Jesus as personal Lord and savior

[babylonsfalling]

I don’t think Catholics forget that faith is essential to salvation – but not Faith Alone (Sola Fide). Protestantism is built on the Solas – Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide being foremost.

It’s the Protestant mantra of “Where is that in the Bible?” or “That’s not biblical” that I am responding to when I say “accepting Jesus Christ as personal Lord and Savior” is not in the Bible. For many, their idea of “confessing Christ with your lips” is limited to the emotional experience of being “born again” by “accepting Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.” The position of (many) Protestants is that if it’s not explicit in the Bible, it’s not Christian doctrine. But they don’t hold that true for themselves. Protestants have many beliefs and practices that are not in the Bible.

Jim Dandy
Former “Born Again” Baptist

The problem is they aren’t REALLY all that Biblical. They will certainly use the Bible as ammo IF it supports whatever belief they might be arguing. But if their belief isn’t Biblical, they’ll do it anyway. If their belief actually goes so far as to blatantly contradict what’s in the Bible, they’ll apparently just ignore that particular passage, while still calling themselves Biblical or course

Former non Catholics are telling me they never heard a sermon on John 6, which UNDENIABLY supports the Real Presence. I never did either but I was never in one particular non Catholic church for a really long period of time so I never made an issue of it. Apparently though, John 6 on the Real Presence is just ignored by most non Catholic churches altogether.

 

[JRKH]

The problem is they aren’t REALLY all that Biblical. They will certainly use the Bible as ammo IF it supports whatever belief they might be arguing. But if their belief isn’t Biblical, they’ll do it anyway. If their belief actually goes so far as to blatantly contradict what’s in the Bible, they’ll apparently just ignore that particular passage, while still calling themselves Biblical or course

Former non Catholics are telling me they never heard a sermon on John 6, which UNDENIABLY supports the Real Presence. I never did either but I was never in one particular non Catholic church for a really long period of time so I never made an issue of it. Apparently though, John 6 on the Real Presence is just ignored by most non Catholic churches altogether.

Best to be careful in saying John 6 UNDENIABLY supports the real presence…I’ve seen well educated protestants argue quite well that it does NOT support the real presence…In other words, they have looked at it and come to a different conclusion…and the DENY it…
Not saying they are right, but just saying that some have looked at it and will staunchly deny that it supports the real presence.

Peace
James

 

[Jim_Dandy]

Best to be careful in saying John 6 UNDENIABLY supports the real presence…I’ve seen well educated protestants argue quite well that it does NOT support the real presence…In other words, they have looked at it and come to a different conclusion…and the DENY it…
Not saying they are right, but just saying that some have looked at it and will staunchly deny that it supports the real presence.

Peace
James

This is because of the Protestant doctrine of private interpretation of Scripture. Each individual Protestant is his own authority about what the Bible means! Those who deny it look at the texts with come-lately Protestant, not historical, lenses.

The relevant question is not how many ways the Scriptures can be interpreted – which we know from the number of Protestant denominations is many thousands – but what did the first Christians who learned from the Apostles own lips believe? They believed Christ was truly present in the consecrated Bread and Wine.

Not only John 6, written c. 90 - 100, but the earlier words of Paul in l Corinthians 10 and 11, written c. A.D. 56, together with the teachings of the early Church and belief of the first Christians, offer conclusive proof. But Protestants still insist, “I’ll read it my way.”

But they are absolutely correct; they do not, in their own ecclesial communities, have the Real Presence because they lack validly ordained priests in apostolic succession required to confect the Eucharist. But for Protestants to claim that Catholics and the Orthodox do not have the Eucharist – the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ – is absurd.

Jim Dandy

 

[JRKH]

This is because of the Protestant doctrine of private interpretation of Scripture. Each individual Protestant is his own authority about what the Bible means! Those who deny it look at the texts with come-lately Protestant, not historical, lenses.

The relevant question is not how many ways the Scriptures can be interpreted – which we know from the number of Protestant denominations is many thousands – but what did the first Christians who learned from the Apostles own lips believe? They believed Christ was truly present in the consecrated Bread and Wine.

Not only John 6, written c. 90 - 100, but the earlier words of Paul in l Corinthians 10 and 11, written c. A.D. 56, together with the teachings of the early Church and belief of the first Christians, offer conclusive proof. But Protestants still insist, “I’ll read it my way.”

But they are absolutely correct; they do not, in their own ecclesial communities, have the Real Presence because they lack validly ordained priests in apostolic succession required to confect the Eucharist. But for Protestants to claim that Catholics and the Orthodox do not have the Eucharist – the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ – is absurd.

