If a Person Accepts Jesus is the Savior,

[notuptome]

There is a difference between believing in Jesus and actually believing Jesus.

Well it is not enough to believe that this Jesus is the Savior or a Savior. One must believe all that scripture teaches of Jesus as the Christ of God. Jesus must be our personal Savior and we must be known of Him as our Savior.

With the heart man believes and with the mouth confession is made. Confessing without a heart knowledge is not sufficient. Romans 10 gives good teaching on the matter.

Many dead religions will accept Christ as a good teacher or a sent one from God but deny His deity.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Magenta]

 

[Noose]

Accepting is believing IMO. Even if they are different, they could be both in vain as Paul says:

1 Cor 15:1Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

 

[know1]

I wasn't quoting John, I was quoting Luke. But if Luke isn't convincing how about Matthew? 26:39Matthew 26:39 And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt. King James Version

Matthew 26:39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will." New international Version.

Matt 26:39Going a little farther, He fell facedown and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me. Yet not as I will, but as You will.” Berean Study Bible

There are four Gospels and many translations for reasons. You should try and learn more before you comment.

There's a problem with your argument.
It's not what the original argument was about.
You have digressed from the original argument and injected scripture I have no problems with, by itself, as I have already stated.
I gave my reasons, only for you and one other to ignore them and continue on with your narrative, as though I never said anything, or as though it completely went over your head.
I have no problem praying for my Father's will to be done, WHEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WILL IS.
But when I do, I go to the promises of His word.
I need some solid ground to stand on.
Bu placing a conditional conjunction with a mystery within the promises of God, it become quicksand.
You fall with the condition or rather failure.
The whole purpose people, like yourself, HAVE TO inject the phrase, "if it be God's will", is to explain away your failures and that of others, while revealing your profound ignorance of what faith is and how it works.
One cannot stand on or have any faith in iffy promises.
Knowing what God is going to do is part of what faith is.
If you don't know, then the best you can do is hope it all works out for your good or that of others.
And why be so selective with where God's will is placed?
I know plenty of salvation promises that could use the same treatment of perverting and corrupting scripture, just to make it fit their doctrinal beliefs.
I take the promises, AS IS, and build my foundation on that.
I get results with the promises as they are now, why don't you?

 

[presidente]

John wrote in John 1 that to as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His name.

So lets say you come across a Mexican gardener named Jesus, and you say, "I believe in this guy" does that save you? No, we have to believe in the Word made flesh, the same Jesus.

If we read what the apostles preached, they preached Jesus, the Messiah and Lord who died for our sins and that God raised Him from the dead.

Nowhere does the Bible say you receive Jesus by saying, "I receive Jesus." It does not say if you have no idea Who Jesus is or what He did and repeat the words "I receive Jesus" after a preacher that you are saved.

Paul does quote the Old Testament where it says that it shall come to pass that whosoever calleth upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. But in the same chapter, Romans 10, Paul asks how then shall they call on Him Whom they have not believed, and how shall they hear without a preacher? This 'calling' is calling in faith, not the sinner taking God's name in vain if he hits his hand thumb with a hammer.

 

[calibob]

There's a problem with your argument.
It's not what the original argument was about.
You have digressed from the original argument and injected scripture I have no problems with, by itself, as I have already stated.
I gave my reasons, only for you and one other to ignore them and continue on with your narrative, as though I never said anything, or as though it completely went over your head.
I have no problem praying for my Father's will to be done, WHEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WILL IS.
But when I do, I go to the promises of His word.
I need some solid ground to stand on.
Bu placing a conditional conjunction with a mystery within the promises of God, it become quicksand.
You fall with the condition or rather failure.
The whole purpose people, like yourself, HAVE TO inject the phrase, "if it be God's will", is to explain away your failures and that of others, while revealing your profound ignorance of what faith is and how it works.
One cannot stand on or have any faith in iffy promises.
Knowing what God is going to do is part of what faith is.
If you don't know, then the best you can do is hope it all works out for your good or that of others.
And why be so selective with where God's will is placed?
I know plenty of salvation promises that could use the same treatment of perverting and corrupting scripture, just to make it fit their doctrinal beliefs.
I take the promises, AS IS, and build my foundation on that.
I get results with the promises as they are now, why don't you?

Well then I misunderstood the point that you were trying to make. My beliefs come from studying the bible, payer and discernment. I have witnessed many trying to treat the teachings of the lord and the epistles as if they were some sort of magic book and it's offensive. He makes the choices about what and how he answers. Not us. We must remain humble because we don't know if he has a better idea or when he knows something we don't. He dosn't take orders from us. Rather we should learn to listen for him and seek his will not our own.

I've been out on the bus for 5 hours to make 3 stops. I'm not up for a debate at this time. My titanium knee implant hurts and I've been on my feet too long. If you can formulate a logical point in less the 50 words or so I'll be back. The scriptures don't exactly match because the writers were different people who saw and heard different things and there are many variables or there would only be one version of the gospels not four or Paul could have summarized his 14 letters also or didn't you notice that he dealt with different issues as they came up? We can't adequately study with a 1 track mind. Good day sir.

