debunked.
By now, many of you would be aware
that Joseph Prince teaches the false doctrine
that there is no place
for believers to confess their sins to be forgiven
as all their sins have been forgiven at the cross.
In ‘Destined To Reign’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“People have taken this verse and built a whole doctrine around it when actually, chapter 1 of 1 John was written to the Gnostics, who were unbelievers. John was saying to these unbelievers that if they confessed their sins, God would be faithful and just to cleanse them from all unrighteousness.”
In ‘Unmerited Favor’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“With this context in mind, it becomes clear that 1 John 1:9 was not written to believers. The verse is a reference to the prayer that a sinner prays to accept Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior. You may know this as the ‘prayer of salvation’ or ‘the sinner’s prayer.’”
In ‘Unmerited Favor’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“This passage (1 Jn 1:8-10; which includes 1 Jn 1:9) was clearly written to the unbelieving Gnostics to encourage them to stop their denial of sin, acknowledge the truth that sin exists and acknowledge that they have sinned. It was written to bring them to the realization that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”
“Essentially, John was preaching the gospel to the Gnostics and telling them that if they confessed their sins, God would be faithful and just to forgive them their sins and cleanse them from all unrighteousness.”
To reiterate, Joseph Prince wrote:
“This passage (1 Jn 1:8-10; which includes 1 Jn 1:9) was clearly written to the unbelieving Gnostics…”
Joseph Prince has told a lie.
If it is so clear that 1 John 1:9
was written to unbelievers,
why did the historic and contemporary church
of every denomination
and different theological persuasions
(charismatics or non-charismatics)
believes and is still believing
that the whole book of 1 John (not just 1 Jn chapters 2-5)
was written to believers?
One must remember this is a long-held belief
of both the historic and contemporary church.
This only goes to show the recklessness of Joseph Prince
who dares to teach such a view
that while 1 John chapters 2-5 were written for believers,
1 John chapter 1, of which 1 John 1:9 is located,
was written to unbelievers,
not believers,
even though it can be so easily disproven.
Let’s start by focusing on a few keywords in 1 John 1:9:
1 John 1:9 NIV
9 “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.”
The first keyword is ‘we’.
The Apostle John said,
“If we confess our sins …”
Since the author, John uses the word, ‘we’,
he is including himself as one among those
who needs to confess his sins in order to obtain forgiveness.
Is John a believer or an unbeliever?
A believer, of course!
John, as the author, is using the words
‘we’, ‘our’ and ‘us’,
as he is representing all believers
who need to confess their sins.
John was not an unbeliever
when he wrote the Epistles of 1 John, 2 John and 3 John.
He was a Born Again, Spirit-filled Christian
who had been walking with the Lord for many years.
Therefore, it is impossible that John was referring
to the unsaved people of the world
when he used the pronouns ‘we’, ‘our’ and ‘us’.
How can John lump himself who is saved
together with the unsaved people
by using the words ‘we’, ‘our’ and ‘us’?
When John used the terms ‘we’, ‘our’ and ‘us’
he was referring to Christians, such as himself,
not unbelievers.
This is so simple that even a teenager can understand it.
If that is so, I am flabbergasted
why Joseph Prince, being the so-called world-renowned grace teacher
couldn’t grasp this simple truth
– when he stubbornly insists that 1 John 1:9
was written to unbelievers.
Along with the same strain of thought,
let’s take a look at the entire passage
from 1 John chapter 1 verse 1,
right up to the first three verses of chapter 2,
in two instalments,
and you will clearly see the logic of this argument:
1 John 1:1-7 NIV
1 “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched – this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. 4 We write this to make our joy complete. 5 This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. 6 If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth. 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.
In this entire passage,
I’ve highlighted the words, ‘we’, ‘our’ and ‘us’ in blue
to indicate that they refer to believers.
In this whole passage
from 1 John chapter 1, verse 1 to chapter 2 verse 3,
there is not a single ‘They’ or ‘Them’ or ‘Their’,
indicating that no unbelievers were being addressed to:
1 John 1:8-10 NIV
8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.
(Note that Chapter 1 ends at verse 10.)
1 John 2:1-3 NIV
1 My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father – Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. 2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world. 3 We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands.”
This is to show you that the entire letter,
especially from 1 John chapter 1 to chapter 2
was written to the same audience – believers.
Hence, there is not a single chance
for 1 John 1:9 (and 1 John chapter 1)
as Joseph Prince has claimed,
to be addressed to unbelievers.
