The words in the baptismal formula do not keep on changing constantly, like numbers in a lottery draw. So your quotations from these theological dictionaries only prove that the prepositions are constantly changing from Acts 2,8, 10 and 19 (en, eis, epi), as well as the precise wordings; Jesus Christ, Lord and Lord Jesus. Such constant changes prove that this is not a baptismal formula it cannot be, when the wording always differs between each occurrence.
These verses must be references to the authority for baptism, which is solely in the person of Jesus Christ himself. This is borne out when we consider that all of these verses Acts 2:38 etc are all DRY VERSES, with not a drop of water amongst them whatsoever. To me this settles it, these cannot be baptismal formulas, when not only do the wordings differ, but the prepositions also differ, and water is completely absent. How one earth can you baptise without water, I guess that as with our Lord, in Oneness theology “all things are possible.”
Consider Acts 2:38 as a case in point. This cannot be a baptismal formula, because nobody was baptised here, but rather three verse later in verse 41, where God considered the baptismal formula of such little importance that he did not even record it. Go through these verses, and you will find that they are only commanding baptism upon (or "in" or "on") the authority of the Lord (or "Lord Jesus" or "Jesus Christ"). The baptisms always follow after these verses, as does the water. So you cannot twist these verse into a baptismal formula, they must refer to the basis for baptism which is on / in / upon the authority of the Lord / Lord Jesus / Jesus Christ.
What on earth could be clearer? One would have to be a blind as a bat to miss this. Or of course a Oneness preacher, who not knowing the idiomatic structure of Greek, takes a simple statement in the Greek and completely misunderstanding it, by reading it as a twenty first century American would, then builds an entire new revelation upon a common layman’s misunderstanding.
These verses must be references to the authority for baptism, which is solely in the person of Jesus Christ himself. This is borne out when we consider that all of these verses Acts 2:38 etc are all DRY VERSES, with not a drop of water amongst them whatsoever. To me this settles it, these cannot be baptismal formulas, when not only do the wordings differ, but the prepositions also differ, and water is completely absent. How one earth can you baptise without water, I guess that as with our Lord, in Oneness theology “all things are possible.”
Consider Acts 2:38 as a case in point. This cannot be a baptismal formula, because nobody was baptised here, but rather three verse later in verse 41, where God considered the baptismal formula of such little importance that he did not even record it. Go through these verses, and you will find that they are only commanding baptism upon (or "in" or "on") the authority of the Lord (or "Lord Jesus" or "Jesus Christ"). The baptisms always follow after these verses, as does the water. So you cannot twist these verse into a baptismal formula, they must refer to the basis for baptism which is on / in / upon the authority of the Lord / Lord Jesus / Jesus Christ.
What on earth could be clearer? One would have to be a blind as a bat to miss this. Or of course a Oneness preacher, who not knowing the idiomatic structure of Greek, takes a simple statement in the Greek and completely misunderstanding it, by reading it as a twenty first century American would, then builds an entire new revelation upon a common layman’s misunderstanding.