Joseph Prince’s Veiled Reply to My Criticism of his Teaching against Discipleship in Luke 14:25-27,33 – By Rev George Ong (Dated 4 June 2022)
(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.)
Crucial Concluding Point in this Article:
Believers, (including the Apostle Paul and 11 of Christ’s Apostles) throughout the centuries of Christianity under the New Covenant, knew what costly discipleship that Jesus preached in Luke 14:25-35 meant and had given up their lives for the sake of Christ.
These godly men and women were willing to pay the ultimate price of discipleship – giving up everything and even their own lives in order to follow Christ.
Yet, these are the very godly men and women that Joseph Prince is mocking when Prince teaches that the costly discipleship teachings of Jesus in Luke 14:25-35 are under the Old Covenant Law of demand and no more applicable to New Covenant believers (His own words in a Sunday sermon on 22 May 2022: “You are not a disciple anymore”) – implying that these courageous martyrs have suffered and died for Christ and the gospel FOR NOTHING!
Two Tuesdays ago, on 24 May 2022, I featured an article in this website, titled,
“Joseph Prince Lied against the Holy Spirit & Preaches against the Costly Discipleship of Jesus.”
In that article under Point Number 3,
“Joseph Prince teaches against the Costly discipleship of Jesus,”
I showed a 30-second video excerpt.
On 29 May 2022, last Sunday, surprisingly, Joseph Prince didn’t preach live in person but showed an old sermon on YouTube instead.
The old sermon Prince showed on 29 May 2022, last Sunday on YouTube, titled: “Understanding Grace and Discipleship – comparing Luke 14 and Luke 15” is the same sermon that I had taken from to show the 30-minute video excerpt as the basis of my criticisms against his ‘anti costs-of-discipleship’ teachings on 24 May 2022.
This is no coincidence!
Did Joseph reply to me regarding my article on 24 May 2022 and the 30-second video excerpt?
No, Prince didn’t reply to me directly. But, presumably, he did, indirectly.
Probably, after reading my article dated 24 May 2022 and viewing the 30-second video excerpt on my website which contained my criticisms against his teachings, Joseph Prince’s hidden reply to me, is perhaps, as follows:
“George, you had not done me justice by showing only a 30-second video clip (on 24 May 2022) from the one-hour sermon to make your point. So, let me show my congregation and the world the entire one-hour sermon which I did on 29 May 2022 on YouTube (in place of a live sermon by me that Sunday) so that your taking me out of context and the fact that you have misrepresented me in that sermon would be exposed.”
Why do I write it this way? This is because from the plenty of Joseph Prince’s sermons that I have personally viewed, he has frequently (falsely) accused his critics in this manner.
Please understand that for copyright reasons, I am not permitted to show the entire one-hour sermon on my website even if I wanted to; only Joseph Prince has the right to as he is the originator.
Second, for practical reasons due to limitation of space, and also because I cannot show the entire one-hour sermon, it is impossible for me to critique the whole sermon that Prince showed last Sunday on 29 May 2022.
But to give Joseph Prince no lame excuse or reason to accuse me for quoting him out of context or misrepresenting him, may I invite you to view the entire one-hour sermon which Prince showed on 29 May 2022 on YouTube yourself.
This can be viewed only about 3 weeks later from 29 May 2022 (from today on 4 June 2022, it is about 2 weeks later). This is because it is Joseph Prince’s practice to show what he preached on a given Sunday only about 3 weeks later on this given link:
https://www.youtube.com/c/JosephPrinceOnline/videos
I wish you could view this sermon on the above link yourself. After viewing the entire sermon, you can come to your own conclusion whether I have quoted Joseph Prince out of context and whether I have misrepresented him.
To me, this is a sermon that is built on one presumption after another. I can almost title this sermon of Joseph Prince as, “Bible Exegesis through Mere & Baseless Presumption.”
Let’s not talk about Bible exegesis, even basic logic is sorely lacking in his arguments as I shall show you in the ensuing discussion.
Despite this, Prince has the cheek to call this sermon of his a ‘classic sermon’ (these 2 words that Prince reflected in the sermon video). This is an embarrassment for him!
Let me move on to several issues I want to focus on about Joseph Prince’s teachings in this sermon.