After perusing the entire passage,
I believe you will come to a clear conclusion
that Joseph Prince’s argument
that chapter 1 was written to unbelievers
while chapter two was written to believers
is plain hogwash.
Furthermore, the Greek
is even more explicitly against Joseph Prince’s interpretation
since the word, ‘confess’ in the Greek in 1 John 1:9
speaks of continuous, present action
as opposed to a one-time act:
1 John 1:9 NIV
9 “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.”
This means that we, as believers,
are to confess our sins on a regular basis.
It does not refer to a one-time confession of sins for unbelievers
to receive Christ for salvation
as Joseph Prince has falsely made it out to be.
In other words, confessing of sins when a Christian sins
from time to time is an on-going affair.
But the confessing of sins for unbelievers
to receive Christ as Saviour and Lord
is a one-time act.
So, the confessing of sins in 1 John 1:9,
which is a continuous and present action,
is definitely referring to believers
and not to unbelievers
as claimed by Joseph Prince.
Furthermore, after writing 1 John 1:8-10,
immediately, John says in 1 John 2:1,
“My little children, these things I write to you…
1 John 2:1 NKJV
1 “My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.”
What are ‘these things’ referring to in 1 John 2:1?
‘These things’ in 1 John 2:1
are referring to what John wrote in 1 John chapter 1,
especially the preceding three verses,
namely, 1 John 1:8-10, especially 1 John 1:9:
1 John 1:8-10 NKJV
8 “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.”
1 John 2:1 NKJV
1 “My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.”
So, we can now clearly see that 1 John 1:9
was written to believers
because there is an obvious connection
between 1 John 2:1 and 1 John chapter 1,
especially the last three verses, 8-10, including 1 John 1:9.
‘These things’ in 1 John 2:1
clearly refer to what goes immediately preceding it,
in 1 John 1:8-10, including 1 John 1:9
and the rest of 1 John chapter 1.
Since there is an unbroken connection
from 1 John 1:1 to 1 John 2:1,
John was unmistakably speaking
to the same audience of believers
in both 1 John chapters 1 and 2.
Hence, Joseph Prince’s illogical idea
that while 1 John chapter 1 was written to unbelievers
while chapters 2-5 were written for believers
is clearly exposed to be false.
The common theme,
especially from 1 John 1:8-10 to 1 John 2:1
that John was trying to address
is the false doctrine that Christians are sinless
or that they could consciously live in sin
without affecting their fellowship with God.
Hence, 1 John 1:9 states that
there must be the confession of sins
before forgiveness can be obtained.
As you can see by now that Joseph Prince’s view
that chapter 1 of 1 John was written to unbelievers
and chapter 2 to believers does not hold any water.
Therefore, Joseph Prince’s teachings
that 1 John 1:9 was not written to believers
to confess their sins
but was written to unbelievers
who were being called to confess their sins in order to be saved
is decisively debunked.
2. Joseph Prince’s teaching that when we sin, we are to confess our righteousness and not our sins cannot be biblically supported.
Joseph Prince teaches that when we sin,
we are not to confess our sins
because every sin has been forgiven at the cross,
but we are to confess we are righteous.
In ‘Grace Revolution’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“And when you have sinned, what do you say? That’s the time to say by faith, ‘I am the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus’” (see 2 Cor 5:21).
There is nowhere in the Bible that tells a believer
to confess his righteousness when he is sinning
instead of his sins
except for the weird and false doctrine
that Joseph Prince teaches.
(Of course, to proclaim that we are the righteousness of God after one has confessed his sins, is perfectly legitimate. To confess that we are the righteousness of God at other times when we are not sinning is also no issue at all.
But for Joseph Prince to teach that when we sin, we are not to confess sin but we are to confess that we are the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus, is grossly erroneous.)
Joseph Prince, show me just one verse in the Bible
that explicitly says that
we are to confess our righteousness
and not our sins when we are sinning.
If there is one,
I will offer to sponsor you on a free trip anywhere in the world.
This same free-trip award is also offered to anyone
who can find me a verse
that explicitly says that we are to confess our righteousness
instead of our sins when we are sinning.
If just 10 of you could find just one verse
and all 10 opt to go to Antarctica,
the next day, the headlines in the newspapers will be titled,
“A silly preacher, George Ong, went bankrupt
for offering a foolish deal.”