Jim Dandy

Hey - you don’t have to convince me…:thumbsup:
My only point was that it may not be technically correct to say that John 6 UNDENIABLY teaches the real presence since there are those who skillfully and tenaciously DO deny it teaches this.

Peace
James

 

[fhansen]

Not only John 6, written c. 90 - 100, but the earlier words of Paul in l Corinthians 10 and 11, written c. A.D. 56, together with the teachings of the early Church and belief of the first Christians, offer conclusive proof. But Protestants still insist, “I’ll read it my way.”

But maybe the real point is that, even if historical literature were not conclusive regarding a given issue, the CC has the right teaching in any case. The evidence simply does not have to be-maybe can’t be-100% conclusive.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Catholics have more than jsut a personal relationship with Christ–they have a Body, Blood, soul, and Divinity relationship whith Jesus that is INFINITELY more personal!

Tell that to a Protestant the next time they ask you if you have a personal relationship th Christ!

Tell them that through the Catholic faith you can know Jesus INFINITELY more personaly than you ever could by cracker and grape juice Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity denying Protestant symbolic religion ever could!

 

[UhaveAnswers]

In addition to claiming salvation through Jesus Christ the idea of being born again (accepting Jesus as my Lord and Savior) can be a defining moment in ones life. Being born Catholic many years ago, it was’t until April, 1983 that I realized that I needed to get off “the fence” and live my life with Jesus as my focus, my center, the main root of my life.
This, to me, was a pivitol moment in my life. I then, for myself (through God’s love), decided to “accept Jesus as my Lord and Savior”. Call it what you like (born again?), but I became a new man, not perfect by any means, but definitely new and different than before. I saw Catholism in a new light because I then had the fuel to want to learn more about my faith. Praise be to God!

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Protestants tend to invariably be right in what they affirm, but wrong in what they deny. There is no denying that a personal relationship with one’s Lord and savior is the goal of every Christian. The problem is when the “personal relationship with my Lord and Savior” becomes “my personal relationship with my personal Lord and Savior.” Images of the movie “Dogma” and the thumbs-up “Buddy Jesus” spring to mind.

Because of this exclusivist sense of either/or vs the Catholic both/and, their entire theology will become affected. Paul as a Jew-turned-Christian, for instance, would have understood salvation in corporate terms, in line with the prophets speaking of a restored 12 tribes coming to the promised land in a “New Exodus.” Does this rule out the truth of the individual relationship with God? Of course not. However the individualistic attitude toward sin and salvation (partly due to the introspective St. Augustine) led to Luther’s extreme focus on the individual in regard to sin. A solid ecclesiology of the Church as the One Body of Christ is usually lost or watered down to some degree, and the Church as institution becomes a hindrance to one’s relationship with Jesus, rather than the very Body of Jesus Himself.

This strongly individualistic sense is precisely why protestants are prone to take the verse stating that “all have sinned” as a proof-text denying Mary’s immaculate conception. They focus on the individual sense at the expense of the corporate. There have also been some interesting works written about how the uniquely American cultural phenomenon of the “rugged individualist” has largely predisposed many Americans to favor protestantism. I think the implications are worth considering.

 

[stevekehl]

I think Catholics who have spent their life going to church and following the teachings of their faith have a hard time understanding why Protestants talk so much about being born again. Not everyone grows up in a church. Many people grow up in broken or screwed up families and accepting Christ is truly like being born again, Paul called it becoming a new creature, the old dying and all things made new (2 Corinthians 5:17). It’s been called other things, seeing the light, coming to Jesus, gettin’ right with God.
UHaveAnswers gave the Catholic version of being born again. One day it dawns on you that you aren’t lining your life right. That can range from “I need to completely change my life” to “99 percent isn’t enough, I have to give 100 percent.”
Whatever you call it, gettin gsaved is easy, living the Christian life is hard. There have been some comments about saved in a moment or once saved always saved and I want to clear that up. No Protestant church teaches say a prayer and your saved, go back to your old behavior secure in the knowledge that no matter how many drugs you do, or people you sleep with, or crimes you commit, or abortions you have (or perform) you are going to heaven. People who think this are deluding themselves, they think baptism is magic water or something. There is a period of learning, where brothers and sisters are expected to help new Christians learn about their faith, but all Protestant churches teach holy living (well I guess some Episcoplian and United Church of Christ have become satisfied with holey living).

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

The glaring problem with Protestants face with subjecting Christ to a “personal” Savior is that it fully implies an esoteric mentality, and thus faces the problem why we have multiplicity of beings and yet corporeal existence can be justified for a single individual in this belief. I seem to remember He came for the salvation of the world. He calls us to a church of one, throughout all the world and to teach and baptize people of all nations. Though his hands were transfixed for each and every single person, the individual is still united in purpose with many.

