You should be more specific then! You stated:
You didn't ask whether the "term" is found in your mocking of Protestants/Evangelicals but where it is DEFINED in the Bible. If you cannot see how the concept of believing in/receiving Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord (and it IS a personal decision) is the same thing as accepting Him, then you ought to "Just. Stop.". Besides, if you actually understand what sola Scriptura means, you would know that it is the belief that because Scripture is the Divinely-inspired word of God, by its authority everything we must believe in order to have eternal life and live godly in Christ Jesus is explicitly or implicitly taught in Scripture:
There, now you know!
I don't see any mention of that catchphrase anywhere, until the Born Again movement in the US, following the publication of Richard Nixon's former hatchet man, Chuck Colson's book Born Again, in 1976. I conclude that the phrase is a recent man-made invention. Recent enough, that it post-dates the Bible. So much for Protestants following sola scriptura as they define it. It is BECAUSE I knew the phrase didn't exist in the Bible I called you out on it by asking the question.
Which "catchphrase"? Born again or "accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Personal Savior"? I showed you some of the numerous places in Scripture that specifically teach the doctrine of "born again". As for the other, if you really have a problem with equating "accepting" with "receiving" or "believing", then I'd say that's being petty. And, as to claiming it doesn't jibe with sola Scriptura, then see the definition above. It is NOT piggybacking, thumbtacking or scotch taping a doctrine onto a verse - that does describe, however, quite a few dogmas and doctrines of Roman Catholicism. Do you also have a problem when they do it?
To wit: "Catholics are going to Hell because they follow the teachings of men! Show it to me in the Bible."
"This phrase or doctrine is not stated in the Bible, but my denomination / Bible teacher told me, and I believe it with everything within me!"
The catchphrase, of course.
What you're missing, is that there are scads of people who love and serve and obey Jesus, without having formally uttered the sinner's prayer or gone to an altar call.
And here's the points of disagreement:
Besides, if you actually understand what sola Scriptura means, you would know that it is the belief that because Scripture is the Divinely-inspired word of God, by its authority everything we must believe in order to have eternal life and live godly in Christ Jesus is explicitly or implicitly taught in Scripture:
“The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.” —Westminster Confession of Faith
I agree with doctrinal elements for Salvation: the fallen state of man, "original sin," death as a consequence of sin, who God is and his perfection, (implicitly) the Trinity, the incarnation, death, and Resurrection of Jesus, all that.
What I *disagree* with, is that any teachings of men afterwards, must *necessarily* be wrong.
In particular, faith (how to increase in faith, what practices in life aid or increase the faith) and life (how and when to pray, who to pray for, whether for an individual, group, city, country, what have you).
And, I find it odd, that the many Protestant groups seem to neglect, or fail to practice, many practices enjoined in Scripture; and openly insist (as a DOCTRINAL point, from sola scriptura, that any apparitions, vision, prophecy, revelation, from any source whatsoever, on any topic whatsoever, is necessarily an Orwellian "crimethink" instead of Scripturally testing the spirits.
And that they take for granted certain elements of the faith which were hammered out in post-Biblical times, *cough* Arianism *cough* *cough* Albigensians *cough* *cough* Donatism *cough* to name a few, while still loudly Demanding sola scriptura (hint, in a lot of heresies, the heretics cited Scripture, but it was decided they were misusing it; the reason that is important is there are folks like the extreme Calvinists (predestination) who also quote Scripture, and yet both the Catholics and most other Protestants insist they're wrong.
The last area of, hmm, "practice" so to speak, is that I've heard Protties say that "Catholics teach prayers of empty words by repetition" e.g. the Rosary. I used to think so myself, until I started praying it. The practice is to devote oneself to meditation on certain episodes of the life of Jesus, or Mary, thematically. I've published on this thread one such set for the Sorrowful Mysteries. And the statements to meditate on in it, openly contradict a lot of the ignorant blather about dead works and Mary _substituting for_ Jesus.
A lot of the other revelations / apparitions, were calls to prayer for particular circumstances in time, and in particular, calls to pray for Mercy to ward off Judgment or God's wrath. (E.g. Fatima's warning in 1917 of an error which would come from Russia and affect the whole Earth *cough* Communism *cough*, or prayers in Reparation for Atheism and Blasphemy ("what if ten righteous were found there? For the sake of the ten I will not destroy it.")