But this is nothing as compared
to what may happen on the Day of Judgement
– this headline in the Heavenly Straits Times,
a newspaper for the angels may appear,
“Millions went to hell all because they have been so foolish to listen to Joseph Prince about a weird doctrine
without even checking the scriptures to test whether what he taught was true.”
Now readers – why am I doing this?
For the fun of it?
No, my friends!
I am dead serious about honouring the deal
at the prospect of going bankrupt.
But more crucially,
it is to expose Joseph Prince as a wolf to the body of Christ.
But don’t panic, I won’t go bankrupt,
as I’m now making Joseph Prince sweat
as he won’t find any text
no matter how much he tries.
Joseph Prince, if there isn’t a single verse
that explicitly says that we are to confess our righteousness
instead of our sins when we are sinning,
it is pure recklessness on your part
to teach this doctrine as if it is gospel truth
and deceive millions of people to hell.
The blood of these souls will be on your hands.
The truth is that confessing righteousness instead of our sins
when one has sinned
isn’t taught by any of the Apostolic Fathers,
Reformation Church Fathers, Puritan Church Fathers
or Contemporary Church Fathers.
If you don’t believe me,
ask Joseph Prince to name just one church father
who taught this?
I’m 101 percent sure he can’t even name one.
Joseph Prince has made big claims
that his ‘confessing your righteousness
instead of confessing your sins’ teaching
has set many people free from their bondage.
Come to think of it,
if he has discovered such an effective strategy to set people free,
why didn’t the apostolic and early church practise it?
Instead, they were practising the reverse of what he taught
– confessing sins instead of confessing righteousness (1 Jn 1:9).
Joseph Prince’s teaching that when we sin,
we don’t have to confess our sins, but our righteousness
is part of his feel-good, cheap grace and easy Christianity
that can only appeal to carnal people.
True Christians will never be deceived
by such too-good-to-be-true teachings
that will only bring destruction
to those who are deceived by such teachings.
3. Joseph Prince’s teaching that when we sin, we are to confess our righteousness and not our sins, is not only false but spiritually destructive.
Joseph Prince teaches that one should confess his righteousness
when he is sinning instead of his sins
is not only false but spiritually destructive.
What is dreadful is that Joseph Prince teaches
that whenever believers commit any sin,
presumably, whether it is a sin of anger, lying,
cheating, pornography, robbery,
adultery, molest, rape, murder, etc,
they are not supposed to confess any of such sins
as all these sins have been forgiven at the cross.
Instead, they are to confess
“I am the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus.”
In ‘Grace Revolution’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“And when you have sinned, what do you say? That’s the time to say by faith, ‘I am the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus’” (see 2 Cor 5:21).
Let me repeat what Joseph Prince wrote,
“And when you have sinned…say by faith, ‘I am the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus.’”
(Joseph Prince had boasted of the many testimonies of people who are delivered from pornography because they followed his approach of confessing righteousness instead of confessing sins when they sinned. Specifically, they are to confess they are the righteousness of God repeatedly when they are in the act of sinning, watching pornography; and lo and behold, this sin of pornography would somehow be overcome. To prove that Joseph Prince is right, this must apply to all sins, and not just the sin of pornography.)
So, just imagine this tragic scene of a Christian
who has embraced Joseph Prince’s teachings,
and who is committing the sin of adultery.
And knowing that his sin of adultery
has been forgiven at the cross
(because he had learned that from Joseph Prince
that all his future sins, including adultery, have been forgiven),
and still in bed with his lover committing the adulterous act,
he follows the advice of Joseph Prince
and keeps repeating,
“I am the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus.”
After repeating that ‘magic’ phrase several times,
he continues to have sex with his lover.
After the entire adulterous act is over,
he caps it off by shouting one last time,
“I am the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus.”
Can you see how outrageous this is,
if we follow Joseph Prince’s advice?
Just imagine this horrifying scene of a Christian
who has embraced Joseph Prince’s teachings,
and who had just stabbed someone with a knife to murder him.
And knowing that his sin of murder
has been forgiven at the cross
(because he had learned that from Joseph Prince
that all his future sins, including murder, have been forgiven),
he follows the advice of Joseph Prince,
and keeps repeating,
“I am the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus,”
as he continues to stab the victim until the victim is dead.
After committing the sin of murder,
this Christian looks over the dead body,
and knowing that his sin of murder
has been forgiven at the cross,
he follows the advice of Joseph Prince, and keeps repeating,
“I am the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus.”
Only an idiot or a spiritually sick person
would believe such hideous teachings of Joseph Prince!
