The Error is Baptism in Jesus name only for salvation

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
13,357
4,482
113
#1
Part One:

Within some branches of some Pentecostalism and others, a movement has emerged that rejects the traditional doctrine of the Trinity. This anti-Trinity movement, often referred to as Oneness Pentecostalism, has splintered into various denominations, fellowships, and independent churches.


A central point of contention in this movement is the formula used in Christian baptism. While mainstream Christianity follows Jesus’ instruction in Matthew 28:19 to baptize “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” those in the anti-Trinity camp reject this practice. Instead, they insist baptism should be performed “in the name of Jesus only,” arguing that the Trinitarian formula is unbiblical and, in some cases, even claiming it is an anti-Christ concept.


This perspective significantly deviates from historic Christian orthodoxy, which has affirmed the Trinity as a foundational truth since the early creeds of the Church. It’s important for believers to understand where these differences come from and to engage in thoughtful, biblically grounded discussion on matters of doctrine and practice.

Understanding these movements helps us appreciate the diversity within Pentecostalism while also reaffirming the core doctrines that unite the broader body of Christ.

The “Jesus Only” View of Baptism: A Revival of an Ancient Heresy

Adherents point to Acts 2:38, where Peter declares on the day of Pentecost: “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins…” They interpret this as a divine revelation that reveals the “true” meaning behind Matthew 28:19. According to their belief, the phrase in Matthew is essentially a riddle—one that is “unlocked” by the revelation that “Jesus” is the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

This teaching is a modern expression of an ancient heresy known as Modalism, or Sabellianism—named after Sabellius, a third-century teacher. Modalism denies the distinct persons of the Trinity, claiming instead that God reveals Himself in different “modes” or roles: Father in creation, Son in redemption, and Spirit in regeneration. Oneness advocates often present this as a unique, end-time revelation from God. Yet, ironically, the belief itself is not new—it revives a doctrine the early church refuted nearly 1,800 years ago.

While sincere in their convictions, this rejection of the Trinity stands in direct opposition to historic Christian orthodoxy, which affirms the co-equal and co-eternal nature of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Nicene Creed (A.D. 325), a foundational statement of Christian faith, was developed in part to combat such distortions of God’s nature.

The language of Scripture and the testimony of the early church both affirm a Triune God—not three gods, but one God in three persons. Understanding these theological distinctions isn’t just academic; it’s vital to preserving the integrity of the gospel and the fullness of who God has revealed Himself to be.
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
13,357
4,482
113
#2
Part Two:

What Does “In The Name Of …” mean?

Oneness proponents have a simplistic view of what it means to be baptized “in the name,” as if there is a specific magic incantation that must be uttered in order for baptism to “work” and the person to truly be saved.

Colossians 3:17 says:

Whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks through Him to God the Father.

Does this mean you rise out of bed and, all day long, you say:

“I wash my face in the name of Jesus.” I put on clothes in the name of Jesus. I eat my Captain Crunch in the name of Jesus …

Or maybe Colossians 3:17 just means that you do everything under the authority — and in worship of — Jesus.

It’s the same with prayer. Praying, “in the name of Jesus” means praying as directed and authorized by Jesus (as in the Lord’s Prayer, which does not include any reference to God the Son). You don’t have to literally say, “In the name of Jesus” for God to hear your prayer (not that there’s anything wrong with saying, “in the name of Jesus”).

In 1 Corinthians 1:14-15, Paul writes:

I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one would say you were baptized in my name.

Paul wasn’t worried that anyone would have accused him of literally saying, “I now baptize you in the name of Paul.” He meant, “No one can accuse me of baptizing under my own authority, instead of Christ’s.”

Baptism “in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38) means baptism as commanded by the risen Lord (in Matthew 28:19), not something different.
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
13,357
4,482
113
#3
Part Three:

Matthew 28:19 for Baptizers / Acts 2:38 for Baptizees


One of the most important distinctions often overlooked in baptism discussions is the difference in perspective between Jesus’ command in Matthew 28:19 and Peter’s words in Acts 2:38.


