Water Baptism-What is in a Name?

  • 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.

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,251
1,106
113
Matthew 28:18-20 gives instructions by Jesus. Why do you take historical accounts, and consider them the trump card over explicit words of Jesus?

Actually these verses are all compatible if one understand that Jesus is Messiah, and that the early church was proclaiming this after his death, as well as accentuating his authority.

Also, using your worldview, do you deny all baptisms using Trinitarian language?

And, if they are invalid, are you claiming those who were baptized using Trinitarian language are unsaved?
Ten days after being taught principles by Jesus for 40 days do you believe the disciples would water baptize differently than instructed by Jesus? No they did not. They administered baptisms as instructed; in the name of... And that name is Jesus.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
Ten days after being taught principles by Jesus for 40 days do you believe the disciples would water baptize differently than instructed by Jesus? No they did not. They administered baptisms as instructed; in the name of... And that name is Jesus.
You are not effectively dealing with these verses. Why don't you think they are applicable?

By the way, they were baptizing in the "name of Jesus" in the sense that they were baptizing under the authority of Jesus, as they were commissioned by him. And, if they made sure that the individuals being baptized understood union with Christ, then in effect they were acknowledging Jesus in their baptism.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
Consider the possibility that a person was given the opportunity to hear (numerous invitations to hear God's Word) and accept the truth of the need to be water baptized but rejected all attempts when they could have in fact been obedient.

The instructions given on the Day of Pentecost were directed to everyone. "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.
For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." Acts 2:38-39

Jesus specifically states that those not accepting His words are in fact rejecting Him. Everyone will be judged by the Word. Not just portions of the Word but all of it:

"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." John 12:48

Beings everyone will be judged by the Word it stands to reason that all of the scriptures are accurate; this includes Jesus words on the topic of water baptism.

In each case just prior to Jesus' ascension He brings up the need for mankind's belief and the need for all to submit to water baptism:
“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” Matthew 28:19-20

“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized (water baptism) shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues” (Holy Spirit); Mark 16:15-17

“Then opened He (Jesus) their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things.” Luke 24:45-48
Peter was speaking to a particular audience, therefore the command that all needed to be baptized needs to be considered in this light. If there was someone with severe health issues, or a prisoner who is unable to be baptized due to jail restrictions receives Christ, he is a believer regardless of baptism.

Speaking in tongues cannot be a sign of salvation because not all speak (spoke) in tongues. It was a sign in a specific context, in that it identified disenfranchised individuals throughout the book of Acts as true believers, and oriented them to the Jerusalem church by identical signs experienced in Acts 2 by them. This is covered well in a book called New Wine by Dwight Pentecost for those who are teachable and want to look into this in more depth. Misunderstandings concerning Acts are common problems amongst aberrant groups.

It's pretty funny how you focus on the "name" in Matt 28:18-20.

If the pastor says, "I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit for the remission of sins", would this person be saved? If not, what problem do you have with these words?

I have already covered Mark 16:15-17 and told you that Mark 16:9-20 is not canonical, but read those verses again. There is nothing said about a person who believes, but is not baptized. This case is not covered in those verses.

These are the possibilities:

1. Someone believes, and is baptized. - saved
2. Someone believes, and is not baptized.
3. Someone does not believe, and is baptized. - damned
4. Someone does not believe, and is not baptized - damned

The verses cover #1, 3,4 but doesn't cover #2. So, your proof text doesn't work.

By the way, you have inserted water baptism in the text. While I agree it is talking about water baptism, you really shouldn't interpret the text yourself. It simply says "baptized". You can be baptized in a spiritual sense, too.

As I have said, I believe baptism is a command, but it follows salvation, and is not necessarily accompanied by "tongues". This occurred in Acts, but you can find no other support for this teaching other than a historical account. There is no place in Scripture that teaches tongues is always the evidence of salvation. This comes from some within the Pentecostal movement, and largely Oneness Pentecostals.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
Water baptism is the acting on our repentance and the beginning of submission to God's will and commandments.
Union with God is through the baptism of the Holy Spirit which is then maintained through praying in tongues > that is
praying in the Holy Spirit.
Not by praying in tongues, but by the other thing instituted by Jesus, called the Lord's supper, whereby we partake of his body and blood in the form of the bread, and the cup of the new covenant in his blood.

Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord. There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, and to another the effecting of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues. But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills. All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they?
1 Corinthians 12:4‭-‬11‭, ‬30 NASB

But all with whom it is possible are baptized and take the Lord's supper.
 