Joseph Prince may defend himself,
“But George, when I tell everyone to confess their righteousness when they are sinning, I am referring to the sins of smoking, gambling and watching pornography, but I don’t mean to also include the sins of adultery and murder.”
George would say,
“Wait a minute, didn’t you say the following in ‘Grace Revolution’, Pages 290-291,
“And when you have sinned, what do you say? That’s the time to say by faith, ‘I am the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus’” (see 2 Cor 5:21).
Did you qualify what those sins were and were not? Everyone who read what you wrote would have taken that to mean every sin. If you do not mean that they would also include the sins of adultery and murder, why didn’t you make this clear in your quote? You ought to have said,
“And when you have sinned, (except for the sins of adultery and murder plus 10 other exceptions) what do you say? That’s the time to say by faith, ‘I am the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus’” (see 2 Cor 5:21).
Joseph Prince’s comeback defence could be,
“But surely a true and born-again believer won’t commit the sins of adultery and murder?”
George would say,
“Who says a believer cannot commit such sins as adultery and murder? Have you forgotten about David? Even though David was a man after God’s own heart, he committed both sins of adultery and murder. And Moses, the man whom God gave the law to His Old Covenantal people, was a murderer too.”
Friends, if Joseph Prince’s bizarre doctrine
of confessing righteousness
instead of sin when one has sinned,
can lead to such horrendous outcomes,
only a fool or a mentally deranged person
would choose to follow his grace teachings.
Yet, sadly, there are plenty of such people,
who have been bought over
by his false and destructive teachings.
Yvonne Tan shared a powerful testimony about her 20-year journey with New Creation Church.
Amongst the many things that Yvonne Tan shared is the following:
“Joseph Prince loves to use the example or testimony of how a man who was addicted to pornography would be declaring, “I am the righteousness of God in Christ” even as he watched porn and the Holy Spirit inside him would convict him of his righteousness which is in Christ!!! And slowly but surely, this man will lose his desire to watch porn and he is delivered from his addiction through this way. This teaching is so toxic and dangerous.”
You must understand that this comment
“This teaching is so toxic and dangerous,”
was made by someone
who attended New Creation Church for 20 long years,
so, Yvonne certainly knows what she is talking about.
4. Joseph Prince’s sense of logic is appalling & the amount of self-contradictions in his no-confession doctrine is shocking!
In a sermon, Joseph Prince said;
Please click here to view the 5-second video:
“We confess our sins because we are forgiven… You confess because you’re forgiven.”
In Grace Revolution, Joseph Prince wrote,
“I confess my sins, knowing that all my sins are already forgiven. I don’t confess my sins to be forgiven.”
In ‘Grace Revolution’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“So is Joseph Prince against a Christian’s confessing his sins? Let me say this clearly: I do believe in the confession of sins and I do confess my sins still. But there’s a big difference now – I confess my sins knowing that all my sins are already forgiven. I don’t confess my sins to be forgiven.”
To reiterate, Joseph Prince wrote,
– I confess my sins knowing that all my sins are already forgiven. I don’t confess my sins to be forgiven.”
What a silly statement!
How dumb can Joseph Prince get?
Doesn’t Joseph Prince know
that he just made an illogical statement?
I am utterly surprised such a dumb statement
can be uttered from a world-renowned speaker.
Why is there the need to confess our sins to God
when they have all been forgiven?
I mean, if you are already forgiven of all your sins,
why bother confessing them to God?
One confesses so that he can receive the forgiveness of his sins,
and yet Joseph Prince said,
“I don’t confess my sins to be forgiven.”
It is either you don’t have to confess
because there are no more sins to confess
as they have all been forgiven,
or you must confess
because your sins are not forgiven yet.
Why is such basic logic beyond Joseph Prince’s comprehension?
Let me give you an illustration about two friends, John and Jim
to illustrate the silliness of Joseph Prince when he said,
“I confess my sins knowing that all my sins are already forgiven.”
Here is a conversation between Jim and John:
Jim said,
“John, I am sorry, I’ve taken two of your books without asking your permission the other day.
Would you accept my confession?”
John said,
“No worries, your confession is accepted.”
Jim said,
“But John, I really mean I’m sorry, would you honestly accept my confession?”
John said,
“Yes, definitely, I will, and I have already told you I have accepted your confession.”
Jim said,
“But John, I’ve done you a terrible thing by taking your books without your permission, will you really, really, really accept my confession?”