In Matthew 28:19, Jesus is speaking directly to baptizers—those who will carry out the ordinance. He instructs them to baptize “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” This is the official formula given to the Church by Christ Himself.


In contrast, Acts 2:38 reflects Peter addressing baptizees—those who are about to be baptized. He says, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ…” Here, Peter is not prescribing a liturgical formula to the baptizers, but emphasizing Jesus as the authority under which the baptism is taking place. It’s a public declaration of allegiance to Christ.


Acts 22:16 sheds even more light:


“Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name.”

The grammar here is key—the one being baptized is the one calling on the name of the Lord. This moment is what we refer to as the confession of faith.


At our church, we honor both commands by recognizing this two-part dynamic in every baptism:


  1. The baptizer asks: “What is your sacred confession?”
  2. The candidate replies: “Jesus is Lord.”
  3. Then the baptizer declares:
    “Upon your confession of faith, I now baptize you in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”

In this way, we fulfill both Matthew 28:19 (instruction to baptizers) and Acts 2:38 (response of baptizees). It’s not either/or—it’s both/and. This practice preserves the biblical integrity of baptism while embracing the richness of Scripture’s full witness.
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
13,357
4,482
113
#4
Finally:

How Did The Early Church Really Do It?

First, these are not magical incantations. Baptism is not hokus-pokus salvation. Those who insist that Acts 2:38 must be recited in order for the baptism to “work” are guilty of turning baptism into a spell.

But what did the first Christians say as they were baptizing converts? Oneness/Jesus’ Only practitioners say that the book of Acts proves their claim. But if Luke, the writer of Acts, had intended to record word-for-word the exact phrase the baptizer was to utter, then why didn’t he write it the same way every time?

  • Acts 2:38 “… in the name of Jesus Christ …”
  • 8:16 “… in the name of the Lord Jesus.”
  • 10:48 “… in the name of Jesus Christ.”
  • 19:5 “ … in the name of the Lord Jesus.”
  • 22:16 “… calling on His name.”
One would think that if there is a precise formula of words that needs to be said in order for baptism to “work,” Luke would have been careful enough to record it that way every time. Luke didn’t report a formula, liturgical phrase, or incantation that was said before every baptism. He noted that these baptisms were performed under the authority of Jesus.

The emphasis in every verse is on the person being baptized, not the one doing the baptizing. This is why we don’t read “they were baptized by Paul, who said, ‘in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.’”

But consider Acts 19:2-3. Paul comes to some disciples at Ephesus:

He said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said to him, “No, we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” And they said, “Into John’s baptism.”

Isn’t it odd that Paul answers the admission, “we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit,” by blurting, “Into what then were you baptized?”

His response would make no sense, except that Paul can’t understand how they could have heard the baptizer say, “in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” and yet claim they’d never heard whether there is a Holy Spirit. As soon as they confess their ignorance about the third Person of the Trinity, Paul knows that something was amiss with their baptisms.
 

wattie

Senior Member
Feb 24, 2009
3,438
1,265
113
New Zealand
#5
Yeah.. being baptized 'for' the remission of sins..

First compare this with salvation verses all through the book of John. Such as John 3:16 and 5:24. Also Romans 10:9-10.

No water baptism is mentioned, but salvation is given.

Now going back to Acts 2:38.. what is the context? What is the condition on not receiving salvation?

Unbelief is the condition on no salvation..not water baptism.

So 'for' the remission of sins.. is akin to.. 'because you already have' remission of sins.

So someone will say a converted person WILL definitely get water baptism. That it is inevitable once converted they WILL get water baptised.

Where is that in scripture?
 

