Why Did Peter Command To Baptize in Jesus Name?

[donfish06]

Jesus himself told Peter that he had the keys to the kingdom, and told him to Baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Why, after Peter received the Holy Spirit which is to lead and guide us into all truth, did he command everyone to be baptized in Jesus' name to receive the same? Everyone else in Acts baptized the same way.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Jesus himself told Peter that he had the keys to the kingdom, and told him to Baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Why, after Peter received the Holy Spirit which is to lead and guide us into all truth, did he command everyone to be baptized in Jesus' name to receive the same? Everyone else in Acts baptized the same way.

It's doubtful that the point here is to use a specific formula, "I baptize you in Jesus' name"; but rather marks this Baptism as Christian Baptism. Christians didn't invent baptism, as we see John baptizing Jews in the Gospels; the mikvah was a staple of Jewish practice, a ritual washing in water. This is the context of John's baptism.

For example in Acts 19, Paul comes across a group identified as "disciples", but they had only received John's baptism, they hadn't received Christian baptism, which is why he baptizes them "in the name of Jesus Christ".

From very early in Christian history we find that the standard baptismal formula used is the one given in Matthew's Gospel, "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit", as early as the Didache in fact.

The point of mentioning baptism in Jesus' name isn't about formula, but marking what kind of baptism it is. This may seem superfluous today in the 21st century as "Baptism" is fully contextualized in a Christian setting and part of Christian language; but in the 1st century marking this baptism as a Christian one, one attached to Jesus Christ and His promises, would have been rather necessary. Not just any ol' washing in water will do, it must be that washing with water that comes with the authority and Word of Christ, which carries the promises and Word of Christ.

Because this Baptism marks one as belonging to Christ, it marks them with Christ. It clothes us with Christ, it unites us with Christ's death and resurrection, it brings us the gift of the Holy Spirit, forgiveness of sin, it washes us with regeneration. It isn't a simple washing of dirt from the body (1 Peter 3:21), but is a transformation, a salvific work of God acted upon us as grace.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[RDKirk]

The point of mentioning baptism in Jesus' name isn't about formula, but marking what kind of baptism it is. This may seem superfluous today in the 21st century as "Baptism" is fully contextualized in a Christian setting and part of Christian language; but in the 1st century marking this baptism as a Christian one, one attached to Jesus Christ and His promises, would have been rather necessary.

I agree with what you have said, and I also recall:

Therefore, God elevated him to the place of highest honor
and gave him the name above all other names,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father. -- Philippians 2

Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved. -- Acts 4

I and the Father are one. -- John 10

Notice that the baptismal reference is not to "names," but to "name."

There is only one name given to us.

With all NT scripture taken into context, the name of Jesus is the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I agree with what you have said, and I also recall:

Therefore, God elevated him to the place of highest honor
and gave him the name above all other names,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father. -- Philippians 2

Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved. -- Acts 4

I and the Father are one. -- John 10

Notice that the baptismal reference is not to "names," but to "name."

There is only one name given to us.

With all NT scripture taken into context, the name of Jesus is the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Except that "Jesus" is the name given exclusively to the Son who became man in Mary's womb.

The Father didn't become flesh.
The Holy Spirit didn't become flesh.
Only the Son.

As such, only the Son has the name "Jesus", because only the Son became man.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[RDKirk]

Except that "Jesus" is the name given exclusively to the Son who became man in Mary's womb.

The Father didn't become flesh.
The Holy Spirit didn't become flesh.
Only the Son.

As such, only the Son has the name "Jesus", because only the Son became man.

-CryptoLutheran

What, by the way, are the names of the Father and the Holy Spirit?

Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you. -- John 16

We have one name, and the Father responds to it.

Remember that "Jesus" is the Greek for "Yeshua," a contraction of "Yaweh hoshua," which literally means "Yahweh is our salvation."

"Jesus" is a name of God, specifically the name denoting His salvation of man.

 

[ViaCrucis]

What, by the way, are the names of the Father and the Holy Spirit?

Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you. -- John 16

We have one name, and the Father responds to it.

Remember that "Jesus" is the Greek for "Yeshua," a contraction of "Yaweh hoshua," which literally means "Yahweh is our salvation."

"Jesus" is a name of God, specifically the name denoting His salvation of man.

God has many names in Scripture, the most important one being the Tetragrammaton, YHVH.

But "Jesus" is a name given expressly at the Incarnation (Matthew 1:21 and Luke 1:31). And only the Son became flesh. "Jesus" is the name of the God-Man, Child of Mary, eternal and only-begotten Son of the Father, begotten before all ages.

The Father isn't named "Jesus".
The Holy Spirit isn't named "Jesus".

-CryptoLutheran

 

[RDKirk]

God has many names in Scripture, the most important one being the Tetragrammaton, YHVH.

How important can it be if God has rendered it useless?

But "Jesus" is a name given expressly at the Incarnation (Matthew 1:21 and Luke 1:31). And only the Son became flesh. "Jesus" is the name of the God-Man, Child of Mary, eternal and only-begotten Son of the Father, begotten before all ages.