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,251
1,106
113
It was a sign in a specific context, in that it identified disenfranchised individuals throughout the book of Acts as true believers, and oriented them to the Jerusalem church by identical signs experienced in Acts 2 by them.

It's pretty funny how you focus on the "name" in Matt 28:18-20.
The records of water baptism regarding each group; Jews, Gentiles and Samaritans, witness that all baptisms were administered in Jesus' name. Thus, one can conclude that the disciples understood that Jesus' statement recorded in Matthew meant that His name was to be used. (Acts 4:12)

The historical records purpose was not only to identify that salvation was available to Gentiles and Samaritans as well as the Jewish population. This is clear due to the record of Paul's interaction with the Ephesus disciples in Acts 19. Paul's message to them was consistent with Peter's instructions. It is important to understand that Paul was still telling people over 20 years later of their need to repent, be water baptized specifically in the name of the Lord Jesus', and assisting people to receive the Holy Ghost. (Acts 19:1-6)

All nationalities of people throughout history originate from one of the three groups that were instructed on the requirements for salvation. The biblical record shows that no one group is exempt from required obedience to the commands given.
 

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,251
1,106
113
It is an ordinance of the church that is a visual representation of union with Christ. Same thing with the Lord's Supper.

I don't think priests were baptized. They experienced a washing that was similar but it is not baptism in a Christian sense. It involved being commissioned for service.

It is impossible to get around the fact that those added to the Church were baptized. However, it was not considered salvific and it was a representation of the work of the Holy Spirit in cleansing them spiritually and uniting them with Christ.
The distinction between the Lord's Supper and water baptism is that water baptism was one of three requirements given on the day the New Testament church was birthed.

Upon belief in Jesus as the Messiah, individuals asked what they were required of do. Peter, who was given the keys of the kingdom by Jesus Himself, (Matt. 16:19) instructed all present to repent, be baptized everyone in the the name of Jesus for the remission of sin and they would receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2) He goes on to say that the promise is to them, and their children, and all those afar off (in the future), and as many as the God shall call; God is still calling people.

Notice in Acts 2:40 Peter says "...Save yourselves..." Upon obeying his instructions the word indicates that 3,000 souls were added to the family of God (birthed) the same day.

Acts 2:40-41
And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
KJV
 

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,251
1,106
113
By the way, they were baptizing in the "name of Jesus" in the sense that they were baptizing under the authority of Jesus, as they were commissioned by him. And, if they made sure that the individuals being baptized understood union with Christ, then in effect they were acknowledging Jesus in their baptism.
Paul's words in 1 Corinthians make it clear the apostles/disciples were using the literal name of Jesus when administering water baptism:


"Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;

Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name." 1 Cor 1:13-15
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
Paul's words in 1 Corinthians make it clear the apostles/disciples were using the literal name of Jesus when administering water baptism:


"Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;

Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name." 1 Cor 1:13-15
Quote the whole section:

1 Corinthians 1:10-17 10 I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. 11 For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. 12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. 16 (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
(ESV Strong's)

Note that Paul de-emphasizes baptism here, unlike your claims.

The major point here is that they are to identify with Jesus, and not a teacher. But, there were also self-righteous individuals who were proclaiming themselves to be more superior by claiming to be following Jesus. This is the correct view, but they were making a claim to be above others.

Nothing said here can conflict with Matt 28:18-20, though. Jesus himself said to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
Declares the unbeliever.

I am not an unbeliever. Jesus is my Lord. I don't believe weird charismatic/Pentecostal claims, though.

All believers pray in the Spirit.

Romans 8:26-27 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. 27 And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.
(ESV Strong's)

There is nothing here that indicates speaking in tongues.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
The distinction between the Lord's Supper and water baptism is that water baptism was one of three requirements given on the day the New Testament church was birthed.

Upon belief in Jesus as the Messiah, individuals asked what they were required of do. Peter, who was given the keys of the kingdom by Jesus Himself, (Matt. 16:19) instructed all present to repent, be baptized everyone in the the name of Jesus for the remission of sin and they would receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2) He goes on to say that the promise is to them, and their children, and all those afar off (in the future), and as many as the God shall call; God is still calling people.

Notice in Acts 2:40 Peter says "...Save yourselves..." Upon obeying his instructions the word indicates that 3,000 souls were added to the family of God (birthed) the same day.

Acts 2:40-41
And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
KJV
Again, I don't deny that baptism is part of the expectation of believers. It happens after faith and repentance, though, and the faith is what has saved the person.