John said,
“Jim, this is the third time I said I accepted it. So shut up, and I don’t want to hear about it anymore!”
If I committed a wrong against my friend
and he has already accepted my confession and forgiven me,
wouldn’t I be dumb
if I keep confessing my wrong-doing to him?
That would certainly irritate my friend.
You know what
– Joseph Prince’s ‘God’ (not George Ong’s God or the believers’ God)
would be irritated and may tell him off
if Joseph Prince does the same thing to him.
Joseph Prince’s ‘God’ may say to him,
“Joseph Prince, I am sick and tired of your naggy ways because I have told you plenty of times that I have already accepted your confession. What’s more is that all your past, present and future sins have been forgiven at the cross. And you yourself have been preaching so passionately and so often about it.
If I have forgiven all your sins that you have committed and will ever commit in your entire life, why are you constantly hounding me like a naggy grandpa and keep confessing them to me?”
Don’t you think that Joseph Prince deserves to be scolded by his ‘God’
for coming to him time and again
to confess his sins even though they have all been forgiven?
Joseph Prince may protest,
“Yes ‘God’, I know, but I am confessing my sins because I have been forgiven.”
‘His God’ may give him a bigger scolding,
“Hey Joseph, you are downright illogical to say that you confess your sins because they have already been forgiven. If your sins are already forgiven, why the need to confess them? Where is your sense of logic that I have created you with? Threw it away? Don’t ever assume that just because I am ‘God’, I cannot be logical, or being ‘God’ must necessarily mean that I must act illogically.”
If Joseph Prince can’t even pass the test of simple logic,
he has no right to delve into Bible exegesis.
I would advise him to sign up for a course on basic logic
before he tries his luck on Bible interpretation.
Since God has created us with logic,
there is nothing wrong about appealing to logic,
unless our human logic goes against the word of God.
So far, we have talked about
Joseph Prince’s appalling lack of a sense of logic,
and you are probably shocked by it.
But there are more shocking things to come
as I’m going to unveil to you
the amount of illogical arguments and self-contradictions
in Joseph Prince’s no-confession doctrine.
In a sermon, Joseph Prince said;
Please click here to view the 10-second video:
“Does Pastor Prince believe in confessing your sins? I want to say this once and for all. There are people who misrepresent me out there. Pastor Prince never said, ‘You cannot confess your sins. It’s wrong to confess your sins.’”
In ‘Grace Revolution’, Joseph Prince wrote:
“Let me say this clearly: I do believe in the confession of sins and I do confess my sins still.”
But wait a minute!
Didn’t Joseph Prince teach
that confession of sins, according to 1 John 1:9,
is not for the believers, but unbelievers.
In ‘Destined To Reign’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“People have taken this verse (1 Jn 1:9) and built a whole doctrine around it when actually, chapter 1 of 1 John was written to the Gnostics, who were unbelievers. John was saying to these unbelievers that if they confessed their sins, God would be faithful and just to cleanse them from all unrighteousness.”
In ‘Unmerited Favor’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“With this context in mind, it becomes clear that 1 John 1:9 was not written to believers. The verse is a reference to the prayer that a sinner prays to accept Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior. You may know this as the ‘prayer of salvation’ or ‘the sinner’s prayer.’”
Since Joseph Prince taught
that 1 John 1:9 wasn’t written to believers but to unbelievers,
this clearly shows that
he is against the whole idea of confession of sins for believers.
In other words, to Joseph Prince,
there is no doctrinal place for the confession of sins, period.
If that is so, why is Joseph Prince also saying that
he isn’t against the confession of sins,
and it’s not wrong to confess your sins?
What is more shocking is that
he is now even saying that
he believes in the confession of sins
and he personally confesses his sins.
It doesn’t matter what reason/s Joseph Prince gives
for the confession of his sins,
(which he says that he confesses his sins because his sins are forgiven
– which is a nonsensical statement anyway, as I have pointed out).
Did you catch the blatant contradictory statements
that Joseph Prince made?
Furthermore, in ‘Unmerited Favor’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“Before I go into the context of 1 John 1:9, let me establish first that you cannot build a doctrine based on one verse in the Bible. Now, have you ever wondered why Paul… did not make the slightest mention of “confession of sins” to all the churches he wrote to?
In ‘Unmerited Favor’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“Paul wrote extensively to all these churches, and yet there was not one mention of the confession of sins in all his Spirit-inspired letters.”
In ‘Grace Revolution’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“Apostle Paul, who wrote two-thirds of the epistles to the churches, never once taught on confession of sins.”