Kindly note that you would have to read Luke chapter 14 to appreciate my criticisms against Prince’s teachings.
Please click here to view excerpts in the 1-minute video of what Joseph Prince said:
“There are a lot of questions that believers are asking. Pastor Prince, ‘What about discipleship? What about taking up the cross, denying yourself, forsaking all that you have to become Jesus’ disciples?’ Well, all that will be answered in today’s lesson.”
“Jesus shared a parable of a hundred sheep, of a shepherd and one sheep was lost and the shepherd left the 99 to look for that one lost sheep. And then comes the woman with the 10 coins; she lost one piece and the woman lit a candle and sought that piece out until she found it. Then came the story of what we call the prodigal son, the father had 2 sons and all that. All these 3 parables of grace (parable of lost sheep, lost coin and Prodigal son in Luke 15) is to be compared with the 3 parables of demand in Luke 14 (verses 25-35 when Jesus talks about the costs of discipleship). Let me explain, grace supplies (Joseph Prince is referring to Luke 15), law demands (Joseph Prince is referring to Luke 14, particularly verses 25-35).”
In his exegesis, Joseph Prince has clearly separated the Jesus of Luke 14 (particularly verses 25-35) from the Jesus of Luke 15 by pitting salvation in Luke 15 against discipleship, (which he sees as under law, and hence not applicable to New Covenant believers), in Luke 14 (particularly verses 25-35).
What Joseph Prince is saying is that when Jesus talks about the costs of discipleship in Luke 14 (verses 25-35), He is speaking under the law of demand of the Old Covenant. But when Christ talks about salvation in Luke 15, He is speaking under grace of the New Covenant.
Joseph Prince is effectively pitting discipleship in Luke 14 (verses 25-35) which, he says, is under law, against salvation in Luke 15 which is under grace – as he sees discipleship (under law) and salvation (under grace) as mutually exclusive.
The truth is both salvation by grace (Luke 15) and the costs of discipleship (Luke 14:25-35) are given by the same Jesus Himself, and they are presented by Christ as one and the same package which cannot be divorced from each other.
As I’ve already covered this particular issue in sufficient detail in my last article, titled,
Joseph Prince’s Teaching that you can be a Christian without being a Disciple can send you to Hell – By Rev George Ong (Dated 29 May 2022)
under Point Number 2,
The Great Commission of Jesus Proves that Salvation & Discipleship cannot be separated,
I shall not belabour on this point here.
Furthermore, when Joseph Prince says that Luke 15 talks about salvation by grace under the New Covenant, it is contradictory to his own grace doctrine.
In ‘Unmerited Favor’, Page 97, Joseph Prince wrote,
“However, the new covenant does not actually begin with the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John as these books deal predominantly with the life of Jesus before the cross. In fact, the new covenant begins after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Hence, the cross is our clearest marking point of where the new covenant begins.”
In ‘Destined To Reign’, Page 92, Joseph Prince wrote,
“The new covenant only begins after the cross, when the Holy Spirit was given on the day of Pentecost.”
Joseph Prince contended that since, “The new covenant only begins after the cross”, it means all that Jesus said and taught in the gospels are under the Old Covenant Law because they all took place before the cross, and hence, are not applicable and not binding on New Covenant believers.
Yet, in the gospel of Luke chapter 15, Joseph Prince said that Jesus was teaching on salvation by grace under the New Covenant.
If Joseph Prince said all the gospels, including the gospel of Luke, are under the Old Covenant Law, then how can he say that the gospel of Luke chapter 15, is about salvation by grace under the New Covenant?
You see the stark self-contradiction in Joseph Prince’s grace doctrine.
Let me move on to the next issue.
Please click here to view excerpts in this one-and-a-half-minute video of what Joseph Prince said:
“Now the great multitudes that came after Him… These were the people (great multitudes in Lk 14:25 NKJV), the company that came from the house of the Pharisee (Lk 14:1 NKJV). And they came up to Him (Jesus), alright, with all the different reasons – predominantly, self-righteousness. ‘I can do it; I just have to learn what you did’. They are not seeing Jesus as a Saviour. They are seeing Jesus as an example. Look at Jesus’ thoughts – is He comfortable? He turned around, the Bible says He turned around, He turned to the multitudes and said, ‘If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, yes, his own life also, cannot be My disciple. Whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me, cannot be My disciple.’” (Luke 14:25-27)… So likewise whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be my disciple (Luke 14:33)” (Joseph Prince read the entire Luke 14:25-35 in his sermon but not all verses in this passage are reflected in this video excerpt).