 

[presidente]

Jesus must be our personal Savior

Where does the Bible say Jesus is your Personal Savior.

 

[know1]

Where does the Bible say Jesus is your Personal Savior.

Joh 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

How can a person receive Jesus as their lord and savior, if they don't receive Him personally, for themselves?

 

[know1]

Well then I misunderstood the point that you were trying to make. My beliefs come from studying the bible, payer and discernment. I have witnessed many trying to treat the teachings of the lord and the epistles as if they were some sort of magic book and it's offensive. He makes the choices about what and how he answers. Not us. We must remain humble because we don't know if he has a better idea or when he knows something we don't. He dosn't take orders from us. Rather we should learn to listen for him and seek his will not our own.

Discern this.

Mar 11:23 For verily I say unto you,
That whosoever shall say unto
this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea;
and shall not doubt in his heart,
but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass;
he shall have whatsoever he saith.

This is a truth of the word of God, all by itself.

 

[Mii]

There's a problem with your argument.
It's not what the original argument was about.
You have digressed from the original argument and injected scripture I have no problems with, by itself, as I have already stated.
I gave my reasons, only for you and one other to ignore them and continue on with your narrative, as though I never said anything, or as though it completely went over your head.
I have no problem praying for my Father's will to be done, WHEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WILL IS.
But when I do, I go to the promises of His word.
I need some solid ground to stand on.
Bu placing a conditional conjunction with a mystery within the promises of God, it become quicksand.
You fall with the condition or rather failure.
The whole purpose people, like yourself, HAVE TO inject the phrase, "if it be God's will", is to explain away your failures and that of others, while revealing your profound ignorance of what faith is and how it works.
One cannot stand on or have any faith in iffy promises.
Knowing what God is going to do is part of what faith is.
If you don't know, then the best you can do is hope it all works out for your good or that of others.
And why be so selective with where God's will is placed?
I know plenty of salvation promises that could use the same treatment of perverting and corrupting scripture, just to make it fit their doctrinal beliefs.
I take the promises, AS IS, and build my foundation on that.
I get results with the promises as they are now, why don't you?

I have a picture of what you are saying and I don't think you and @calibob are saying different things. I am quite correct in believing that you meditate on what the will of the father is before you pray yes? As it lines up with scripture...from your own personal understanding at the time as well as confirmation and what I call "agreement" within the body that seems to hum as a type of accountability within our own personal walk?

^that last statement it's like the body holds me accountable as a collective when I get too personally motivated.


and that you are NOT asserting a "million dollar mansion" model that was already mentioned in the thread?

Do you think it's fair to assert that "whims" are not what the mountain verse is speaking of?

 

[Mii]

@The OP though. I think it depends.

The wage parable of the people working for less time and receiving the same reward could very well factor in. At least that's what came to mind.


Someone that's spent 10 decades growing in the Lord would feasibly know more than someone that is 1 hour "new". Or like the thief on the cross.

In moments where this is a question I wonder, why the poll, why the thread? It's helpful for me at least to be more open about it.


Phillipians 2:12 and the surrounding context is a great place to sort of sit for a bit when (if you are like me) you focus sometimes on the diversity of the body that it can cause insecurity. Like our relationships are all different but the same root, and there should be some sort of uniformity but with some people you have to dig a bit, and I'll admit at times I focus on surface level stuff, peering at another believer that says a certain thing or believes a certain thing and on starts this long process where I go back to that when I don't know what anyone is really doing specifically and very rarely collectively. Sort of stop thinking and focus on the simplicity that is in Jesus

 

[mailmandan]

Well it is not enough to believe that this Jesus is the Savior or a Savior. One must believe all that scripture teaches of Jesus as the Christ of God. Jesus must be our personal Savior and we must be known of Him as our Savior.

Yes, even the demons believe that Jesus "is" the Savior of the world, yet He is not their Savior. They believe "mental assent" that "there is one God," (James 2:19) but they do not believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and are not saved. (Acts 16:31)

In John 17:3, we read - And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent (which is an intimate, experiential knowledge, found only in a relationship). The term "know" implies intimate, experiential knowledge, through a relationship with Him, not merely theoretical knowledge.

With the heart man believes and with the mouth confession is made. Confessing without a heart knowledge is not sufficient. Romans 10 gives good teaching on the matter.

Amen! It's not enough to merely believe with our head (head knowledge) that the death, burial and resurrection of Christ "happened." We must also believe in our heart (heart knowledge) that God raised Him from the dead. Those that do so are trusting in the death, burial and resurrection as the ALL-sufficient means of their salvation. (1 Corinthians 15:1-4; Romans 1:16)

Many dead religions will accept Christ as a good teacher or a sent one from God but deny His deity.

Yes, good teacher or even a prophet, yet reject Jesus as God. (John 1:1, 14) There are those who have a "different" Jesus and a "different" gospel. (2 Corinthians 11:4)

 

[calibob]

Discern this.

