Matthew 28:19

[37818]

Matthew 28:19, Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: . . .

The anti-Trinitatians claim "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: . . ." Is unique and so not original to Matthew account.

 

[Conan]

And yet they have no proof whatsoever.

 

[JD731]

Matthew 28:19, Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: . . .

The anti-Trinitatians claim "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: . . ." Is unique and so not original to Matthew account.

I am a Baptist Christian and therefore trinitarian in every way and consider anti - trinitarians to be ignorant and unsaved but what is their logic and reasoning for denying the doctrine based on Mt 28:19? They are not likely to show up on a Baptist only forum to explain themselves.

 

[37818]

I am a Baptist Christian and therefore trinitarian in every way and consider anti - trinitarians to be ignorant and unsaved but what is their logic and reasoning for denying the doctrine based on Mt 28:19? They are not likely to show up on a Baptist only forum to explain themselves.

It is a Baptist tenet our 27 New Testament books were authored in the first century.

 

[JD731]

It is a Baptist tenet our 27 New Testament books were authored in the first century.

I have no light on that passage except to say it must be an apostolic commission only pertaining to the 12 and 70 that were chosen by Jesus to preach his gospel to the Jews and may be in some way connected to the "gospel of the kingdom." I do not have any doubt that Jesus said it to them and that Luke was in that meeting and yet he quoted Peter some ten years later in the house of the Italian Cornelius, the first saved gentile, with the command of Acts 10:48. which was at least somewhat different.

I have no doubt about any scripture in my KJV but all must be reconciled contextually.

 

[37818]

I have no doubt about any scripture in my KJV but all must be reconciled contextually.

Can you prove your tenet? [In an another thread]

Matthew 28:19 is NOT a KJB issue here.

 

[JPPT1974]

That was the Sermon on the Mount of course. It was translation of God as a command on an ongoing action. Core message to go around and share the Christian faith. Making Disciples of all nations. Baptizing them in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Obeying His commands. With different translations depending on what Bible you have like KJV, NKJV, NIV, CSB, etc. Message is the same! As it was when Jesus spoke those words to life. Over 2,000 years ago.

 

[robycop3]

Can someone show me it's wrong to invoke the name of the Holy Spirit (He's not a ghost!) when baptizing someone ?

 

[atpollard]

Examining the Evidence: The Case for and Against the Authenticity of Matthew 28:19

Above is a scholarly discussion of all the facts for those interested. However, just for the sake of argument, let us grant the non-trinitarians the ASSUMPTION that Matthew 28:19 is a later addition (contrary to the evidence). With respect to the question of the Trinity, I would ask them … “Are Matthew 3:16-17, Mark 1:9-11 and Luke 3:21-22 also later additions?”

Matthew 3:16-17 [ESV] 16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; 17 and behold, a voice from heaven said, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased."

Mark 1:9-11 ESV] 9 In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. 10 And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven, "You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased."

Luke 3:21-22 [ESV] 21 Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heavens were opened, 22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, "You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased."

All three versions of the event (recorded by 3 different accounts in their own words) affirm the simultaneous presence of 3 persons (Father speaking from heaven, Son baptized in water, Spirit descending like a dove) … thus affirming the TRINITY and the participation of all three in Christian baptism … the TRUTH of Matthew 28:19 irrespective of its inclusion in the autograph (which is more likely than not).

 

[atpollard]

Can someone show me it's wrong to invoke the name of the Holy Spirit (He's not a ghost!) when baptizing someone ?

In KJV English (like Shakespeare spoke), Ghost and Spirit meant EXACTLY the same thing. The words drifted apart in “connotation” (flavor) over the centuries since then.