Accept Jesus - Where is it?

[Amybeth]

We should try to keep the OSAS debate in the appropriate thread(s). The subject has a tendency to draw conversations WAY off course. In any case, I don;t see any inherent danger to saying that the Lord is your personal Lord and personal Savior. After all, is He, or is He not either? The Lord is my Lord - my personal Lord: He is Lord over my person, my life, my livlihood, my every action, and my environment. The Lord is my Savior - my personal Savior: He saved me, individually, and placed me in teh corporate Body of Christ. Not only that, He is saving me. He saves me a little more every day by His life. The more I turn to Him the more He saves me.

I agree that such phrases can be really doctrinal. They can be dry and dead by virtue of their over-use. But there is a very real and purposful meaning behind them, so it's not right to simply disregard them. So what if someone says that the Lord is their "Personal Lord and Savior"? Is He yours? Yes? Good! Then leave your brothers and sisters alone, for goodness' sake.

I say that for the sake of everyone, by the way, not just you, bro. Christians can get so petty and self-righteous sometimes. I think we all need to learn to leave one another alone, and quit being so nitpicky about things that don't really matter.

Wow,

That is AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And truly the Love of Christ shines through....

[Guest shiloh357]

"Accepting Jesus in my heart as Lord and personal savior" - This is not scriptural

Of course it is "scriptural!!!"

The Jesus is our personal Lord and Savior, if not then you are not saved.

The very thing that separates Christianity from Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, etc. Is that we have a God who is a personal Savior. Other religions do not have the notion of a personal God who cares for each of individually, and cared so much, that He was willing to send His own Son to die on our behalf. Judaism, for example, rejects the notion of personal salvation. They do not believe that the individual is a sinner in need of forgiveness. Hence, there is no need for God to save them as individuals. In Judaism, the concept of "salvation" is corporate.

Jesus is the Savior of "whosever." As the old hymn also says, "the vilest offender who truly believes, that moment from Jesus, a pardon receives."

Christ is the savior of the world, and He is the personal Savior of each person who will consciously receive Him.

The term "accept" for those who need an English lesson, means "to regard as true," "to believe," "to receive," "to allow admitance into." Accepting Jesus is part of salvation, but repentance is also part of it as well. I have never heard anyone argue that repentance is unnecessary. Granted, I have heard preachers who I thought were too light on the issue, of repentance, but their errors is not a reflection on the concept itself.

To "accept Jesus as Savior" does not in any way deny, or preclude repentance. To argue that it does is pure nonsense. You need to stop confusing the concept with those who misuse or abuse the concept. While there may be some people who have misapplied the concept to avoid repentance, it does not follow that the proper understanding of "accepting Christ" was created or designed to provide salvation without repentance of sin. Frankly, it does not sound as if you really know enough about other denominations to be making that assertion. You need to restrict your remarks to your little pocket in the NW U.S., instead of plaguing us with some pitiful canard that subjectively assigns your values to everyone else.

"Accepting Jesus in my heart as Lord and personal savior" doctrine takes away from repentance because it teaches people "once saved always saved" along with it.

Again, pure nonsense, as it has nothing to do with OSAS. That is an entirely different issue. There is no meaningful connection between the two. I have Pentacostal friends who vehemently reject OSAS who believe in accepting Christ as a Personal Savior. My town is the headquarters of the Assemblies of God, and they preach a strong message of Christ as Personal Savior and Lord, but hold to the Arminian position that salvation can be lost. Frankly, your arugment is without merit.

If you want to talk about OSAS or Baptismal Regeneration find other threads to argue about it.

[BlindSeeker]

I have provided scriptures backing up everything I have mentioned. Could you please provide me scriptures supporting that baptism is just a symbol?

Baptism is essential to salvation and without it we can't be saved:

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

1 Peter 3:21 The like figure <antitupos> whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

Same Greek word translated

[eric]

What a lot of kerfuffle over a subject that has been dicussed for the last 2000 years, and I am inclined to a degree that's it's a nit picking and hair splitting question,. from someone who has been around as long as the OP.

Now if it was a new christian wanting to be fed, I could understand it, but not from a mature christian.

And of course,as usual, the thread gets hijacked into water baptism, with all the pros and cons which is irrelevant to the OP.

Jon.1:12

Rom.10:9 10.

11Jn.5:10-12.

These are enough evidence,....... there are many more, to show that you need to receive Christ . End of story.

eric.

[larryt]

I guess it's about time I got back and responded to some of the posts. I really wasn't trying to split hairs. I get so annoyed when as some have said here, and I have heard many, many time that all that is need is to just accept Jesus, without any mention of repentance. As has been mentioned in this thread by some that there are many who are not "prepared with the gospel of Peace" going about getting people to "accept Jesus." As I think I hinted in the OP it is not a matter of us accepting Him but whether He accepts us. We are accepted in the Beloved when we come believing in Him, that He has made us clean that we might be accepted. He has made us to be accepted.

On the other hand, anyone can accept a Jesus that is a figment of their own imagination if He is not shown to be who he really is to them. Notice what Paul says to Timothy about taking heed.

1Ti 4:16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.

If we are really to win the lost we need to be more prepared with the gospel of peace that we might go to them that need to hear not fearing that the gospel might be offensive to those that hate God.

LT

[SpiritLedEd]

shiloh357

That is why I started that post the way I did not fully understanding what was meant by "accepting".

I live in the Pacific NW. My brother is a Baptist and is taught here completely different than what you have said. They, as well a countless other churches here, are taught to "accept Jesus in your heart as your Lord and personal savior" and this is all they need for salvation completely leaving out baptism for remission of sins (Act 2:38), repentance, and working out our salvations (Philippians 2:12). They believe that once save always saved and that God automatically forgives every presumptuous sin I do whether there is repentance or not.