“And the context I’ve just shown you, I took pains to show you the context, it is actually Jesus, not comfortable at all in this world of men. And then turned around and said, ‘If you want to see me as a pattern, you want me as an example, do what I did – give up everything. I gave up heaven to come to buy that pearl of great price, that treasure hidden in the field. Can you do it? And we take this whole thing and say, ‘This is what we must learn to do, count the cost.’”
“And the context is that He, (Jesus), turned around, no one can deny, these are hard words. Why? Because if you don’t see me as a Saviour, you see me as a pattern, you see me as an example. This is it, shiooo.”
“And Jesus says, if you want me as an example, you come after me as a pattern, you gotta give up everything.”
One of Prince’s main arguments is that the great multitudes in Luke 14:25, came from the same house of one of the Pharisees in Luke 14:1:
Luke 14:25-27 NKJV
25 Now great multitudes went with Him. And He turned and said to them, 26 “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple. 27 And whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple.
Luke 14:1 NKJV
Now it happened, as He went into the house of one of the rulers of the Pharisees to eat bread on the Sabbath, that they watched Him closely.
So, from the viewpoint of Prince, the great multitudes in Luke 14:25 are of the same kind as the Pharisees in Luke 14:1-24, who are self-righteous. Therefore, they came to Jesus with a self-righteous attitude not to be saved but just to learn from him as an example.
Hence, according to Prince, what Jesus said in Luke 14:25-35, and particularly Luke 14:26-27,33 to give up everything, He is not saying to genuinely communicate the costs of discipleship per se but to hit back at the great multitudes for their self-righteousness – that if they come to Him in a self-righteous way and want to see him as an example – then they must give up everything – just to spite them or to teach them a lesson.
Joseph Prince said,
“Now the great multitudes that came after Him… These were the people (great multitudes in Lk 14:25 NKJV), the company that came from the house of the Pharisee (Lk 14:1 NKJV).”
How does Joseph Prince know that the great multitudes in Luke 14:25 are those who came from the Pharisee’s house in Luke 14:1?
This wasn’t stated in the text at all. Since this wasn’t reflected anywhere in the text, Prince, as usual, has sinfully read into it – and added his own words in the word of God.
His overall game plan was to tar the great multitudes and the Pharisees with the same Pharisaic brush in order to craftily set it up for his twisted and false interpretation.
So Joseph Prince has to assume that Luke 14:1-24 and Luke 14:25-35 form one and the same continuing and unbroken episode.
Specifically, he has to presume that the people Jesus was talking to in Luke 14:1:24 is the same group of people He was talking to in Lk 14:25-35 (specifically, the great multitudes in Luke 14:25).
He has to presuppose that both categories of people from Luke 14:1-24 and Luke 14:25-35 are one and the same, both possessing a self-righteous Pharisaic attitude.
This is a terribly weak argument because it is based on mere presumption and nothing else.
How can a so-called world-renowned grace teacher build an interpretation of a text based just on such flimsy assumptions?
This presumption is critical to Joseph Prince’s interpretation. Once this is torn down, which I will in just a moment, his whole position and interpretation of the issue will go down the drain.
To me, Luke 14:1-24 and Luke 14:25-35 are two separate episodes/incidents. Also, the people that Jesus was talking to in Luke 14:1-24 are different from those in Luke 14:25-35.
By assuming that these great multitudes in Luke 14:25 came from the Pharisee’s house in Luke 14:1, (the one who invited Jesus to a meal), showed that Joseph Prince’s imagination had gone berserk.
How could such great multitudes have come from the Pharisee’s house?
When the gospels use the word, ‘multitudes,’ it connotes a big and gigantic crowd of people.
Two clear examples are the feeding of the five-thousand and four-thousand:
Matthew 14:19-21 NKJV
19 “Then He commanded the multitudes to sit down on the grass. And He took the five loaves and the two fish, and looking up to heaven, He blessed and broke and gave the loaves to the disciples; and the disciples gave to the multitudes. 20 So they all ate and were filled, and they took up twelve baskets full of the fragments that remained. 21 Now those who had eaten were about five thousand men, besides women and children.”
