In Ireland in 2002 a high-profile 'evangelistic' campaign has been taking place. Many churches have been taking part: even in Dublin, many buses have been carrying banners advertising the campaign. Many famous people in Ireland have promoted it. I decided to contact the people involved and see what ''POWER TO CHANGE'' stands for. Sadly, as you can see from my dialogue (the name of the power to change [P2C] representative has been deleted from the correspondance) P2C is made up with people who are sincere, but have little or no concern about the truth. Therefore, I refer to P2C as 'Power to Deceive'.
I started by sending this e-mail to the P2C people:
''I was looking at the Power-To-Change webpage and I was wondering what you are about. The first thing I have noted is that all the main churches are said to support this 'endeavour'. Does that include Roman Catholicism? [since I wrote this I have noticed many RC buildings advertising P2C]. Do you view Roman Catholics (I mean those who believe in Roman Catholicism, lay and clergy alike) as people who need salvation or who are already saved and are able to point others to salvation?
Does your Gospel message have any distinctives? By that I mean, do you espouse or reject certain doctrines? I know doctrine is not popular anymore, and people find it divisive. I think, however, that unless you can define which 'Jesus' you believe in, then saying, 'I believe in Jesus', is meaningless. There are many concepts of Jesus and what He has done. Which does PowerToChange (P2C) promote?
Do you have a list of non-negociable beliefs or is it the case that anybody can believe anything as long as they are sincere and have an experience?
I assume that P2C wants to be true to the Bible, but what (acc. to P2C) does the Bible teach on salvation?
Did Jesus die to save specific sinners, or die to make it possible for all sinners to be saved, if they do their bit? Does God have ''power to change'', or does that power depend on the sinner's response? Does God give grace before or after the sinner responds? Are God's love and the work of Christ effectual?
I wonder what your responses would be. I suppose you think I am being picky and divisive. I don't think I am. I would appreciate your response''.
To this e-mail I got the following response (my comments to P2C are made between what they wrote. The fonts have been altered accordingly):
Thanks for your message filled with good questions. I agree with you. I don't think you are too picky. Our P2C coordinator asked me to respond to you. I will try to answer your questions in the order they appear in your message.
I am very pleased that you decided to respond and forgive my delay in responding to you. Please read carefully my comments on what you wrote to me, and do not take offense. Reject only what I write if it is unbiblical.
It is a bit of a sensitive issue but in Ireland both Protestants and Catholics are participating in the power to change effort.
I don't think it should be a 'sensitive issue' in Ireland anymore than anywhere else. It seems that people have the idea that it is just a difficult problem in Ireland because of the ''troubles''. That is not the point. The fact is that this should be as sensitive an issue in Canada, the USA, or anywhere else, as it is in Ireland. Leave politics aside! The point is that there are irreconciliable differences between the Gospel taught by Rome and many sections of so-called evangelicalism and the true Gospel. To deny that is to be ignorant either of the Gospel or of what Romanism is all about.
Around the world we come along side all Christian denominations who want help in reaching people with the message of Jesus. In some cases Catholic do, in others they choose not, which is the same for the Protestants.
I understand you want to be inter-denominational, but some denominations are not Christian, in that they do NOT preach the Gospel and have no message of good news. The only message they have is a message which, if believed, will damn the soul. That applies equally to some Protestant denominations, as well as to Romanism.
Who needs salvation? The short answer is all people do, both Catholics and Protestants and all others.
I think you know what I meant by my original question. I know all ''need'' salvation, but the question was, are Roman Catholics already in possession of salvation? Don't say, we cannot judge, because we must. If a person comes with a message of salvation by works, for example, is that person a saved person or a lost person? That is an important question, is it not?
We try to communicate to people that belonging to a church or a group does not make you a Christian - having a personal relationship with Christ does.
I agree, but even a ''personal relationship'' with Jesus is not salvation, unless the relationship is based on the imputed righteousness of Christ ALONE. Judas Iscariot had a 'personal' relationship, he knew the man Jesus, but he did not believe the Gospel. The Pharisees had a 'personal' relatioship, Herod did, Pilate did. But none of these people had the truth of the Gospel. Anybody, even heretics such as Arians and Liberals can claim a ''personal relationship'', but unless Jesus is defined as the true Jesus (see 2 Cor 11: 1-5 that there are ''other christs'' yet one true Christ, and Galatians 1:8-9 that there are many gospels but only one true Gospel) it is meaningless religion based on fuzzy feelings, not truth. John said, ''Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the DOCTRINE of Christ, hath not God''. What is the doctrine of Christ? Who abides in it? If we don't know that, how can we say we have God? And, remember, it doesn't say, Whosoever does not have an experience of Christ, nor does it say, Whosoever does not have a personal relationship with Christ. It uses that unpopular word 'doctrine'. This is an anti-doctrine age. How else can Romanists and Presbyterians etc come together unless they jettison doctrine? Are we now in 2 Timothy 2:3? Look up 'doctrine' in a concordance in the KJV (in modern versions the word used is 'teaching') and see how important Christ and the Apostles thought it was (John above said it was vital).