In the same sermon as above, Joseph Prince said;
Please click here to view the 10-second video:
“So, there’s no teaching; Paul addressed the most carnal church, Paul never one time in his Spirit-inspired letters and Paul wrote three fourths, he never one time said, ‘Confess your sins.’”
By alluding to Paul that he never said or taught one time in all his letters
‘Confess your sins,’
clearly shows that Joseph Prince
is against the idea of confessing your sins.
(This topic about Paul not mentioning ‘Confess your sins’ even once is easy to handle and retort. But because this isn’t my focus, I will leave it as it is, perhaps deal with it at another time.
Joseph Prince thought he had come up with an excellent argument to support his no-confession of sin doctrine.
But this is nothing but an argument from silence, which is a rather weak argument, and it could even lead to ridiculous conclusions.
Do you know that Paul never mentioned the word ‘Trinity’ in all in his epistles?
So, I supposed Joseph Prince must have been teaching that Paul is against the Theology of Trinity.
I’m sure you are aware that the Bible never mentioned the word, ‘computers’ even once.
So, I supposed Joseph Prince does not believe in the existence of computers even though they are placed right before his very eyes.
Ridiculous, right – as can be seen from Joseph Prince’s argument from silence!
Try harder the next time, Joe.)
So, when Joseph Prince said in both his sermons and books
that Paul never said one time in all his letters
‘Confess your sins,’
he is clearly against the idea of confessing your sins.
If that is so, why is Joseph Prince
saying in the same sermon
that he is not against confessing of sins
and he even does it himself?
If Joseph Prince really believes in his interpretation of 1 John 1:9,
then, he must go all the way and say that
confession of sins is totally wrong,
because that verse is not for believers
but unbelievers.
Since the confession of sins is totally wrong,
Joseph Prince must tell his people
never to ever mention these three words,
‘confession of sins’ anymore.
But why is Joseph Prince compromising on his no-confession doctrine?
Why is he now saying that confession of sins is not wrong?
What is worse is
why is he admitting that he himself is confessing his sins?
If Joseph Prince himself is confessing his sins
because confessing sins is not wrong,
then why did Joseph Prince make such a big fuss
by telling the world that chapter one of 1 John
was written to unbelievers,
and, hence, 1 John 1:9 is inapplicable to us, believers,
and therefore, confession of sins is not for believers
but unbelievers?
Why?
Once Joseph Prince agrees
that he is for the confession of sins (notwithstanding the reason),
he is undoing what he tries to prove in 1 John 1:9
that confession of sins is not for believers.
If Joseph Prince is serious about his position in 1 John 1:9,
then he should be saying,
“I am totally against the confession of sins because it’s wrong as all our sins are forgiven, and there is nowhere in scripture by Paul or John or any other scripture writer who have told us to confess our sins.”
But if Joseph Prince still insists
that confession of sins is right (whatever the reason/s),
then he must issue a public statement
to recant what he taught in 1 John 1:9.
If Joseph Prince refuses to recant,
then he has no right to say that confession of sins is not wrong
and he has to apologise for doing the wrong thing
when he confesses his sins.
Unbelievably, in the next video that you will be watching,
I have caught Joseph Prince
again contradicting himself
and making more flip-flops.
In the same sermon as above, Joseph Prince said;
Please click here to view the 20-second video:
“I want to give you the Greek right now. ‘If we are confessing, (present tense), our sins, he is faithful and just to have forgiven us our sins and to have cleansed us, (both are aorist tense), from all unrighteousness (1 Jn 1:9).’ In other words, we have been forgiven; that’s why we are confessing.”
My focus is not on his use of the Greek
but in alerting you
that Joseph Prince had made another flip-flop again
on the same issue.
By saying in the video,
“In other words, we have been forgiven, that’s why we are confessing,”
Joseph Prince is using 1 John 1:9 as the basis
to justify the way that he, as a Christian, is confessing.
But He is not permitted to do that
without contradicting himself
because he had always viewed
that 1 John 1:9 was not written to believers
but unbelievers (Gnostics).
So how can he now use the same text of 1 John 1:9
that he says it is for unbelievers
to justify the way a believer like him ought to confess
– that a Christian can confess because his sins have been forgiven?
How can he invoke 1 John 1:9
to support that this is how a believer ought to confess,
when, according to him,
1 John 1:9 was not written for believers,
but unbelievers?