Matthew 15:33,38-39 NKJV
33 “Then His disciples said to Him, ‘Where could we get enough bread in the wilderness to fill such a great multitude?’ 38 Now those who ate were four thousand men, besides women and children. 39 And He sent away the multitude, got into the boat, and came to the region of Magdala.”
No matter how big the Pharisee’s house is in Luke 14:1, it is impossible to contain such great multitudes amounting to thousands in Luke 14:25:
Luke 14:1 NKJV
Now it happened, as He went into the house of one of the rulers of the Pharisees to eat bread on the Sabbath, that they watched Him closely.
Luke 14:25 NKJV
25 Now great multitudes went with Him. And He turned and said to them,
Let’s not talk about Bible exegesis, even from the test of simple logic, Joseph Prince’s interpretation of the text has failed miserably.
Even if the great multitudes in Luke 14:25 could somehow be magically defined as referring to a much smaller group of people, there is still no concrete proof in the passage that the great multitudes in Luke 14:25 came from the house of the Pharisee in Luke 14:1.
Joseph Prince has to wildly presume and read his own fanciful ideas into the text – the word of God.
Prince will go to any lengths, even at the expense of posturing an impossible and foolish presumption, just to prove his grace theology and disprove the discipleship teachings of Jesus in Luke 14:25-35.
I have studied the issue and referred to many commentaries, and so far, I have not yet come across any commentator who says that the people mentioned in Luke 14:1-24 are the same as that of Luke 14:25-35.
This goes to indicate that an interpretation based on silence and mere conjecture like what Joseph Prince did is at best amateurish and cannot be conclusive and even deceptive.
Joseph Prince said,
“And they (the great multitudes in Luke 14:25) came up to Him (Jesus), alright, with all the different reasons – predominantly, self-righteousness. ‘I can do it; I just have to learn what you did’. They are not seeing Jesus as a Saviour. They are seeing Jesus as an example.”
What evidence does Joseph Prince have to conclude that the great multitudes in Luke 14:25 were self-righteous in their attitudes and that they were not seeing Jesus as a Saviour but only as an example?
Joseph Prince’s interpretations are incredibly built on one presumption after another.
Joseph Prince has to again read into the text and add into God’s word in order to support his position.
He certainly possesses great imagination when it comes to Bible interpretation – the trouble is, it is based on no fact but all imagination – so how can we trust this fellow’s exegesis!
Joseph Prince said,
“And the context I’ve just shown you, I took pains to show you the context, it is actually Jesus, not comfortable at all in this world of men.”
This is getting ridiculous!
This is the first time I have ever heard a teacher of God’s word locating or justifying the context of a passage by presumption after presumption, and psycho-analysing Jesus about how he really felt on the inside without any concrete fact and evidence to back it up.
Joseph Prince said,
“… it is actually Jesus, not comfortable at all in this world of men.”
How did Joseph Prince know Jesus was not comfortable with these great multitudes in Luke 14:25?
Where is his proof?
If one has read through Luke 14 and 15, the texts that Joseph Prince used to preach this sermon, nothing was explicitly mentioned that Jesus was uncomfortable with these great multitudes in Luke 14:25.
Yet, Prince has the cheek to say,
“I took pains to show you the context.”
Even if Jesus really felt uncomfortable with the great multitudes in Luke 14:25 and even if the great multitudes are self-righteous as Joseph Prince has tried to posture, SO WHAT!
Does that mean that Jesus’ words on Luke 14:25-35 should be discounted – that Jesus wasn’t genuinely speaking about the costs of discipleship?
Regardless of whether Jesus was comfortable or not and whether the great multitudes in Luke 14:25 were self-righteous or not, the point is that when Jesus laid down the costs of discipleship in Luke 14:25-35, he meant every word that he said.
It was Joseph Prince who twisted it and implied that Jesus didn’t mean what He said at all because He had another intention.
Joseph Prince also said in the video,
“And we take this whole thing and say, ‘This is what we must learn to do, count the cost.”
“And the context is that He, (Jesus), turned around, no one can deny, these are hard words. Why? Because if you don’t see me as a Saviour, you see me as a pattern, you see me as an example. This is it, shiooo.”