There are people in both Catholic and Protestant churches who have received salvation through Christ and others who have not. It's a personal matter.
Do you believe then, that the bishops and arcbishops and cardinals in Ireland who have endorsed P2C are saved men? How can they be when they live and preach a false Gospel? They can claim a relationship with Jesus, but they approach Him in the wrong way, not by grace ALONE. Their endorsement of P2C is no more valid than if Osama Bin Laden were to endorse it (no offence), in fact their endorsement is highly worrying, for if they can endorse P2C how doctrinally weak and prevaricating must it be? If men and women can allow the RC churches to lead people to Christ, what Christ are they being led to?
All those who have personally received Christ are in a position to point others to Him.
That depends on what you mean 'by ''receiving Christ''. With Christ we must also receive 'a love of the truth' (2 Thes 2:10). If there is no love of the truth [but a clinging to false gods and gospels, such as 'Mary, Queen of Heaven' [sic!] and Therese de Lisieux] there has been NO receiving of Christ. How many of the P2C people are going to tell the people that receiving Christ means leaving idols? I'll tell you, none! Why, because then you'd lose the endorsement of the bishops and cardinals of the RC 'church'. How many are going to tell the people of the finished work of Christ? Very few, because that'd offend the people believing in puragatory and personal works of satisfaction for their own sins. That'll jettison the Mass in which (in the words of Vatican II) 'redemption is continued'.
The Gospel message does have its distinctives. The message of the Gospel is that Jesus was born as God's Son, born of a virgin, died on the cross for our sins, and rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. There is no other Gospel.
With all due respect, there are no 'distinctives' in what you wrote above. You didn't even mention the Deity of Christ. Possibly the liberals and JW's who deny the bodily resurrection of Christ (not that you actually said 'bodily') would be excluded from such a definition, but few else. Acc to that definition even Mormons could be said to believe the Gospel. If a Mormon church were to want to take part in PTC, how would you feel? Would you say Mormons have received Jesus and are ''qualified'' to point Him out to others??? What would PTC say on that issue? Seriously, that gospel is as vague as the Apostle's Creed.
Just to believe in 'something', even sincerely is not good enough because in is not in accordance with God's plan.
I couldn't agree more. That is why sincere Catholics, sincere JWs, sincere Mormons and many sincere Protestants are lost, why? because they do not believe the truth of the Gospel.
Probably the best outline of what P2C teaches on salvation, which is strictly Bible based as you will see, can be found on the P2C site by clicking on "Make a Change" in the top bar. It will give you a 4-point outline of the message of salvation and how to lay claim to it according to the Bible.
I am sorry to disappoint you, but your 4 point Gospel message is not biblical at all. I expect by now, you are beginning to want to stop listening, but allow me to elaborate.
Jesus died to offer salvation to ALL sinners not just some. But for salvation to become reality to any 'sinner' the offer from God must be received as you will see in the above mentioned presentation. God's grace is extended to the sinner before he receives Him, but also after to make possible the living of the Christian life.
The essence of P2C's ''Make a Change'' message is that God has done all He can to effect salvation and has left the results up to man. He is waiting to see what the outcome will be. He is sitting on the sidelines, hoping that some will accept His salavtion. That is a man centred message which is deeply offensive to God. That is the popular message. Jesus is there for you, if only you'll do something about it? There is no understanding of the radical depravity of man.
The common belief (certainly the one P2C presents) is that people get saved because they ALLOW God to save them. The flip-side is that people are LOST because they REFUSE to let God save them. But, why do some ALLOW God to save them? [John 3:20; 1 Cor 2:14, Rom 8:7, John 6:44 and many other verses prove that men never just allow God to save them]. It must be because they make a wise decision; it must be because they are more perceptive to spiritual truth; it must be because they are less stubborn, less self-righteous, less proud; less rebellious, in short, because they are BETTER. That is the ONLY logical conclusion which can be reached if we start from the [false] premise that God wants to save everybody, He has made salvation available and possible for everybody, and everybody has an equal chance. BUT, that makes man ultimately his own saviour. The very idea is repugnant.