Brasspen

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2024
593
291
63
#6
One reason we have so many of these denominations, is because starting one's own religion could give that person; dominion, power, and authority. They would be able to collect donations also, become rich in all these things. Money and power is what they could gain. That is one reason you see these Christian faith forked religions show up. One of those powers they could gain, is great influence in the voting polls. As the church leader, they would setting the rules for the morals and beliefs of the people. And because they have everyone following them and doing as he/she says...
 
Feb 18, 2025
164
57
28
#7
One reason we have so many of these denominations, is because starting one's own religion could give that person; dominion, power, and authority. They would be able to collect donations also, become rich in all these things. Money and power is what they could gain. That is one reason you see these Christian faith forked religions show up. One of those powers they could gain, is great influence in the voting polls. As the church leader, they would setting the rules for the morals and beliefs of the people. And because they have everyone following them and doing as he/she says...

That is so true wow
 

Brasspen

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2024
593
291
63
#8
Yeah.. being baptized 'for' the remission of sins..

First compare this with salvation verses all through the book of John. Such as John 3:16 and 5:24. Also Romans 10:9-10.

No water baptism is mentioned, but salvation is given.

Now going back to Acts 2:38.. what is the context? What is the condition on not receiving salvation?

Unbelief is the condition on no salvation..not water baptism.

So 'for' the remission of sins.. is akin to.. 'because you already have' remission of sins.

So someone will say a converted person WILL definitely get water baptism. That it is inevitable once converted they WILL get water baptised.

Where is that in scripture?
It was this same idea, the reason the catholic church started sprinkling babies with holy water.
 

Beckworth

Well-known member
May 15, 2019
987
405
63
#9
There is much evidence in the scriptures of the trinity. At the creation of the world. God spoke, the Holy Spirit moved upon the face of the waters and John 1 says that Jesus was there, too. Three personalities.

At the baptism of Jesus we find all three personalities: Jesus, the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove, and God the Father spoke from heaven.

I also believe it is significant that Jesus instructed His disciples to baptize men into all three personalities. Matthew 28:18-19.

I’m sure it does not matter to some people but I think we should do Bible things in Bible ways.
 
Apr 7, 2014
26,125
13,943
113
59
#10
This article sums it up nicely - Must baptism be done "in Jesus' name"? | carm.org

Oneness Pentecostal theology maintains that baptism must be by immersion using the formula “in Jesus' name” and not the formula “in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” as is found in Matt. 28:19. They reject the Trinitarian formula because they reject the Trinity...

Let’s take a look at what is going on in the verses. The phrase, “in the name of the Lord,” is not a reference to a baptismal formula but a reference to authority. It is similar to hearing someone say, “Stop in the name of the Law!” We understand that the “name of the Law” means by the authority of the Law. It is the same with baptism “in Jesus’ name.” To baptize in Jesus’ name is to baptize in the authority of Jesus...

Therefore, the Oneness Pentecostal people are simply in error by demanding that baptism be done with the formula “In Jesus’ name.” Instead, it should be done as Jesus commanded: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19). The proper way to baptize in Jesus’ name is to say, “I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”
 
Sep 2, 2020
15,592
6,307
113
#11
Part One:

Within some branches of some Pentecostalism and others, a movement has emerged that rejects the traditional doctrine of the Trinity. This anti-Trinity movement, often referred to as Oneness Pentecostalism, has splintered into various denominations, fellowships, and independent churches.


A central point of contention in this movement is the formula used in Christian baptism. While mainstream Christianity follows Jesus’ instruction in Matthew 28:19 to baptize “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” those in the anti-Trinity camp reject this practice. Instead, they insist baptism should be performed “in the name of Jesus only,” arguing that the Trinitarian formula is unbiblical and, in some cases, even claiming it is an anti-Christ concept.


This perspective significantly deviates from historic Christian orthodoxy, which has affirmed the Trinity as a foundational truth since the early creeds of the Church. It’s important for believers to understand where these differences come from and to engage in thoughtful, biblically grounded discussion on matters of doctrine and practice.

