Baptism

[supertone]

My wife was discussing baptism in Jesus' name with one of her Christian friends. She received this e-mail about the subject afterwards. I have my thoughts on how to reply but I thought that I'd see some other responses first. Here is the e-mail below:

'Was having a think and read about our conversation this morning about baptism in the name of Jesus....looked up the verse you were talking about in Acts 2:38 and yes it does say in Jesus Name but when you read the notes about it at the bottom of the page it talks about why it says this and that it is not trying to contradict they Great Commission of Matt 28:19 where it does say in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit. In Matt Jesus was expanding on John's baptism and in Acts Peter seems to be emphasising the Jesus part because of who he was talking to and trying to persuade them that Jesus was the messiah and whom they need to believe in and put their trust in. Both seem to be interchangeable according to scriptures from what I can find out. Hope this is helpful'

[Austin]

Originally Posted by supertone

My wife was discussing baptism in Jesus' name with one of her Christian friends. She received this e-mail about the subject afterwards. I have my thoughts on how to reply but I thought that I'd see some other responses first. Here is the e-mail below:

'Was having a think and read about our conversation this morning about baptism in the name of Jesus....looked up the verse you were talking about in Acts 2:38 and yes it does say in Jesus Name but when you read the notes about it at the bottom of the page it talks about why it says this and that it is not trying to contradict they Great Commission of Matt 28:19 where it does say in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit. In Matt Jesus was expanding on John's baptism and in Acts Peter seems to be emphasising the Jesus part because of who he was talking to and trying to persuade them that Jesus was the messiah and whom they need to believe in and put their trust in. Both seem to be interchangeable according to scriptures from what I can find out. Hope this is helpful'

Well baptising in the name of the Father would be fine if you know his name. In the name of the son would of course be Jesus, the name of the Holy Ghost I have never heard anyone speak it.
Then if it states in the name, that word is in the singular sense which indicates one name joining all three titles.

The new testament should be called the new covenant because it became that when Jesus finished His work and joined mankind both Jew and gentile together under one covenant bu His blood.
.
Paul said, as many of you who were baptised were baptised unto Jesus death, you are there for buried in Him.

In the new covenant He is the author. He has been given a name above all names in heaven and earth. All power in heaven and earth has been given unto Him. So I think if baptised into something or unto something then it should be announced who you are being baptise to.

In the message of the Prophets He is declared to bear the name of The Everlasting Father.
I think once believers figure out who Jesus was and is they might be more at ease with what name to announce at the baptism event.
Also, don't always put a lot of validity in the notes at the bottom of the page in any bible.

[mfblume]

They're not interchangeable. The apostles never used the titles in the book of Acts. If it was interchangeable, they would have at least done it somewhere in the titles, but they did not.

[TGBTG]

Personally, I don't think baptism in titles vs. in Jesus' name is really about baptismal formula. I believe it has more to do with recognizing the SUPREME Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Satan does not want people to acknowledge the Full Deity of Jesus Christ, so he gives them Father, Son, and HolyGhost.

People should think for a second, why is it that all prayers is done in Jesus' name and then only baptism is done in FSH? hmmm...

[NorCal]

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.
For there is no other Name under heaven, given among men, where by ye MUST be Saved.

[Aquila]

Here's a challenge I've yet to fully answer to my satisfaction.

I was challenged to provide an exact quote of what was spoken at the moment of baptism in the book of Acts. I was told that all things are done "in the name of Jesus", but they are to be done according to Christ's commandments. Therefore in Matthew 28:19 we have an exact quote from Jesus illustrating a triune baptism. Thus triune baptism is to be performed by the church "in the name of Jesus" (in the authority of Jesus).

Thoughts?

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Here's a challenge I've yet to fully answer to my satisfaction.

I was challenged to provide an exact quote of what was spoken at the moment of baptism in the book of Acts. I was told that all things are done "in the name of Jesus", but they are to be done according to Christ's commandments. Therefore in Matthew 28:19 we have an exact quote from Jesus illustrating a triune baptism. Thus triune baptism is to be performed by the church "in the name of Jesus" (in the authority of Jesus).

Thoughts?

The words spoken are all suppositions and guesses. Some may be better guesses than others, but who knows?

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by seekerman

The words spoken are all suppositions and guesses. Some may be better guesses than others, but who knows?

i can find more quotes of a mathew 28:19 baptism in History than i can Jesus only

and many are before the council of nicea.

Its really not as much of the words Spoken over you by the baptizer, its the faith that is in the Baptizee

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by acerrak

Its really not as much of the words Spoken over you by the baptizer, its the faith that is in the Baptizee

I agree. The baptizee is the person calling on the name of Jesus in faith.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by seekerman

The words spoken are all suppositions and guesses. Some may be better guesses than others, but who knows?

Exactly, we don't have an exact quote from the book of acts as to what was said. Yet we do have the exact words of Jesus regarding baptismal formula in Matthew 28:19. Therefore... how can we know that they didn't perform triune baptism "in the name of Jesus", i.e. as He commanded?