Mar 11:23 For verily I say unto you,
That whosoever shall say unto
this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea;
and shall not doubt in his heart,
but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass;
he shall have whatsoever he saith.

This is a truth of the word of God, all by itself.

Let me know when God approves of rearranging his planet. Or the next time you plan to move a mountian? Pray me up a ticket to see it. I will volunteer to take the video.

Or do you misunderstand mustard seed faith? (which you omitted) If we are completely willing and able to let go of life as we know it and become born again solely by trusting that God has a futile and nurturing place for us to grow. Our faith will be unstoppable!

Next time you plan to move a mountian, let us know please.

 

[PS]

There is a difference between believing in Jesus and actually believing Jesus.

I cannot see much point in accepting Jesus if you do not believe what he says.

 

[calibob]

I cannot see much point in accepting Jesus if you do not believe what he says.

I agree but I accepted the Lord before I learned very much of what he taught. It dosn't make me any less saved does it?

 

[PS]

I agree but I accepted the Lord before I learned very much of what he taught. It dosn't make me any less saved does it?

Jesus wants a childlike faith, in fact we come to Jesus to be fed on the mill, before we are given the strong meat. God bless you brother.

 

[presidente]

Joh 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

How can a person receive Jesus as their lord and savior, if they don't receive Him personally, for themselves?

The phrase 'Personal Savior' is not found in scripture. And 99% of the time the phrase is used without such an explanation (in my experience), adding a layer of unnecessary verbage that distracts and confuses unbelievers. There are people who treat the phrase as if it should be in the Bible, and as if people aren't saved unless they through the word 'personal' in front of Savior.

My car is my personal property. If you use a slim jim and open the door and drive it around, you can be arrested. But me believing in Jesus does not keep you from believing in Jesus.

 

[Mii]

The phrase 'Personal Savior' is not found in scripture. And 99% of the time the phrase is used without such an explanation (in my experience), adding a layer of unnecessary verbage that distracts and confuses unbelievers. There are people who treat the phrase as if it should be in the Bible, and as if people aren't saved unless they through the word 'personal' in front of Savior.

My car is my personal property. If you use a slim jim and open the door and drive it around, you can be arrested. But me believing in Jesus does not keep you from believing in Jesus.

That's why understanding the body of Christ is helpful for me. Especially with where most of us are born and the individualism/independence that seems to be in the air we breath.

I agree that we are all unique but that we are also of one body and must move in such a way that bears that in mind when we get too "personal". All the scriptures in the NT have been useful for me about the body to help me understand that I need them and they need me too and if we are not focused on the mind of christ we will just flounder.


I think personalizing things too much is error, and you can fall into this "specialness" that can lead to exaltation and pride. It'd take me a while to explain precisely how, except that there are counter concepts in the media to a lot of the things that were preached when I was a child.



@know1 I presume that most here do not view that scripture as physical. If indeed it is permissible for us to effect the physically miraculous I am undecided. I base this off the false signs and wonders of the enemy and the fact that many in the world would love to see such things as they are consistently portrayed in fantasy films, a lot of that has to do with grave error.

Then of course you do have that power being displayed by individuals in revelation but that's the only instance as far as "a witness" in that fashion. So I certainly believe that it can and will occur, but I also believe that it is timing based and only for a particular purpose...

 

[presidente]

@know1 I presume that most here do not view that scripture as physical. If indeed it is permissible for us to effect the physically miraculous I am undecided. I base this off the false signs and wonders of the enemy and the fact that many in the world would love to see such things as they are consistently portrayed in fantasy films, a lot of that has to do with grave error.

What do you mean 'view that scripture as physical.' Do you mean does it describe a real, 'physical' parting of the Red Sea, real miracles of Old Testament prophecies, real miracles of Jesus, and Christ really rising from the dead? I believe those things really happened.

I Corinthians 12 teaches that the Spirit gifts members of the body of Christ with the gift of the 'working of miracles' as He wills. I see no scripture that cancels out this teaching. Why wouldn't we believe that?

I haven't gotten around to reading Craig Keener's book, Miracles. He writes it against Hume's old argument against miracles based on the idea that they are not in line with human experience, showing from many historical and modern accounts that this assumption is false. it started as a footnote and grew to a 1200+ page book.

 

[Mii]

What do you mean 'view that scripture as physical.' Do you mean does it describe a real, 'physical' parting of the Red Sea, real miracles of Old Testament prophecies, real miracles of Jesus, and Christ really rising from the dead? I believe those things really happened.

I just mentioned that I believe that type of "power display" will occur again but he does not display this except for a very particular purpose.

I'm a bit aghast that you somehow took what I said to mean that I think nothing that I quoted from you (above) occurred in the physical sense



Moving mount Everest would be a cataclysmic event. Don't you think that such events (such as large hailstones and so forth) would be best left in the hands of the Lord? I do.

I think when he is talking about moving mountains he is referring to obstacles unseen primarily.

The fig tree also factors in. As well as walking on water. The why of these matter. NOTHING he did was purposeless.