• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Baptism in the Name of Jesus Christ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

1689Dave

Well-Known Member
I don't think you do as you are still using "In the name of" as some kind of secret formula. (A modern day form of Gnosticism?)

Who, in this thread, has stated otherwise? I know the guy in the other, now closed, thread failed to understand that YHWH was the OT Name for the Triune God, but so far nobody in this thread has disagreed.

I showed, in the other thread, by comparing OT verses with NT verses, that Jesus is Jehovah (Yahwah).

By the way, you erred in changing the word "name" to "name(s)" when referring to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Great Commission reads in
Mat 28:19 "Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

Name, Greek ονομα, is singular in both Greek and English. The NAME (singular) of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. :)
I didn't err. I was only showing the way people use three positions in the God Head to baptize in instead of God's name...Jesus Christ.
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
I didn't err. I was only showing the way people use three positions in the God Head to baptize in instead of God's name...Jesus Christ.
Except they don't! All baptism today (biblical baptism) is done due to the authority given to the church to baptize. It has nothing to do with saying magic words. It has to do with the authority given to the church in the Great Commission.
 

Darrell C

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Thanks for a very good overview. I believe scripture amply shows that Jesus Christ is the personal name (YHWH) of the Triune Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Not sure I could agree with that, but always glad to learn something new, so would be glad to look at the Scripture you feel supports that. I look at it like this, the Name Jesus was given to the Christ when He manifested in human form. That form has a beginning in time, though the Son is Eternal God.

Consider:

Revelation 3:12
King James Version (KJV)

12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.



I look at the Eternal State to be the time when revelation will be full, meaning, we will know all things at that time. In the Eternal State there will be a physical existence, a new heavens and earth (universe), but, there will still be...Heaven, God's abode. I think New Jerusalem bridges the two, but Heaven will remain distinct as it is now.

And by the way, welcome to the forum, I hope your time here will be blessed and that you in turn will be a blessing to those here.


God bless.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No, as I said originally, I see the trinitarian aspects of Jesus' name. But sects baptizing this way are in error if they reject the trinity. Jesus Christ is the Name of the triune Father Son and Holy Spirit (YHWH).
There are 3 separate and Distinct Persons within Godhead, correct?
 

Darrell C

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Not really. Remember, "Jesus" (ιησου - first mention Matt 1:1) is a translation of the Hebrew name Jehoshua - Jehovah Savior. It was well known in the OT.

Doesn't change the fact that prior to God forming that body in the womb of Mary, the Name Jesus (given to that form) was unknown to men.

Just because the name existed, doesn't mean the Name existed, just as the form did not previously exist.

When God manifested in physical form unto Abraham in Genesis 18...it was not the form created in Mary's womb that the Eternal Son of God took up residence in.

Here is New Testament commentary on Joshua, and the distinction between him and Jesus:


Hebrews 4:8
King James Version (KJV)

8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.



We see the name of Jesus here, but we do not see the Name of Jesus here.


God bless.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Doesn't change the fact that prior to God forming that body in the womb of Mary, the Name Jesus (given to that form) was unknown to men.

Just because the name existed, doesn't mean the Name existed, just as the form did not previously exist.

When God manifested in physical form unto Abraham in Genesis 18...it was not the form created in Mary's womb that the Eternal Son of God took up residence in.

Here is New Testament commentary on Joshua, and the distinction between him and Jesus:


Hebrews 4:8
King James Version (KJV)

8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.



We see the name of Jesus here, but we do not see the Name of Jesus here.


God bless.
Jesus was not His pre Incarnate name, as he was known as Logos/Word/Angel of the lord.
 

Darrell C

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jesus was not His pre Incarnate name, as he was known as Logos/Word/Angel of the lord.

Hey thanks for that! Now I can go back and correct all of my Theological errors!

I'll let you know when I finish doing this.

;)


God bless.
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
the Name Jesus (given to that form) was unknown to men.
What part of "Jehovah is Salvation" (Greek: Ἰησοῦς - English: Jesus) didn't you understand?

Just because the name existed, doesn't mean the Name existed,
So Jehovah is not a Name, just a name?

it was not the form created in Mary's womb that the Eternal Son of God took up residence in.
Of course it was. Jesus went from earth into Eternity at the Ascension then from Eternity to earth in the days of Abraham. Just how many physical bodies do you think Jesus had?
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
Not sure why that needs to be explained.
I am not sure either. I have showed, over and over and over again but for some odd reason it doesn't seem to get through the skull into the brain. I used to think I was a pretty good teacher but after the last couple threads I am beginning to wonder. Maybe I am just getting too old.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I am not sure either. I have showed, over and over and over again but for some odd reason it doesn't seem to get through the skull into the brain. I used to think I was a pretty good teacher but after the last couple threads I am beginning to wonder. Maybe I am just getting too old.

Naa for some people it just takes a little longer and a few more reminders to get past their presuppositions.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Yes, it was. Hebrew Jehoshua = Greek Jesus.
Jesus did not exist before His incarnation, as God the Son Himself assumed on human flesh, and then became Jesus of Nazareth. he was not called Jesus when here as the Angel of the Lord for example.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I am not sure either. I have showed, over and over and over again but for some odd reason it doesn't seem to get through the skull into the brain. I used to think I was a pretty good teacher but after the last couple threads I am beginning to wonder. Maybe I am just getting too old.
Do you know any Pastor who did not baptize into the name of the father/Son/Spirit though? Other than an Apostolic pastor, I have never met one!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top