Adding 'Personal Savior' to the Gospel

I have only ever look upon the term ""Personal Savior "" as a term to help people understand that they are not saved because they are in this church or part of this group.. But God will deal with each person on the day of Judgement as an individual.. They will be assessed for only what they have believed and done.. And God will make a judgement upon them as an individual.. Either save them as an individual or condemn them as an individual..

I have never seen it as a term pointing to the personal ownership of God..

i don't know where this term comes from.

is it to indicate that He 'personally & individually' saved me in particular?
that is, as opposed to, He made a kind of generic salvation room, not with anyone in particular in mind, but just anybody who happens to come in receives salvation?

or is it supposed to be referring to a specific, custom-tailored salvation for each unique person?

I think what's overlooked here is what salvation truly is.....it's a adoption which is very personal. Being grafted in complete with a name change and inheritance.
God the Father spoke to the nation of Israel through the prophets.....Jesus spoke to the hearts of men.
" Those who have ears hear what the spirit has to say" being a chosen vessel (not vessels) fit for the Masters use points to individuals.
It doesn't take a nation to turn the world upside down but just one faithful person.....aka Jesus.

Heard a good teaching on the difference between a adopted son and a blood son..... Israel vs Christians.
The difference is in short.....one is chosen the other your stuck with. Lol

I cannot understand your issue here with personal Savior. The concept of an unapproachable God is a Muslim concept. There is nothing generic nor weird about personal Savior. Sin is personal and the atonement is personal. Jesus Christ died for all and Jesus Christ died for each and every individual. Celebrate this great display of love and grace directly from the Father.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

“Jesus Christ is my Lord and Saviour.”
I say that verbatim all the time. I wonder if that’s deemed personal, not that I care.

How can you not like their music if you never heard it as far as you know?

Not sure why all the fuss over the term, "personal Savior." John 17:3 - 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. Would that relationship be personal or impersonal? Obviously personal.

Yes he was only 28, I used to receive his publications even after he died....and have all his music.

He was young and influenced by various bible teachers and I think he really needed to develop a more solid foundation of understanding and sometimes his ideas were contradictory.

The terms come from concepts in the scripture, I am not sure there is a way around this, but I agree the terms can definitely become little sound bites and they loose the fuller concept... so maybe this is what he was trying to argue.

I'm Canadian but married to an American and living in the US. you could be right about it being mainly American...cause honestly I did not grow up hearing personal this or that...I was saved at 5 so I have been around a bit. but really the expression does not bother me and I do see a very personal interaction between God and people in the Bible.

gee you know, in answer to your question (highlighted) I could not say. having been saved at such a young age, I mean I just grew up in and with Christianity.

reasoning about the word now, I would think Jesus died for me personallyand cares about me personally...frankly I don't see that as against biblical truth though

but I do have an inclusive understanding of the doctrines of the Bible

from the responses in this thread, seems like most people agree with the use of the word personal

I am actually curious why some are so opposed to it

well if He is then He is, right?

now this reminds of the teaching you are not saved unless you say or declare Jesus Lord and Savior

Lordship Salvation? that's a whole other discussion though....been around this forum a few times I think

canarican?

I think the idea is that Jesus is not just the generic Savior of the world in a way that does not effect you personally. You have to respond to the Gospel.

But if you are preaching the gospel and exhorting people to respond, then that is already implied. A lot of preachers and one-on-one witnessers (or whatever the right word is) will use the term 'Personal Savior' without explanation. The confusing terminology gets in the way. And it must sound really cheesy if you aren't used to it to a lot of people. It can also mislead people. They hear a preacher talk about personal Savior and personal relationship, and maybe a year later they refuse the next person who witnesses to them because their religions is too personal.

Let's say someone somehow agreed to come to a church After the sermon, the preacher throws in a truncated altar call, telling people they must 'accept Jesus Christ as your personal Savior' without explaining 'personal.' This often happens. And evangelical Christians (maybe the ones from church cultures that haven't changed much since the '70's and '80's) often throw the term 'personal Savior' around without explanation. What it serves to do is make the message a little more difficult to understand, and it can also lead to misunderstanding, for example this idea-- "Jesus is my Savior, and my faith is so personal, I don't have to go to church and no one can give me any advice about it."

Can you imagine if there was a movement that said, "You have to accept Jesus as your uber terrific Savior to be saved." We might all agree, if pressed, that Jesus is uber terrific. But it just sounds so cheesy it is distracting. It would detract from the presentation of the Gospel. And if some people treated you almost like a heretic if you did not say that or care for the terminology, that would be taking things way too far. Isn't that the sort of thing that has been done with 'personal Savior.'

is that a thing? not been introduced

ok looked it up....nope. just Canadian

7seas of the great white north and all that

Have you accepted Jesus as your uber terrific Savior?

Reverence for Whom you are referring would be appreciated. What possesses you to go low in reference to Christ Jesus? I am offended by your casual flippant reference to the Christ of God.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

I do not mean this as flippant toward the Savior. But it's the same thing people are doing with 'personal Savior'. The difference is, we have heard 'personal Savior' so much, it does not sound quite as weird as many other things we can put in front of "Savior" that are true, but are just unnecessary verbage and that also obscure our message.

Nothing weird at all about having a personal relationship with the Savior. I know Him and most importantly He knows me.

All of us here in the states know Donald Trump as President. If we knock on the door of the White House and he greets us we will know him but he will not know us. Trump is the President he is not a personal President.

It is because of the righteousness of Christ imputed to me that I can approach the Father and come as ABBA Father. God desires that relationship. God addressed Adam by name in the garden.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

'Personal president' is almost a cringe-worthy phrase to hear.

Just imagine a political opponent of Trump giving a speech where he says that Trump is not a 'personal president'-- with no explanation. It would just sound weird, cringe worthy. If newscasters did not like the speech, they might play that clip over again.

How many evangelicals say, "You have to accept Jesus as your Personal Savior" with no expectation as if their listeners understand the extraneous use of the word 'personal'. Sometimes the person who uses the phrases uses it robotically, following the traditional script that dates back maybe 100 or 130 years, without thinking of what it means or without realizing that the phrase 'personal Savior' was not important enough to make it into the Bible.

And this reinforces American individualism, and the idea that Christianity is 'all about a personal relationship with Jesus Christ'-- which is unbiblical because our fellowship with other believers and how we relate to our fellow human beings is important to God, too.

Even with explanation, 'personal president' is a pretty weird-sounding phrase. 'Personable' maybe. 'Personal'...no.

Is there any reason to defend the use of 'personal Savior' in Gospel presentations other than the fact that it is (relatively new) church tradition that goes back a few generations? The average Joe on the street is probably not going to guess that 'personal Savior' is supposed to have something to do with having a personal relationship with the Savior.

Do you have a personal relationship with your personal computer?

Something else to consider is that the early-20th-century American evangelicals (or late 19th) who added 'Personal Savior' to their presentations of the Gospel were probably doing this to address the issue of quasi-churched Americans who considered themselves Christians because they went to church or had gone to church.

Now, we live in a country where the number of people who identify themselves as shrinking. A message about how you, the individual, must respond to the Gospel, not just think Jesus is some kind of Savior of the world and that you are not required to repent personally probably doesn't resonate well with someone who does not go to church or identify himself as a Christian.

And of course it resonates a lot less well if you just throw out the term 'Personal Savior' without explanation, the remnant of a line of preaching that isn't preached so much anymore.