Faith and repentance (which you replace with 'accept') are something that man can take credit for, and these virtues excercised by sinners are the reason why God saves them. God, as it were, ''rewards'' the sinner, who out of humility [why he is humble is not explained. Is he naturally humble?], decide to accept God's offer of salvation [which everyone could have had, if they hadn't ''blown it'' by their own foolishess and stubborness]. Have you not read that God CAUSES faith and repentance, that these are gifts given to those whom He saves? Maybe you think that that would imply God ''forcing'' people to be saved.
Consider the reaction of the Jewish Christians in Acts 11:18, ''Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life''. They did not say, 'Wow, the Gentiles have decided to repent', or 'Look, the Gentiles have worked out the Gospel and now believe like we do''. No, they knew that God had granted them repentance, so when they saw the Gentiles repent, they attributed it to God, not to the Gentile's decision. In Psalm 10:4, we read, ''The wicked [that is ALL unregenerate sinners] through the pride of his countenance will not seek after God'' This agrees with Romans 3:11, 'There is none that seeketh after God''. Man, left to his own devices, will NOT respond favourably to God. Sinners are described by the Psalmist as those ''which will not hearken to the voice of charmers, charming never so wisely'' (Psalm 58:5). That is why Jesus says in John 3:20 ''Every one that doeth evil [that is ALL sinners devoid of salvation] hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved''. A light-hating sinner is NOT going to respond favourably; Jesus says he will NOT come to the light. The only way a person who can respond to the light is if God causes him to come. ''Quicken us and we will call on Thy Name'' says Psalm 80:18.
Does that mean that preaching is a waste of time? No! Preaching is the means God uses to save, but He only saves through the right message. False messages never save, in fact God sends false messages to harden people in sin and ultimately to destroy them. (2 Thes 2:11)
God's love and the work of Christ has changed the life of many. For some samples check "Changed Lives" top bar, on the P2C site. It has changed mine and I trust it is changing yours too.
I am somewhat perturbed that some of the 'changed lives' are Roman Catholics, people who still trust in the church of Rome, who still pray to Mary, who still believe in the dogmas of Romanism. If that is so, how are they changed? They are not changed. They are as deceived as they were before. They have taken their old religion and added a personal relationship with Jesus to it. They have not repented of their idolatry. Their self-righteous religion has become more refined, but at the core it is still the same.
What is the 'work of Christ'? What has He done? That is the very core of the Gospel. You believe that Jesus died for everybody, but not everybody is saved. You say that Jesus died for 'our sins' [meaning everybody's sins]. If some people go to hell 'in their sins' how can Jesus have died 'for their sins'? If Jesus has paid their price, how can it be that some for whom Jesus paid the price still miss heaven? The answer P2C offers is that some choose to agree with what Jesus did and others reject it. That means that Jesus' work is not the reason for salvation. Do you see that? The only difference between salvation and damnation is not the love of God [God loves all alike acc to P2C), nor the blood of Jesus [His blood was shed for all alike acc to P2C), nor the work of the Spirit [He cannot influence our wills, and anyway He strives with all equally acc to P2C], BUT the positive freewill choice of some for Christ against the negative freewill choice of others against Christ. That means that Christ's work has no saving power IN AND OF ITSELF, and the real 'star of the show' is me! Jesus helps me to get saved, and that is it! That is a false gospel, as false as Mormonism and twice as subtle, and that is the gospel that P2C is hoping to promote in Ireland. God help us!
Watch for the P2C campaign in Ireland this fall and see if there are any positive results.
I don't expect there to be any positive results. I expect it to be part of a great deception.
I hope this is somewhat helpful. If you have further comments or questions I'd love to hear from you.
You have 'heard' from me now. I hope you are not offended, and that you will take seriously what I have written. To what do you attribute salvation? To a decision you made to follow Jesus? To a time when you 'went to the front', 'invited Jesus into your heart'? If you do, you do not know the truth either. I hope that you will allow me to discuss this further will you if you don't think I am a bigot. Postscript:
I did not get much of a response from P2C, which was quite sad. I got the same old ''we'll agree to disagree'' approach. It seems today is the day of doctrinal apathy. Experience and feelings rule the day, and all opinions seem to count. To counter that attitude with SOUND DOCTRINE is unpopular, but by God's grace, it MUST be done, lest we get swept away by every error of men's thinking.