This is unbelievable and outrageous
to know that Joseph Prince’s sense of logic is so appalling!
Joseph Prince – you mean to tell me
that you are not even aware
that you are making another contradictory statement
about your doctrinal stand?
– I can’t believe this!
What is worse is that he made yet another flip-flop
in the same sermon as above when he said;
Please click here to view the 10-second video:
“And in the entire New Testament, there’s only one verse that people build their whole life on, 1 Jn 1:9.”
So, Joseph Prince is now suggesting that people, referring to believers,
shouldn’t have relied on the only verse, 1 John 1:9, in the entire New Testament,
as the basis for their confession of sins
– definitely implying and admitting
that 1 John 1:9 does not apply to believers
and cannot be used to teach the confessing of sins.
(Regarding what Joseph Prince said that 1 John 1:9 is the only verse in the New Testament on confession of sin;
do you know that the David & Goliath story was only mentioned once in the entire Bible?
So, I suppose Joseph Prince does not believe in this story about David killing Goliath because it is mentioned only once.
Indeed, Joe, you need to try harder the next time!)
One moment, Joseph Prince uses 1 John 1:9
to justify the way a believer ought to confess (the earlier part of the video),
and the next moment (this part of the video),
he strongly implied that the same verse, 1 John 1:9,
does not apply to believers.
Frankly, I don’t know about you,
but I am sick and tired
of his constant and endless flip-flops and double-talks.
Can you honestly trust this so-called world-class teacher
who says one thing at one time
and another at another time?
This is not the end of his constant flip-flops and self-contradictions.
Here’s more…
Joseph Prince has taught many times in his books and sermons
that we need to confess our righteousness and not our sins
because we need to be righteousness-conscious
and not sin-conscious.
In ‘Unmerited Favor’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“Beloved, instead of being sin-conscious, become righteousness conscious…”
In ‘Unmerited Favor’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“Jesus wants you to have no more consciousness of your sins. Instead, He wants you to have a consciousness of your righteousness in Him.”
Now, what’s going on?
One moment, Joseph Prince said we must be righteousness-conscious
and we must never talk about sin
because we must never be sin-conscious,
and the next moment,
he said that there is nothing wrong
with confessing our sins
and he is not against it;
and in fact, he confesses his sins.
One moment, he said,
“Confess righteousness,”
the next moment, he said,
“I am not against confessing our sins and I’m even doing it myself.”
Joseph Prince is really confusing everybody.
(By the way, the gift of confusion
is not a gift I can find anywhere in the scriptures.)
The fact that Joseph Prince said he is confessing his sins (notwithstanding the reason)
plainly shows that he is still focussing on the negative
– being sin-conscious
(which is disallowed by his own teaching),
instead of focussing on the positive
– being righteousness-conscious.
Furthermore, Joseph Prince said the Holy Spirit
never convicts us of our sins, but our righteousness
because our sins have all been forgiven.
Prince also said that it is the devil
who reminds us of our sins and not the Holy Spirit.
In ‘Unmerited Favor’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“That is why the enemy wants to keep you sin-conscious. Confessing your sins all the time keeps you sin-conscious.”
If “Confessing your sins all the time keeps you sin-conscious,”
and Satan is the one who “wants to keep you sin-conscious,”
then why is Prince now undoing
all that he has preached in the above by saying,
“I do believe in the confession of sins and I do confess my sins still.” (In ‘Grace Revolution’, Page 84)
Joseph Prince claimed in the video
that people had misrepresented him, when he said;
Please click here to view the 5-second video:
“There people who misrepresent me out there.”
Now, you be the judge
– has people misrepresented him
or has he misrepresented himself?
The truth, with all his double-talks and self-contradictions,
he has misrepresented himself
and yet, he has the cheek to blame it on others.
He can’t even explain basic truths
with clarity, accuracy and unambiguity.
He has given many conflicting signals
that confuse people to no end.
And I hope Joseph Prince himself is not being confused too.
Through his own fault,
by not making sure that what he taught
can withstand the scrutiny of logic,
and more importantly, scriptures,
he has the gumption to blame it on others
by saying that they have misrepresented him.
Come on, be a true leader, and admit fault.
The worst in a leader
is to blame others for the mistakes he makes,
instead of owning up and apologise.
While the scripture in 1 John 1:9
clearly says that we are to confess our sins
in order to be forgiven,
Joseph Prince had to go the opposite way
by saying we confess our sins
because we are forgiven.
