• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Accepting Jesus as your Personal Savior.

Smoke

Done here.
One of the things that bewilders me about some forms of Christianity is their insistence on a view of salvation that is plainly an unscriptural innovation, contrary to all Christian tradition.

I've done my best to document the earliest occurrence of the phrase, "accept Jesus as your personal Savior," but I can't find anything earlier than 1844. I suspect the phrase doesn't predate John Wesley, and I wonder whether it predates J. N. Darby.

Can anybody document an occurrence of this phrase, or a close variant, before 1844? The earlier, the better.
 

retrorich

SUPER NOT-A-MOD
Then, there's the question: "Have you found Jesus?" I usually answer, "Find him? Hell, I didn't even know he was lost. :D
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
This is an interesting question. My denomination uses a variation of this phrase as part of our "confession of faith" that one repeats prior to baptism. Alexander Campbell, one of our founders, was baptized on June 12, 1812, following a "confession of faith in Jesus Christ as Lord." I don't know whether that confession was followed by the phrase in question.

The phrase I've heard here omits the word, "personal."
 

Smoke

Done here.
sojourner said:
This is an interesting question. My denomination uses a variation of this phrase as part of our "confession of faith" that one repeats prior to baptism. Alexander Campbell, one of our founders, was baptized on June 12, 1812, following a "confession of faith in Jesus Christ as Lord." I don't know whether that confession was followed by the phrase in question.

The phrase I've heard here omits the word, "personal."
And that's important, because there is -- I think -- a significant difference between confessing Jesus as Lord and accepting him as savior, and an even more significant difference between a savior and a personal savior.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
MidnightBlue said:
And that's important, because there is -- I think -- a significant difference between confessing Jesus as Lord and accepting him as savior, and an even more significant difference between a savior and a personal savior.

I think that you're right. I've assumed that the phrase "personal Savior" comes from some 19th or 20th century American preacher - most likely from the Second Great Awakening. It's a reflection of the self-sufficient American pathos, and an attempt to seperate Protestants from Catholics who have a communal approach to God and Church life.

Personally, it seems to me to be heretical.
 

polomint

New Member
Savior??????????

The language is English

Learn to use it properly, seeing this abomination hurts the true Anglo-Saxon warrior (or worrier).
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
polomint said:
Savior??????????

The language is English

Learn to use it properly, seeing this abomination hurts the true Anglo-Saxon warrior (or worrier).

Agrrrr! You are a guest on an American Forum here; when in Rome............... (seriously, I have two English languages, one for the forum, and one for England:D ).

I think the view of Christ as 'Our Saviour' is apt. Jesus died on the cross that we might be forgiven our sins.

I would call that 'saving humanity' from being punished. I see little to go from that step to calling Christ 'My Savior'
 

Smoke

Done here.
polomint said:
Savior??????????

The language is English

Learn to use it properly, seeing this abomination hurts the true Anglo-Saxon warrior (or worrier).
A real Anglo-Saxon would say Hæland, and wouldn't worry about the British spelling of the bastardized French Savior. But thanks for your concern. :D
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
MidnightBlue said:
A real Anglo-Saxon would say Hæland, and wouldn't worry about the British spelling of the bastardized French Savior. But thanks for your concern. :D

hahahaha - I prefer "Saviour" to "Savior" - my American spell checker has won in my mind!

From now on, Jesus is the Saviour of the world, and the American evangelicals' personal pan pizza.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
angellous_evangellous said:
I think that you're right. I've assumed that the phrase "personal Savior" comes from some 19th or 20th century American preacher - most likely from the Second Great Awakening. It's a reflection of the self-sufficient American pathos, and an attempt to seperate Protestants from Catholics who have a communal approach to God and Church life.

Personally, it seems to me to be heretical.

It's way egocentric and seems to go against the grain of the communion we all share in Christ.
 

e.r.m.

Church of Christ
One of the things that bewilders me about some forms of Christianity is their insistence on a view of salvation that is plainly an unscriptural innovation, contrary to all Christian tradition.

I've done my best to document the earliest occurrence of the phrase, "accept Jesus as your personal Savior," but I can't find anything earlier than 1844. I suspect the phrase doesn't predate John Wesley, and I wonder whether it predates J. N. Darby.

Can anybody document an occurrence of this phrase, or a close variant, before 1844? The earlier, the better.
Calvin in the 1520's advanced the time clause that we're saved "at the moment" we first believe and he originated the idea of "receiving Christ as savior", which in 1950 became "Accepting Christ as personal savior".
Institutes of the Christian Religion (John Calvin)
Pg. 487 "Their meaning is NOT, that by faith in Christ an opportunity is given us of procuring justifications OR acquiring salvation, but that BOTH are given us. Hence, so soon as you are ingrafted into Christ by faith, you are made a son of God, an heir of heaven, a
partaker of righteousness, a possessor of life, and (the better to manifest the false tenets of these
men) you have not obtained an OPPORTUNITY of meriting, but ALL the merits of Christ, since they are communicated to you."
Page 408 "Surely he who thus speaks shows, that as soon as any one repents he will be ready to receive him, and that the rigor which he exercises in chastising faults is wrung from him by our perverseness, since we should prevent him by a voluntary correction."
Page 154 "Hence, Bernard truly says, that, in the present day, a door of salvation is opened to us when we receive the gospel with our ears, just as by the same entrance, when thrown open to Satan, death was admitted."