“And Jesus says, if you want me as an example, you come after me as a pattern, you gotta give up everything.”
Joseph Prince is effectively saying what Jesus meant was something like this,
“Okay, since you (great multitudes) are so self-righteous and since you asked for it, I will teach you all a lesson. I am going to ask you to do something. And that something is everything that I did for you. I gave up heaven. I went to the cross. I gave up my life for your sake. I bought that pearl and treasure in you (Matt 13:44-46). I am totally aware that this is something you cannot do, and it is impossible for you to do. Nevertheless, I am only doing this just to teach you a lesson about your self-righteousness. Since you did not come to me to seek after salvation which is by grace and prefer to go by law, I will give you the demands of the law of discipleship – that amongst the many demands of the law of discipleship you must fulfil, you must give up everything.”
So Prince is clearly saying that Luke 14:25-35 is not teaching that we must count the costs of discipleship because Jesus was not sincere about what He said, or Jesus did not mean what He said.
Do you think Jesus would do such a thing in Luke 14:25-35?
The truth is when Jesus laid down the costs of discipleship, He was absolutely sincere about His intention. His intention was not to use it to hit back at the great multitudes with the demands of the law of discipleship for their self-righteousness as Joseph Prince has tried to sneakily imply.
For the rest of my critique on Joseph Prince’s ‘anti costs-of- discipleship’ teachings, you can read these 2 previous articles by clicking them below (if you haven’t):
My final point is that the costs of discipleship is a core teaching of Jesus not only in Luke 14:25-35 (Lk 14:26-27,33) but also in many passages in the gospels.
Even if Joseph Prince can get away with his twisted interpretation of Luke 14:25-35, he can never wriggle his way out for the following 3 ‘costs of discipleship’ passages:
Let’s first examine the first ‘costs of discipleship’ text in Matthew 16:21-25:
Matthew 16:21-25 NIV
21 “From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life. 22 Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. “Never, Lord!” he said. “This shall never happen to you!” 23 Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.” 24 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 25 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it.”
There is no way that Joseph Prince can twist this text to advance his ‘anti cost-of-discipleship’ agenda as Jesus is portrayed as clearly saying in Matthew 16:21-25 that He expects his disciples to be willing to suffer, take up his cross and die for His sake, similar to that of Luke 14:25-35.
When Peter tried to stop Jesus from going to the cross to suffer and die, Jesus said to His disciples:
“…Get behind me, Satan! (Jesus said to Peter) You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns” (Matt 16:23).
Didn’t Jesus identify Satan as the one who inspired Peter to say, “Lord, You will never go to the cross” (Matt 16:21-22)!
So shouldn’t we recognise as satanic the teaching by Joseph Prince that as disciples/believers, we have no business to take up our cross and suffer and give up our everything including our own lives for the sake of Christ – these being the costs of discipleship that we may have to pay?
“Since the mere avoidance of suffering for both Christ and us is severely reprimanded by Jesus as being satanic – Joseph Prince’s ‘no-suffering, no-sacrifice and no-martyrdom’ dogma is even a worse form of treachery.” (Matt 16:21-23) (George Ong)
Joseph Prince has to let us know what his take on this text is. If Prince disagrees with what Jesus plainly said in Matthew 16:21-25 as he did to Luke 14:25-35 on the costs of discipleship, what are his reasons?
Now, let’s look at the second ‘costs of discipleship’ text in Luke 9:57-62:
Luke 9:57-62 NIV
57 “As they were walking along the road, a man said to him, “I will follow you wherever you go.” 58 Jesus replied, “Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.” 59 He said to another man, “Follow me.” But he replied, “Lord, first let me go and bury my father.” 60 Jesus said to him, “Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and proclaim the kingdom of God.” 61 Still another said, “I will follow you, Lord; but first let me go back and say goodbye to my family.” 62 Jesus replied, “No one who puts a hand to the plow and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God.”
In the gospels, and in particular Luke 9:57-62, Jesus is again speaking about the costs of discipleship. Jesus is never in a hurry to accept disciples. He placed ‘obstacles’ in front of them as He wanted them to count the cost of becoming His disciple.
Isn’t that what Jesus was sincerely trying to convey to these three men in Luke 9:57-62 to count the costs of discipleship as He did to the great multitudes in Luke 14:25-35?
