Staight Path or Rabbit Trail...

Not sure if wansvic meant to make this point, but the old father, son, holy ghost things does come across as a bit of an impersonal tradition, rather than a personal one, like reciting an incantation. Now I'm not saying all those pastors had that mindset of course.

The idea water baptism is merely a public display is in fact a manmade concept. The biblical record confirms water baptism in the name of Jesus is for remission of sin as established by God. Those who believe the gospel message, first presented in Jerusalem, act in faith and receive the promised reality. (Luke 24:47, Acts 2:4-41, 8:12-18, 10:43-48, 19:1-7, 22:16)

To belittle the importance of invoking the name of Jesus in water baptism as nothing more than magic words is to discredit the very intent of God:

"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." Romans 6:3-6


Please tell me who died to pay the penalty for the sins of all mankind? Consider the Apostle Paul's word on the subject, "Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?" 1 Cor 1:13

Matthew 28:19 aligns perfectly with the actions of the apostles. The apostles obeyed Jesus' command, they baptized in His name.

As noted in post 15, the didache contradicts many principles set forth in the bible. And we are instructed that scripture is where the truth can be found. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Tim 3:16-17

Being picky about fine details in the word is essential. God does nothing haphazardly. Everyone of His designs is laid out with precision and has its purpose. Keep in mind, all will be judged by the word of God, not questionable outside sources such as the didache. (John 12:48)

Any document's teachings that contradict the word of God are suspect.

And the scriptures you reference do not express the need to confess sins in church. Context matters...

What I actually said: "...it was the forerunners of the Roman Catholic Church that changed how water baptisms were administered. They rejected the biblical mandate to water baptize individuals in the name of Jesus. And opted rather to insist on using the phrase Father, Son and Holy Ghost." Afterward the RCC perpetuated the error.

As to Matthew 28:19, What is the name? Jesus stated to baptize in the name of... The detailed accounts of water baptism by the apostles provides the answer. (Acts 2:4-41, 8:12-18, 10:43-48, 19:1-7, 22:16)

Also, the sequence in which Cornelius and other Gentiles obeyed the water baptism command is irrelevant. The idea that the Holy Ghost is received instantly upon obedience to water baptism is not scriptural. Yes, the word says those willing to repent and be water baptized in the name of Jesus shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. However, scripture itself reveals the experiences are independent of one another. Some gathered at Pentecost received the Holy Ghost before, and others after submitting to water baptism in the name of the Jesus. (Acts 2:4-42) The Apostle Paul received the Holy Ghost prior to water baptism in the name of Jesus. (Acts 9:17-18, 22:16) The 12 Ephesians were water baptized in the name of Jesus and afterward received the Holy Ghost at the laying on of Paul's hands. (Acts 19:1-7) Samaritans, those half-Jew and half-Gentile, were water baptized first and days later received the Holy Ghost. (Acts 8:12-18)

The point is the scriptural accounts back up Jesus words: "...Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. " (John 3:5) Many refuse to accept Jesus meant water baptism. However, if that is not what was meant, Why does every detailed accounts include people being baptized in water in the name of Jesus as well as a separate experience of receiving the Holy Spirit?

Faith can refer to the teachings of the Bible and is what is meant in Jude 3.
Jude begins by referencing the common salvation and admonishes his readers to earnestly contend for the faith first delivered to the saints. Clearly this is a reference to their teaching regarding the common salvation.

good.

then you agree this thread is a profitless rabbit trail and there is no need for further discussion.

Were your questions answered?

Oneness Pentecostal deny the trinity.

No, I do not agree.

Again, my point is Jesus' words in Matthew do not contradict the apostles actions recorded in Acts.

Jesus told the apostles to baptize in the name... And that name is Jesus as revealed through the actions of the apostles. (Acts 2:4-41, 8:12-18, 10:43-48, 19:1-7, 22:16)

An actual water baptism administered in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost can be found no where in scripture. Scripture does however reveal that in Jesus dwells the fulness of the Godhead. (Col. 2:9)

Bringing up the Trinity is a mere diversion tactic.

Specifics regarding the Trinity don't alter what the Bible actually reveals concerning how water baptisms were administered by the apostles. The bottom line is the apostles obeyed Jesus and baptized everyone in the name of Jesus. Why? Because it was He who was crucified for the sins of all. And in Him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead. (Col. 2:9)

Denominational beliefs associated with the Trinity don't alter what the Bible actually reveals concerning how water baptisms were administered by the apostles. The bottom line is the apostles obeyed Jesus and baptized everyone in the name of Jesus. Why? Because it was He who was crucified for the sins of all. And in Him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead. (Col. 2:9)

The Apostle Paul instructs the born again Corinthians concerning the relevance of their water baptism in the name of Jesus.
Paul knew baptism was to be in Jesus’ name:
Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? 1 Cor 1:13

Members of the church of Corinth that Paul water baptized:
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.
And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. 1 Cor 1:14-16

You believe that if not baptised in the name of Jesus only then you are not saved?
Yes or no is suffice?

Do you believe the same if someone believes in the Trinity?
Yes or no is suffice.

No more or no less.
Yes or no.

Ta

Jesus didn't say this?

Yes or no?

Matthew 28:19-20
19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.