3. What keeps false doctrines going?
Protestants go by "The gospel is simple, salvation is simple, truth is simple" - Simplicity is intoxicating. The less one has to do to be saved, the more attractive God is. Everything revolves around that. The problem is: They go with a simple but unscriptural Gospel. When teachings sacrifice truth for simplicity, people prefer simplicity.
To support this gospel, what has developed is:
B. Protestants, live by
"A doctrine does not have to be directly stated in the Bible as long as the concept is there."
With this premise, anybody could claim any concept in the Bible. This loose approach gives protestant leaders a lot of wiggle room in their doctrines. Exs. of round about doctrine - First act of obedience is justified by Matthew 3:15 and 1 John 2:6, in the abscence of a scripture saying "Baptism is a christian's first act of obedience." Protestant leaders also use Revelation 3:20 and 1 John 1:9 as salvation scriptures even though they are not telling the Christians to whom they're addressed how to be saved.
C. They use modern day expression and philosophical reasoning to analyze first century Biblical scripture. For example John 1:12 did not in any way refer to those receiving Jesus 'as Savior', but to those who accepted that Jesus's claims were true. Protestants capitalize on the word receive out of context to support the sinner's prayer. In John 12:49-50 Jesus delivered God's words just as God wanted them - they are good enough.
D. Protestants do not encourage their members to study out for themselves the scriptures on salvation, especially before "being saved."
G. Protestantism and psychology.
-The altar call and the brain.
-Book: Made to Stick. (How humans come to accept ideas and doctrines.)
Simple, unexpected, concrete, credible, emotional, & stories.
(E.g.- Several false myths people still believe in - We use only 10% of our brains, Mary Magdelene committed sexual sin, & shaving makes hair grow back thicker.) The same 6 psychological processes that promote myths make people believe in false Biblical teachings.
In essence, although not always intentional, large institutions package things in an easy to understand way, complete with catch phrases, lingo, and slogans so that everyone within a given culture can follow along. It creates a momentum like the phrase 'Go green'. It's very difficult for people to doubt the validity of a teaching once a momentum has started - Accept Jesus as your personal savior, oh how beautiful.
I was very surprised to find out that Sherlock Holmes never said "Elementary, my dear Watson."
 
Last edited:

e.r.m.

Church of Christ
One of the things that bewilders me about some forms of Christianity is their insistence on a view of salvation that is plainly an unscriptural innovation, contrary to all Christian tradition.

I've done my best to document the earliest occurrence of the phrase, "accept Jesus as your personal Savior," but I can't find anything earlier than 1844. I suspect the phrase doesn't predate John Wesley, and I wonder whether it predates J. N. Darby.

Can anybody document an occurrence of this phrase, or a close variant, before 1844? The earlier, the better.
Earliest I found was 1950. Would you please give me the reference for 1844 citing? Thank you.
 

e.r.m.

Church of Christ
Personal Savior or Personal Saviour either way is a derivation or deviation from Scripture, which never mentions personal Savior. It is therefore, under any case, an adulteration or corruption of Word.
 
Last edited:

e.r.m.

Church of Christ
I found something disturbing the other night. I visited a large protestant church twice recently. Once to their English Service and once to their Spanish service.
In the english service the church pastor quoted

Romans 1:16
Good News Translation (GNT)
16 I have complete confidence in the gospel; it is God's power to save all who believe, first the Jews and also the Gentiles.

and shortly after they did the invitation for people to invite Jesus into their hearts.

The next night the spanish pastor gave a phenomenal lesson on fasting and a short video clip on a family in need in Honduras. It was convicting, it was down to earth, and it was scriptural, dead on. He deserves credit for a great lesson.
But then this pastor did the invitation for people to invite Jesus into their hearts. The invitation had absolutely nothing to do with his lesson. He gave NO scripture reference for the invitation.

Between these two lessons, it confirms what I researched previously. Protestants do not teach salvation from the scriptures with any kind of thoroughness or responsibility. Either they believe that since they already know the scriptures, they don't really have to teach them, or that their audience has no need to know the actual scriptures to be saved.

In addition, Jesus told people to estimate the costs of the decision to follow Him. Luke 14:25-33.
In these two services, there were no costs counted.

Both messages and the singing were highly emotional (not a bad thing) except that I believe it completely incapacitated everyone from any sort of critical thinking or scriptural analysis, both are necessary for making a genuine and sound lifetime decision to follow Christ and/or be saved.
I was a first-time attendee to both services, yet they would have accepted my "Inviting Jesus into my heart" based soley on their invitation - and Romans 16. To be fair, in the english service one of the pastors gave a short description (without scripture) that the gospel is simple, that God loves you and gives you the opportunity have a personal relationship with Him.

My conclusion, for this church, is that when it comes to salvation, they Emphasize experience and Deemphasize scripture. A very dangerous recipe.
 
Last edited:

CynthiaCypher

Well-Known Member
In early Christianity Jesus is the savoir of the whole of humanity rather than a personal savior. Christianity of today would seem to be heretical to the early Christians who viewed salvation to be collective rather than individualistic.
 

e.r.m.

Church of Christ
In early Christianity Jesus is the savoir of the whole of humanity rather than a personal savior. Christianity of today would seem to be heretical to the early Christians who viewed salvation to be collective rather than individualistic.
Yup the personal Savior catch phrase sure didn't exist back then.
 

dyanaprajna2011

Dharmapala
Like most modern day, western conservative Protestant ideas, there's not much that pre-dates the Second Great Awakening. The earliest usage of the phrase, from my knowledge, goes back the the tent revivals during this time period, particularly amongst Baptists and Methodists. This goes hand in hand with the "altar call", which also dates from this time period, and developed in much the same way. During early Christianity, when a person wished to be counted among the church, they made a confession faith just before their baptism, if they weren't born into the church to begin with. Like Cynthia pointed out, salvation in early Christianity was focused on the whole community, and wasn't just a personal, individualistic thing.
 
Top