Logistics of accepting Jesus

[Katieb123]

Hello everyone!

I recently came across an article that I thought was very interesting: Why do we have to “accept” Christ to make our salvation count?

The part that stuck with me was the original question:

“Why do we have to “accept” Christ to make our salvation count? If Christ’s sacrifice is wholly sufficient, why do I have to do something (“believe”) to get it? Doesn’t that make it not truly “Christ alone”?”

This is something I’ve never thought about, but found interesting. I understand what she is saying, and have never heard that perspective before.

I’m not ashamed to admit that the answer she was given went over my head, so I just thought I’d post it here to see if anyone wanted to analyze and dissect the answer that was given, or if anyone wanted to try to answer it themselves!

 

[MikeDwight]

That's the sweetest sentiment I've heard. Considering we took "Jesus Loves me" This I know, to the international mission field of Korea, I don't have too much to say about it. You mean his offspring choosing to accept Jesus. I mean that's the difficult part.

 

[PureX]

... "Accepting Jesus" as what? Until we clarify the question, the answer will remain enigmatic.

 

[wizanda]

“Why do we have to “accept” Christ to make our salvation count?

When we remove Christianity (John, Paul, and Simon) as it being a fabricated Pharisaic Beast (jesus)...

Then we can understand that Yeshua means Salvation in Hebrew, and we see the Salvation of God interacting with mankind, by separating the Red Sea (Exodus 14:13), defeating the Children of Ammon (2 Chronicles 20:17), putting its Spirit into David as Yehoshua to show that God can promise (Isaiah 52:10-14, Psalms 89:19-21), and do mighty things.

So we put our trust in Salvation coming from God, not a man, not a sacrifice, not a name, else we defile the Law in some way.

If Christ’s sacrifice is wholly sufficient, why do I have to do something (“believe”) to get it?

Believing a man can act as a human sacrifice isn't Kosher/Legal.

Doesn’t that make it not truly “Christ alone”?”

Believing in a dead God, rather than the living God is what the Bible is a test for... Yeshua came to teach knowledge to save people, not to die as an animal sacrificial offering.

In my opinion.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Hello everyone!

I recently came across an article that I thought was very interesting: Why do we have to “accept” Christ to make our salvation count?

The part that stuck with me was the original question:

“Why do we have to “accept” Christ to make our salvation count? If Christ’s sacrifice is wholly sufficient, why do I have to do something (“believe”) to get it? Doesn’t that make it not truly “Christ alone”?”

This is something I’ve never thought about, but found interesting. I understand what she is saying, and have never heard that perspective before.

I’m not ashamed to admit that the answer she was given went over my head, so I just thought I’d post it here to see if anyone wanted to analyze and dissect the answer that was given, or if anyone wanted to try to answer it themselves!

You may not be aware of the Same Faith Debates area where you can specify you want to debate with Christians. Same Faith Debates You can even specify Protestant Christians, and then maybe you will get answers that you find more relevant to your questions.

There is also a problem with your post in that it presumes everyone who reads the biblical canon walks away with a particular version of protestant Christianity. That is not what happens. Instead it raises questions, and there are various conclusions and different people have different interpretations. The article linked in the OP doesn't merely go over your head. Its unsupported. In other words they have utterly failed to support their argument. A good argument can at least be followed even if you disagree with it. That one can't. It is a failure.

My opinion is that to treat the subject from the biblical canon would require tossing the article and starting over.

 

[pearl]

“Why do we have to “accept” Christ to make our salvation count? If Christ’s sacrifice is wholly sufficient, why do I have to do something (“believe”) to get it? Doesn’t that make it not truly “Christ alone”?”

It is God who offers salvation, and saves those who accept. Depending on how one interprets the Incarnation, Jesus is the ultimate sin offering, or the love of God for his creation in the desire to be in solidarity with us.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It is God who offers salvation, and saves those who accept.

Is it? The only times I've ever been offered salvation was by people.

 

[Katieb123]

You may not be aware of the Same Faith Debates area where you can specify you want to debate with Christians. Same Faith Debates You can even specify Protestant Christians, and then maybe you will get answers that you find more relevant to your questions.

There is also a problem with your post in that it presumes everyone who reads the biblical canon walks away with a particular version of protestant Christianity. That is not what happens. Instead it raises questions, and there are various conclusions and different people have different interpretations. The article linked in the OP doesn't merely go over your head. Its unsupported. In other words they have utterly failed to support their argument. A good argument can at least be followed even if you disagree with it. That one can't. It is a failure.

My opinion is that to treat the subject from the biblical canon would require tossing the article and starting over.

AH yes, you’re right. I think my questions should’ve been posted in Same Faith Debates, my bad!

 

[Brickjectivity]

AH yes, you’re right. I think my questions should’ve been posted in Same Faith Debates, my bad!

Make sure to put it in the title whom you are addressing, and then staff will know how to moderate if there is an infraction.

 

[pearl]

Is it? The only times I've ever been offered salvation was by people.

Throughout both Hebrew and Christian Scriptures God has intervened through 'prople'.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Throughout both Hebrew and Christian Scriptures God has intervened through 'prople'.

... which would still have the offer made by people, not God.

Maybe by people who claim to speak for God, but people who claim to speak for God don't necessarily actually speak for God.

 

[pearl]

Maybe by people who claim to speak for God, but people who claim to speak for God don't necessarily actually speak for God.

Unfortunately, this is very true. But I was referring more to the actions of those in Scripture which were apart from the norm yet achieved a divine purpose, women in Hebrew Scripture etc.

 

[Muffled]

Hello everyone!

I recently came across an article that I thought was very interesting: Why do we have to “accept” Christ to make our salvation count?

The part that stuck with me was the original question:

“Why do we have to “accept” Christ to make our salvation count? If Christ’s sacrifice is wholly sufficient, why do I have to do something (“believe”) to get it? Doesn’t that make it not truly “Christ alone”?”

This is something I’ve never thought about, but found interesting. I understand what she is saying, and have never heard that perspective before.

I’m not ashamed to admit that the answer she was given went over my head, so I just thought I’d post it here to see if anyone wanted to analyze and dissect the answer that was given, or if anyone wanted to try to answer it themselves!

I believe the answer is that God is not forcing anyone to be saved.

 

[Muffled]

... "Accepting Jesus" as what? Until we clarify the question, the answer will remain enigmatic.

I believe the whole statement would be: "accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior."

 

[Muffled]

Is it? The only times I've ever been offered salvation was by people.

Then I believe you can consider yourself offered salvation by me also.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Then I believe you can consider yourself offered salvation by me also.

I'd rather you didn't. Proselytizing isn't allowed on RF.

 

[PureX]

I believe the whole statement would be: "accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior."

I still have no idea what that means.

 

[Jainarayan]

I still have no idea what that means.

Same here. I don't understand what that means. I don't think I ever did, even when I was Christian.

 

[Katieb123]

I believe the answer is that God is not forcing anyone to be saved.

Yes I think that free will is a large part of it! I do wonder though: why did God give us the choice to be saved if He knew we would choose incorrectly? Why not save everyone, and only condemn those who directly reject Him? Just a thought!

 

[Skwim]

Yes I think that free will is a large part of it! I do wonder though: why did God give us the choice to be saved if He knew we would choose incorrectly? Why not save everyone, and only condemn those who directly reject Him? Just a thought!

As you say, knowing who would be saveable and who would not be, why not insure the germinal or embryonic form of the unsaveable simply miscarry? Why allow a human develop so as to inherit eternal damnation? Seems darn evil to me.. . . . . . . . Of course, god did say he creates evil, and maybe this is just a part of that cruel delight.

.