The cost of discipleship is such a crucial doctrine that is inaugurated and taught by none other than Jesus, the Son of God Himself that any responsible and sensible teacher of God’s word would uphold it at every opportunity.
Instead of affirming such a crucial doctrine, Joseph Prince deliberately chooses to demean and degrade it as he did to Luke 14:25-35.
Let’s look at the third and final ‘cost of discipleship’ text in Mark 8:34-38:
Mark 8:34-38 NIV
34 “Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 35 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me and for the gospel will save it. 36 What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? 37 Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? 38 If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.”
In Mark 8:34 as in Luke 14:25-35 (particularly verses 26-27,33), Jesus makes the point that paying the price to be His disciples is non-negotiable:
34 “Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.
Jesus is clearly teaching whether a disciple gives up his life or not for Christ’s sake in Mark 8:35,
35 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me and for the gospel will save it.
can have eternal consequences in Mark 8:36-37,
36 What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? 37 Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?
This simply means that the failure to pay the price to be a disciple of Christ by not denying himself and take up his cross to follow Christ in verse 34 and the giving up one’s life for the sake of Christ and the gospel in verse 35, is the same as not accepting Him as Saviour and Lord – as both will lead to the forfeiting of one’s soul in verses 36-37.
This strongly implies that salvation and discipleship cannot be separated. One who is saved has to count the cost of being a disciple and one who isn’t willing to pay the price to be a disciple isn’t saved to begin with.
Jesus is also probably teaching that if one fails to deny himself to save his own life instead of giving up his life as a true disciple would for Christ’s sake and the gospel, it is tantamount to being ashamed of Jesus, and Christ will be ashamed of Him on the day of reckoning in Mark 8:38:
38 If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.”
Joseph Prince, by teaching and deceiving his congregation that there is no cost of discipleship – no suffering, no sacrifice and no martyrdom for Christians or disciples, has failed to prepare them for such an eventuality.
And when it comes to the crunch, they are likely to fail the test of suffering and martyrdom, and Christ will be ashamed of them on the day of judgement.
This simply means that instead of preparing his flock for heaven, Joseph Prince is setting them up for hell.
Is Joseph Prince going to say that these 3 ‘costs of discipleship’ passages in Matthew 16:21-25, Luke 9:57-62 and Mark 8:34-38 are under the Old Covenant Law of demand and no longer apply to New Covenant believers as he did to Luke 14:25-35?
In conclusion, Joseph Prince, by teaching that the cost of discipleship teachings of Jesus in Luke 14:25-35 is under the Old Covenant law of demand, and no more applicable to New Covenant believers, simply means that all that the Apostle Paul, Peter, the rest of the disciples in the early church and throughout the centuries of Christianity, who did to live out their costly discipleship by suffering, being imprisoned, and even martyred, were all done in vain.
Had not Paul given up his everything to gain Christ?
Philippians 3:8 ESV
8 “Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ.”
Had not Peter given up his everything to follow Christ?
Matthew 19:27 NLT
27 Then Peter said to him, “We’ve given up everything to follow you…”
Had not the disciples given up their everything to follow Christ?
Luke 5:11 NIV
11 “So they pulled their boats up on shore, left everything and followed him.”
In the first 300 years of Christianity, what the early Christians had to go through was brutal.
Those who refused to say Caesar is Lord because the only Lord they know and would acknowledge is Christ were brutally martyred.
Even in the present day (several years ago), believers have been martyred during the ISIS reign, in Syria and Iraq.
Believers, throughout the centuries of Christianity under the New Covenant, knew what costly discipleship that Jesus preached in Luke 14:25-35 meant and had given up their lives for the sake of Christ.
These godly men and women were willing to pay the ultimate price of discipleship – giving up everything and even their own lives in order to follow Christ.
Yet, these are the very godly men and women that Joseph Prince is mocking when Prince teaches that the costly discipleship teachings of Jesus in Luke 14:25-35 are under the Old Covenant Law of demand and no more applicable to New Covenant believers (His own words in a Sunday sermon on 22 May 2022: “You are not a disciple anymore”) – implying that these courageous martyrs have suffered and died for Christ and the gospel FOR NOTHING!
Rev George Ong