Understanding these movements helps us appreciate the diversity within Pentecostalism while also reaffirming the core doctrines that unite the broader body of Christ.

The “Jesus Only” View of Baptism: A Revival of an Ancient Heresy

Adherents point to Acts 2:38, where Peter declares on the day of Pentecost: “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins…” They interpret this as a divine revelation that reveals the “true” meaning behind Matthew 28:19. According to their belief, the phrase in Matthew is essentially a riddle—one that is “unlocked” by the revelation that “Jesus” is the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

This teaching is a modern expression of an ancient heresy known as Modalism, or Sabellianism—named after Sabellius, a third-century teacher. Modalism denies the distinct persons of the Trinity, claiming instead that God reveals Himself in different “modes” or roles: Father in creation, Son in redemption, and Spirit in regeneration. Oneness advocates often present this as a unique, end-time revelation from God. Yet, ironically, the belief itself is not new—it revives a doctrine the early church refuted nearly 1,800 years ago.

While sincere in their convictions, this rejection of the Trinity stands in direct opposition to historic Christian orthodoxy, which affirms the co-equal and co-eternal nature of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Nicene Creed (A.D. 325), a foundational statement of Christian faith, was developed in part to combat such distortions of God’s nature.

The language of Scripture and the testimony of the early church both affirm a Triune God—not three gods, but one God in three persons. Understanding these theological distinctions isn’t just academic; it’s vital to preserving the integrity of the gospel and the fullness of who God has revealed Himself to be.
Maybe they read this verse ?

Of course many might insist Paul is wrong but it’s really straight forward

“be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭4:10-12‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
‭‭Philippians‬ ‭2:9-11‬ ‭KJV‬‬

You won’t find another name in the nt anyone was baptized into , anyone prayed in , or did anything in other than the name of Jesus

“And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭3:17‬ ‭KJV‬‬

you know how your saying three persons ? The whole trinity is in one person , jesus christ

“For in him ( Jesus ) dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭2:9‬ ‭KJV‬‬

God is one and there’s one name
 

Komentaja

Well-known member
Jul 29, 2022
491
265
63
#12
Completely agree with what you wrote. Got to love the ones who complain about Matthew 28:19-20 being added or changed by the RCC, yet they go on to quote Acts 2:38 as if it has any authority when they just claimed the Bible has been edited by the catholics. What if they changed the Acts 2:38 one?

This is a rabbit hole you do not want yourself to go down on. The Bible is reliable and trustworthy, believe it.
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
13,357
4,482
113
#13
Completely agree with what you wrote. Got to love the ones who complain about Matthew 28:19-20 being added or changed by the RCC, yet they go on to quote Acts 2:38 as if it has any authority when they just claimed the Bible has been edited by the catholics. What if they changed the Acts 2:38 one?

This is a rabbit hole you do not want yourself to go down on. The Bible is reliable and trustworthy, believe it.

you're unclear in your opening. Acts 4 is Peter speaking, not Paul. Baptism doesn't save Jesus does.
 
Nov 12, 2024
208
55
28
#16
you're unclear in your opening. Acts 4 is Peter speaking, not Paul. Baptism doesn't save Jesus does.
You are correct that Jesus saves, every 1st grader in Bible class learns this.

And when does Jesus save?

Baptism, which is like that water, now saves you. Baptism doesn’t save by removing dirt from the body. Rather, baptism is a request to God for a clear conscience. It saves you through Jesus Christ, who came back from death to life.

They learn this in 2nd grade Bible class.
 

Beckworth

Well-known member
May 15, 2019
987
405
63
#17
Completely agree with what you wrote. Got to love the ones who complain about Matthew 28:19-20 being added or changed by the RCC, yet they go on to quote Acts 2:38 as if it has any authority when they just claimed the Bible has been edited by the catholics. What if they changed the Acts 2:38 one?