Jesus is the universal Lord and Savior and all that exists was made by Him, ergo all that exists is ultimately His whether an individual accepts His Kingship over us or not does not change anything universally true about Him.

 

[stevekehl]

The glaring problem with Protestants face with subjecting Christ to a “personal” Savior is that it fully implies an esoteric mentality, and thus faces the problem why we have multiplicity of beings and yet corporeal existence can be justified for a single individual in this belief. I seem to remember He came for the salvation of the world. He calls us to a church of one, throughout all the world and to teach and baptize people of all nations. Though his hands were transfixed for each and every single person, the individual is still united in purpose with many.

Jesus is the universal Lord and Savior and all that exists was made by Him, ergo all that exists is ultimately His whether an individual accepts His Kingship over us or not does not change anything universally true about Him.

You are making this too complicated. In John’s Gospel Jesus says that He is in God and God is in Him and He is in those who believe in Him. In Luke’s Gospel Mary calls Jesus my Savior. For Protestants the decision to follow Christ is a personal, life changing one.

 

[JRKH]

You are making this too complicated. In John’s Gospel Jesus says that He is in God and God is in Him and He is in those who believe in Him. In Luke’s Gospel Mary calls Jesus my Savior. For Protestants the decision to follow Christ is a personal, life changing one.

As well it should be for all who follow Christ.

I must be honest and say that, as a Catholic, I have no problem with the idea of Christ being my “personal” Lord and Savior. He is, after all, the savior of my person.

It seems to me that the problem with the expression or question, “Have you accepted Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior”, has to do more with the general theology and faith tradition that uses it - that being the more “evangelical” types.
It becomes one of those “catch phrases” that, when heard, calls to mind various doctrines that Catholics do have serious issues with.

Any Baptized Catholic who truly seeks to follow the Lord, when asked if they have accepted Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior can AND SHOULD answer with a resounding YES!!

Peace
James

 

[Prayer_Warrior]

As well it should be for all who follow Christ.

I must be honest and say that, as a Catholic, I have no problem with the idea of Christ being my “personal” Lord and Savior. He is, after all, the savior of my person.

It seems to me that the problem with the expression or question, “Have you accepted Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior”, has to do more with the general theology and faith tradition that uses it - that being the more “evangelical” types.
It becomes one of those “catch phrases” that, when heard, calls to mind various doctrines that Catholics do have serious issues with.

Any Baptized Catholic who truly seeks to follow the Lord, when asked if they have accepted Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior can AND SHOULD answer with a resounding YES!!

Peace
James

Exactly my thoughts. I always answer a resounding yes if I’m asked this question. I don’t think it is a denial of the universality of Jesus as Savior at all. In my opinion, it’s merely an acknowledgment of what He means to you personally and what He has done for you personally. Salvation is personal. Jesus came to redeem all mankind, but not everyone accepts the gift. This expression clearly says “I’ve personally accepted the gift of salvation and I’m confessing it with my lips”. Obviously, a Catholic does not agree in OSAS which sort of goes along with this statement in evangelical circles. But we can agree with the statement itself, proclaim it ourselves, and then discuss with our evangelical brothers what we believe about salvation.

 

[JRKH]

Exactly my thoughts. I always answer a resounding yes if I’m asked this question. I don’t think it is a denial of the universality of Jesus as Savior at all. In my opinion, it’s merely an acknowledgment of what He means to you personally and what He has done for you personally. Salvation is personal. Jesus came to redeem all mankind, but not everyone accepts the gift. This expression clearly says “I’ve personally accepted the gift of salvation and I’m confessing it with my lips”. Obviously, a Catholic does not agree in OSAS which sort of goes along with this statement in evangelical circles. But we can agree with the statement itself, proclaim it ourselves, and then discuss with our evangelical brothers what we believe about salvation.

Nicely put.

Jesus did indeed come to save the world, “one soul at a time” as it were. So it is indeed very personal.

If we answer the question asked with an affirmative, this does not mean that we agree with any other belief of the person asking the question. It merely answers, honestly, the question that they asked.
Then, as you say, if the conversation continues some of these other issues and differences might come up.

Peace
James

 

[TimothyH]

I have no problem with the “Personal Lord and Savoir” doctrine except that too many focus only on the savior part and ignore the Lord part.

-Tim-

 

[JRKH]

I have no problem with the “Personal Lord and Savoir” doctrine except that too many focus only on the savior part and ignore the Lord part.

-Tim-

Nicely put.
And this attitude is certainly not restricted to any one tradition.