I have taught many people here in this state that believe this way. I have found literature and tracts all over town from various churches and bible book stores supporting this. This teaching allows people to hold onto thier sins and live in the day in and day out with out repentance because they are saved by grace and can't fall from no matter how much sin they fall into and/or hang onto.

2Pe 2:20-22 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known [it], to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog [is] turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

The South may be different than the NW in teaching.

As I posted earlier, there is a well known Scripture citation that speaks of repentence AND receiving Jesus:

"Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent. Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him and he with me." (Rev 3:19-20)

Therein lies the origin and validation of the doctrinal term "receive Jesus", in my opinion. When we repent of our sin and receive him into our hearts, it signals the beginning of a deep, intimate relationship with him for us.

SLE

[EricH]

shiloh357

That is why I started that post the way I did not fully understanding what was meant by "accepting".

I live in the Pacific NW. My brother is a Baptist and is taught here completely different than what you have said. They, as well a countless other churches here, are taught to "accept Jesus in your heart as your Lord and personal savior" and this is all they need for salvation completely leaving out baptism for remission of sins (Act 2:38), repentance, and working out our salvations (Philippians 2:12). They believe that once save always saved and that God automatically forgives every presumptuous sin I do whether there is repentance or not.

I have taught many people here in this state that believe this way. I have found literature and tracts all over town from various churches and bible book stores supporting this. This teaching allows people to hold onto thier sins and live in the day in and day out with out repentance because they are saved by grace and can't fall from no matter how much sin they fall into and/or hang onto.

2Pe 2:20-22 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known [it], to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog [is] turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

The South may be different than the NW in teaching.

As I posted earlier, there is a well known Scripture citation that speaks of repentence AND receiving Jesus:

"Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent. Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him and he with me." (Rev 3:19-20)

Therein lies the origin and validation of the doctrinal term "receive Jesus", in my opinion. When we repent of our sin and receive him into our hearts, it signals the beginning of a deep, intimate relationship with him for us.

SLE

For years I viewed this passage the same way. Have you ever considered that Revelation 3:20 is not a salvation passage? The context seems to be that the passage is speaking to the church at Laodicea. Christ is standing outside the door of His own church and is being kept out. There were 3 wells near Laodicea. One was know for its hot springs that had healing power. The other was a cold well known for it's refreshment. there was a third that was warm and full of minerals. It was know to induce vomiting in the drinkers. John was aying that the church at Laodicea had lost its abilty to spiritually refresh and to heal. It had become like the third well which was good for nothing. Jesus stands at the door to discipline (3:19) His church. The church was not answering

[Pilgrim7]

The book of revelation is symbolic of what is happening today. Yes there was a Laodicean church in the days of John. Yet it also refers to any church that is Lukewarm at any time. As there were 'lukewarm' churches then, there are so now. Any message of scripture applies whenever the condition applies. The true christian 'loves God with all the heart, mind, soul and strength' and if not, is in the 'lukewarm condition' and the message applies to him/her/them. There is a condition that Christ identified as 'dwawing nigh to Him with the lips, but the heart was far from Him'.

How is it that not many want to even consider that the Scriptures apply to people today. God warned us that 'wolves would creep into the flock' and that God would give all but the 'very elect over to a delusion' and so few even will consider the possibility of that happening. It was the church that God established that turned the people against Jesus while professing to serve God. When Jesus entered Jerusalem almost the whole city called Him King. It only took the Church a few days to turn most of the people against Him and to call for His crucifixion.

God Bless,

Dennis

[SpiritLedEd]

shiloh357

That is why I started that post the way I did not fully understanding what was meant by "accepting".

I live in the Pacific NW. My brother is a Baptist and is taught here completely different than what you have said. They, as well a countless other churches here, are taught to "accept Jesus in your heart as your Lord and personal savior" and this is all they need for salvation completely leaving out baptism for remission of sins (Act 2:38), repentance, and working out our salvations (Philippians 2:12). They believe that once save always saved and that God automatically forgives every presumptuous sin I do whether there is repentance or not.

I have taught many people here in this state that believe this way. I have found literature and tracts all over town from various churches and bible book stores supporting this. This teaching allows people to hold onto thier sins and live in the day in and day out with out repentance because they are saved by grace and can't fall from no matter how much sin they fall into and/or hang onto.

2Pe 2:20-22 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known [it], to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog [is] turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

The South may be different than the NW in teaching.

As I posted earlier, there is a well known Scripture citation that speaks of repentence AND receiving Jesus:

"Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent. Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him and he with me." (Rev 3:19-20)

Therein lies the origin and validation of the doctrinal term "receive Jesus", in my opinion. When we repent of our sin and receive him into our hearts, it signals the beginning of a deep, intimate relationship with him for us.

SLE

For years I viewed this passage the same way. Have you ever considered that Revelation 3:20 is not a salvation passage? The context seems to be that the passage is speaking to the church at Laodicea. Christ is standing outside the door of His own church and is being kept out. There were 3 wells near Laodicea. One was know for its hot springs that had healing power. The other was a cold well known for it's refreshment. there was a third that was warm and full of minerals. It was know to induce vomiting in the drinkers. John was aying that the church at Laodicea had lost its abilty to spiritually refresh and to heal. It had become like the third well which was good for nothing. Jesus stands at the door to discipline (3:19) His church. The church was not answering

EriicH,

Thanks for your input. You may very well be correct. However, since in verse 20 and in verse 21 the word "him" appears twice,"he" appears once, and "anyone" appears once (all singular), it seems to me that believing these verses to be salvation verses is still very much valid. The citation, then, would have a dual interpretation. I'm sure you will agree with me that the Lord is very good at "killing two birds with one stone."

SLE