This is a rabbit hole you do not want yourself to go down on. The Bible is reliable and trustworthy, believe it.

Saying the Bible is unreliable, the text has been changed or casting doubt on a verse by claiming it wasn’t in all the manuscripts, and many other such prejudices is a popular effort to get around a scripture that you can't explain and doesn’t fit your doctrine. Some also try to discredit the whole book of James because of his verses on “faith only.” I once read that Martin Luther ( a proponent of salvation by “faith only”) completely removed ( tore it out) the book of James from his Bible; As if that would destroy what God has said or make it any less true. Men also try to get around Mark 16:16 by saying it wasn’t in all the manuscripts. Another unpopular scripture with some people.

Let’s remember that God said His word is eternal. Isaiah 40:8, Matthew 24:35. There is nothing man can do to change it or destroy it. More importantly, it will be present at the Judgement and we will stand before God and be judged BY THE THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOKS. Rev. 20:12.
 

Beckworth

Well-known member
May 15, 2019
987
405
63
#18
Maybe they read this verse ?

Of course many might insist Paul is wrong but it’s really straight forward

“be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭4:10-12‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
‭‭Philippians‬ ‭2:9-11‬ ‭KJV‬‬

You won’t find another name in the nt anyone was baptized into , anyone prayed in , or did anything in other than the name of Jesus

“And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭3:17‬ ‭KJV‬‬

you know how your saying three persons ? The whole trinity is in one person , jesus christ

“For in him ( Jesus ) dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭2:9‬ ‭KJV‬‬

God is one and there’s one name

I don’t see the word “ONLY”. In any of these verses. Please give us a scripture that says , “ name of
 
Nov 12, 2024
208
55
28
#19
Saying the Bible is unreliable, the text has been changed or casting doubt on a verse by claiming it wasn’t in all the manuscripts, and many other such prejudices is a popular effort to get around a scripture that you can't explain and doesn’t fit your doctrine. Some also try to discredit the whole book of James because of his verses on “faith only.” I once read that Martin Luther ( a proponent of salvation by “faith only”) completely removed ( tore it out) the book of James from his Bible; As if that would destroy what God has said or make it any less true. Men also try to get around Mark 16:16 by saying it wasn’t in all the manuscripts. Another unpopular scripture with some people.

Let’s remember that God said His word is eternal. Isaiah 40:8, Matthew 24:35. There is nothing man can do to change it or destroy it. More importantly, it will be present at the Judgement and we will stand before God and be judged BY THE THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOKS. Rev. 20:12.
I totally agree with you.

I will also note that this notion of casting doubt on certain verses happens almost always on one side of the theological spectrum.

The pushers of faith alone regeneration theology because of the lack of the ability to cite even one verse that supports their "faith alone" narrative will even inject the definitive "alone" into almost every occurrence of the word faith in the New Testament thus rendering these verses into all-encompassing panaceas.

Most are so blind to this that when confronted on the issue will imply that this is what the author really meant.

They will use general statements of faith to negate the clear purpose of more definitive verses.

Example:

Because John 3:16 does not mention baptism then Acts 2:38 must not mean baptism is the point of the remission of sins.
 

Pilgrimshope

Well-known member
Sep 2, 2020
15,592
6,307
113
#20
I don’t see the word “ONLY”. In any of these verses. Please give us a scripture that says , “ name of
“Please give us a scripture that says , “ name of”

“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,

and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭2:38‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“]I don’t see the word “ONLY”. In any of these verses. “

“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭4:12‬ ‭

Seems like I’ve shared those many times actually but can you show any scripture even one where someone’s baptized in any other name ?

“And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭1:21‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, “

“Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭3:6‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭10:48‬ ‭

“When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭19:5‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭6:3‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭3:27‬ ‭KJV‬‬

seems like jesus is the name at least in my own belief . But honestly I don’t think the issue is that I haven’t shared scriptures to support what I’m saying seems like they are simple and plain