In fact, he has raised two issues in his book
that are clearly blasphemous
to the sanctity and credibility of the word of God
and the God of the word.
In ‘Unmerited Favor’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the forgiveness of sins is according to the confession of our sins. Nowhere!”
In ‘Unmerited Favor’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“This teaching on the confession of sins has caused so much bondage and oppression in the church.”
In the same sermon, Joseph Prince said;
Please click here to view the 10-second video:
“The idea that you need to confess before God forgives will put you in bondage, my friend.”
Isn’t that open rebellion?
He is deliberately and defiantly teaching something
against what God has clearly revealed in His word.
So, friends tell me
– How can this guy be a true teacher of God’s word?
How can he still be considered a shepherd of God’s flock?
In conclusion,
how do we explain all the mess and flip-flops
that Joseph Prince has gotten himself into?
The reason is,
it is not easy to fault and pick a fight with God’s word
on the teaching that believers are to confess their sins in 1 John 1:9.
That is why in Joseph Prince’s vain efforts
to prove the truth of God’s word in 1 John 1:9
to be false,
and while he thinks he has covered all the corners,
he ended up spewing out nonsensical arguments
and making confusing and contradictory statements.
If we cannot accept
such blatant flip-flops and self-contradictory statements
for an ordinary person,
why is it that so many have accepted
and even adored him
as an excellent teacher of God’s word?
After witnessing the fiasco
that Joseph Prince has gotten himself into,
I’m sure you are convinced that Joseph Prince’s teaching
that 1 John 1:9 was written to unbelievers
as a prayer of forgiveness of sins for salvation
and not to believers
to confess their sins to be forgiven,
is one big lie.
Rev George Ong
Appendix
What I want to highlight is the straw man tactic of Joseph Prince
that he constantly uses against his theological opponents.
In ‘Unmerited Favor’, Joseph Prince wrote,
“But His grace is cheapened when you think that He has only forgiven you of your sins up to the time you got saved, and after that point, you have to depend on your confession of sins to be forgiven.”
Joseph Prince loves to use the straw man tactic
to misrepresent the position of his theological opponents.
I have studied him meticulously in his books and video teachings
– and I can tell you that that is one of the typical tactics he uses
against those who criticise his grace teachings.
He uses this straw man tactic frequently and to maximum effect,
as he is well aware that the more he uses this tactic
to misrepresent us,
the more his flock would be misinformed about and prejudiced against us,
and the more they will view his theological opponents with disdain.
George would say to Joseph Prince:
“Joseph Prince, whoever says that we depend on our confession of sins to be forgiven. It is you who have put those words into our mouths. Most Christians will have the understanding that it is the blood of Jesus that cleanses us from our sins.
But that doesn’t mean we don’t confess our sins because this is what God wants us to and because 1 John 1:9 has clearly instructed us to.
We also know that though it is the blood of Jesus that cleanses us, God has ordained that forgiveness of sins cannot happen without our confession and repentance.”
Joseph Prince, for a change,
let me use your straw man tactic to hit you back in return
and give you a taste of your own bitter medicine:
“For those who supposedly come to salvation in the Lord Jesus through your grace preaching, you would definitely lead them to say the sinner’s prayer.
Using your straw man argument, I will say to you that when you lead them to say the sinner’s prayer, these people believe that only their prayers have saved them.
I now say to you,
‘Why do these people of yours depend on their prayers to save them?’”
Joseph Prince will straightaway object and immediately shoot back and defend:
“George, let me clarify that while they must say the sinner’s prayer, they do not depend on their prayers to be saved. They are well aware that it is the blood of Jesus that cleanses and saves them, but they still need to indicate that they have chosen to follow Christ through the sinner’s prayer – so why are you, George, putting your words into their mouths?”
George would say:
“So, Joseph Prince, why are you doing the same thing and putting your words into our mouths that we must depend on our confession of sins to be forgiven.
Joseph Prince, how is it like to be at the receiving end of your straw man tactic?”
Let me tell you that Joseph Prince
uses this straw man tactic very frequently
in his teachings and sermons.
He does it by distorting our doctrinal stand
by presenting an extreme and false image of it,
in order to blind people to the falsity of his grace theology.
So, you’ve got to be mindful of this straw man tactic
is another deceptive ploy of Joseph Prince
to deceive you that 1 John 1:9
was not written to believers but to unbelievers.
But I have already proven that such a teaching is false.
1 John 1:9 was indeed written to believers
for them to confess their sins
to obtain forgiveness from God.