Peace
James

 

[YourAverageJoe]

I have been told I must accept “Jesus as personal Lord and Savior”. But I have also read that that concept is not in The Bible. Now my friend has said that whereas those exact words may noy appear in The Bible there are many places where the concept is spelled out. I need some help. Is it in The Bible or isn’t it? When did “accepting Jesus as personal Lord and savior” become the mark of “being a Christian” or has it always been a requirement?

as Catholics there is abolutely no problem with refering to our Lord as personal Lord and Savior. The problem is that some fundamentalists groups teach this is all you need for salvation and nothing more…accept Jesus in your heart and you are done they say.

 

[JRKH]

as Catholics there is abolutely no problem with refering to our Lord as personal Lord and Savior. The problem is that some fundamentalists groups teach this is all you need for salvation and nothing more…accept Jesus in your heart and you are done they say.

And in the most basic and simplest sense this is true. What is often missed are the “evidences” of having accepted Jesus and that Jesus is residing in the heart. Things like the desire to be baptized and become a new person, to do works of charity and obedience, etc.
Instead these things are pulled apart, dissected so that works are separated (not needed), sin is forgiven even before you commit it and even water baptism is seen as unnecessary in some groups.

I’m generalizing badly here but this IS the impression one gets from looking at and talking to some of these evangelical Christians.

Peace
James

 

[stevekehl]

And in the most basic and simplest sense this is true. What is often missed are the “evidences” of having accepted Jesus and that Jesus is residing in the heart. Things like the desire to be baptized and become a new person, to do works of charity and obedience, etc.
Instead these things are pulled apart, dissected so that works are separated (not needed), sin is forgiven even before you commit it and even water baptism is seen as unnecessary in some groups.

I’m generalizing badly here but this IS the impression one gets from looking at and talking to some of these evangelical Christians.

Peace
James

I think there is some confusion here about becoming a Christian and living as a Christian. Evangelicals will tell you that when you accept Christ as your Savior you have become a Christian. However, that doesn’t mean new Christians will be preaching on the square the next day. Learning to be a Christian takes time, and depending where you start, you may not appear to be a very good Christian but still have made progress. We have a young lady at our church who came from a terrible home life. Her mother had been married several times and had several live in boyfriends. No stability or direction at home, her sister is currently married to one of her mothers ex-boyfriends. She is currently living with a different sister because her mother moved out of state with her current boyfriend. But, she was baptised almost a year ago and has been coming to church regularly. A couple weeks ago she got a few phone calls during church and was obviously upset. I aksed her what was wrong and she said “My fuuu… stupid brother in law is driving me crazy.” Now most people would be shocked that someone almost said the f-word, let alone in church, but for her that was progress, she stopped herself from swearing. Six months earlier she would have said the f-word and probably a few extra curses along with it.
Be patient with people, even if you don’t see what you consider evidences. Remember Paul’s letter to the Romans
Rom 14:12 And so, each of us must give an account to God for what we do. 13 We must stop judging others. We must also make up our minds not to upset anyone’s faith.
Instead of looking for reasons to criticize look for reason’s to encourage.

 

[JRKH]

I think there is some confusion here about becoming a Christian and living as a Christian. Evangelicals will tell you that when you accept Christ as your Savior you have become a Christian. However, that doesn’t mean new Christians will be preaching on the square the next day. Learning to be a Christian takes time, and depending where you start, you may not appear to be a very good Christian but still have made progress. We have a young lady at our church who came from a terrible home life. Her mother had been married several times and had several live in boyfriends. No stability or direction at home, her sister is currently married to one of her mothers ex-boyfriends. She is currently living with a different sister because her mother moved out of state with her current boyfriend. But, she was baptised almost a year ago and has been coming to church regularly. A couple weeks ago she got a few phone calls during church and was obviously upset. I aksed her what was wrong and she said “My fuuu… stupid brother in law is driving me crazy.” Now most people would be shocked that someone almost said the f-word, let alone in church, but for her that was progress, she stopped herself from swearing. Six months earlier she would have said the f-word and probably a few extra curses along with it.
Be patient with people, even if you don’t see what you consider evidences. Remember Paul’s letter to the Romans
Rom 14:12 And so, each of us must give an account to God for what we do. 13 We must stop judging others. We must also make up our minds not to upset anyone’s faith.
Instead of looking for reasons to criticize look for reason’s to encourage.

A wonderful testimony - and prayers for the continued sanctification of our sister in Christ.

I agree that there IS much confusion in understanding each other. This becomes even worse when one “Bible Christian” says one thing and another “Bible Christian” says another……That is why I made the point of saying that I was generalizing badly…

But the fact is that I have had individual Christians make the claims that were in my post.

Peace
James