By the way, in the Cultish videos about United Pentecostal Church - International, they also mention this idea that Peter is the head of the NT church.

Out of interest, does your group claim apostolic succession, and require that hands be laid upon those who are baptized so that they can receive the Holy Spirit by an Apostle? That was the case of the cult I belonged to.

If you are claiming Acts is your model, then wouldn't you need an Apostle to lay hands upon the person to receive the Holy Spirit? Someone claiming to be at the level of the Twelve?
 

Waggles

Senior Member
Sep 21, 2017
3,338
1,262
113
South
adelaiderevival.com
It is amazing to me how some charismatics/Pentecostals make outlandish claims then accuse someone of disbelief if they don't believe their claims. I wasn't born yesterday.
You are not disbelieving my claims you are disbelieving the gospel and disbelieving Jesus and the Apostles.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
The records of water baptism regarding each group; Jews, Gentiles and Samaritans, witness that all baptisms were administered in Jesus' name. Thus, one can conclude that the disciples understood that Jesus' statement recorded in Matthew meant that His name was to be used. (Acts 4:12)

The historical records purpose was not only to identify that salvation was available to Gentiles and Samaritans as well as the Jewish population. This is clear due to the record of Paul's interaction with the Ephesus disciples in Acts 19. Paul's message to them was consistent with Peter's instructions. It is important to understand that Paul was still telling people over 20 years later of their need to repent, be water baptized specifically in the name of the Lord Jesus', and assisting people to receive the Holy Ghost. (Acts 19:1-6)

All nationalities of people throughout history originate from one of the three groups that were instructed on the requirements for salvation. The biblical record shows that no one group is exempt from required obedience to the commands given.
Again, this is Oneness Pentecostal doctrine. The groups associated with it are teaching other elements of Oneness Pentecostalism, including speaking in tongues to verify salvation. It's obvious that not all believers speak in tongues, so their claims are fallacious.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
You are not disbelieving my claims you are disbelieving the gospel and disbelieving Jesus and the Apostles.
The Gospel is this:


1 Corinthians 15:1-9 1 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, 2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.
3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 9
(ESV Strong's)

Nothing about your tongues-gospel in this.
 

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,251
1,106
113
Quote the whole section:

1 Corinthians 1:10-17 10 I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. 11 For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. 12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. 16 (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
(ESV Strong's)

Note that Paul de-emphasizes baptism here, unlike your claims.

The major point here is that they are to identify with Jesus, and not a teacher. But, there were also self-righteous individuals who were proclaiming themselves to be more superior by claiming to be following Jesus. This is the correct view, but they were making a claim to be above others.

Nothing said here can conflict with Matt 28:18-20, though. Jesus himself said to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
You are steering away from the point being made that Paul himself said he did not want people to think he was baptizing in his own name. This indicates they were using the name of Jesus when administering baptism.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
You are steering away from the point being made that Paul himself said he did not want people to think he was baptizing in his own name. This indicates they were using the name of Jesus when administering baptism.
I don't care if they were using Jesus' name in baptism. When I pray, I pray in the name of Jesus. If I were a baptizer, I'd be doing it in Jesus' name. By stating that I am baptizing the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, I am identifying my action with all three, INCLUDING Jesus. It is a statement to Jesus' deity.

Is there anything complicated about this?

I think you guys are treating baptizing in the name of the Triune God, and baptizing in the name of Jesus with a false dichotomy. It isn't an either/or, it is a both/and situation.
 

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,251
1,106
113
Again, this is Oneness Pentecostal doctrine. The groups associated with it are teaching other elements of Oneness Pentecostalism, including speaking in tongues to verify salvation. It's obvious that not all believers speak in tongues, so their claims are fallacious.
I provide scripture that backs up the position that the instructions given on the Day of Pentecost are universal. And again, you change the subject to denominational beliefs. That is sad. We are told to study the Word, not evaluate a concept through the lens of what one denomination or another practices.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
I provide scripture that backs up the position that the instructions given on the Day of Pentecost are universal. And again, you change the subject to denominational beliefs. That is sad. We are told to study the Word, not evaluate a concept through the lens of what one denomination or another practices.
What Scriptures are you referring to?

And, how do you deal with Matthew 28:18-20?

Several doctrinal errors are being presented on this thread that are typical of Oneness Pentecostalism....the claim that one must be baptized in the name of Jesus only, the claim that one must speak in tongues in order to be assured of salvation, and the claim that one must keep speaking in tongues.

If it walks like a duck, and it talks like a duck, it likely learned to do so from a duck somewhere down the line.