The Father isn't named "Jesus".
The Holy Spirit isn't named "Jesus".

-CryptoLutheran

But there is only one name useful for all of them.

I

 

[donfish06]

With all NT scripture taken into context, the name of Jesus is the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Amen, brother!

 

[donfish06]

God has many names in Scripture, the most important one being the Tetragrammaton, YHVH.

But "Jesus" is a name given expressly at the Incarnation (Matthew 1:21 and Luke 1:31). And only the Son became flesh. "Jesus" is the name of the God-Man, Child of Mary, eternal and only-begotten Son of the Father, begotten before all ages.

The Father isn't named "Jesus".
The Holy Spirit isn't named "Jesus".

-CryptoLutheran

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. (Is 9:6)

Then why does this say that his name will be the everlasting Father?

 

[ViaCrucis]

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. (Is 9:6)

Then why does this say that his name will be the everlasting Father?

So there are two Fathers?

So there's the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ is also Father, so there's the Father of the Father?

Or are you saying that Jesus is His own Father?

Neither works biblically.

So perhaps, just perhaps, this text doesn't serve as a proof text to say that Jesus is the Father. In fact, just perhaps, abi-ad doesn't mean that. And that if we take all which Scripture has to say, demonstrating that there is a Father and there is a Son; a Son who is Logos of God, Logos with God, indeed Logos who is Himself God, that there is indeed Father and Son; and the Son is not the Father of Himself. But rather He is Son of the Father, One and Another.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

How important can it be if God has rendered it useless?

I don't understand. How has it been rendered useless? None of God's other Names have been rendered useless.

God is still God Most-Sovereign/Almighty, He is still God Most High, He is still I AM that I AM.

But there is only one name useful for all of them.

I

I fail to understand how.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[RDKirk]

Which name is used by Christians for baptisms? Which name for anything? Do you ever call upon the name of Yahweh...if that's even how it's actually pronounced? Is anyone baptized under that name? What do you use if for?

If it's useful, why did Jesus tell us to use His name only? If we are not to use Yahweh, then it is not useful.

 

[WisdomTree]

I see that some here are saying that Jesus is the Father, which I equate to it as being the Son and the Father as the same thing. This is called modalism, where the differences between the three persons of the Trinity were just the names, a heresy which was promoted by Sabellius during the early period, a school of thought refuted and condemned by the First Council of Constantinople in 381 which also produced the version of the Nicene Creed we have today (minus the filioque clause).

 

[RDKirk]

I see that some here are saying that Jesus is the Father, which I equate to it as being the Son and the Father as the same thing. This is called modalism, where the differences between the three persons of the Trinity were just the names, a heresy which was promoted by Sabellius during the early period, a school of thought refuted and condemned by the First Council of Constantinople in 381 which also produced the version of the Nicene Creed we have today (minus the filioque clause).

I'm not saying that the Son is the Father, I'm saying that "Jesus" is the only name Christians are given to call upon God.

 

[WisdomTree]

I'm not saying that the Son is the Father, I'm saying that "Jesus" is the only name Christians are given to call upon God.

Well, I guess that clears up the confusion then.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Which name is used by Christians for baptisms? Which name for anything? Do you ever call upon the name of Yahweh...if that's even how it's actually pronounced? Is anyone baptized under that name? What do you use if for?

If it's useful, why did Jesus tell us to use His name only? If we are not to use Yahweh, then it is not useful.

My prayers can come in many flavors and permutations:

"Most Holy and Almighty God"

"Blessed and Eternal Father"

"Lord"

"God Most High and King Eternal"

"Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God"

"Lord Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father Almighty"

"Lord and only-begotten of the Father, Jesus Christ"

"You who reign above all things"

"O Creator blessed"

"Father, Son, and Holy Spirit--holy and most blessed Trinity, God"

"Adonai"

"Yahweh, Most Holy, Most Divine"

"You who said to Moses, 'I AM that I AM'"

"O Christ, God, Savior, Son of the Father"

"O Merciful God"

"God Most Merciful"

"God whose grace is neverending"

"O Good Shepherd"

"Eternal One"

"Master and Friend"

etc.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[donfish06]

I am NOT a modalist. I will explain my view of the godhead after church. In the meantime, here are historical findings on the origin of the trinity and the trinity formula used in baptism.

All of these sources are trinitarian:


James Hastings: “It has been customary to trace the institution of the practice to the Words of Christ in Matthew 28:19, but the authenticity of this passage has been challenged on historical as well as textural grounds. It must be acknowledged that the formula of the threefold name, which is here enjoined, does not appear to have been used by the primitive church, which so far as our information goes, baptized ‘in’ or ‘into’ the Name of Jesus, or Jesus Christ, or the Lord Jesus, without any reference to the Father or the Spirit” (Dictionary of the Bible, p. 88).

Scribners: “The original form of words were into the Name of Jesus Christ or Lord Jesus. Baptism into Trinity was a later development” (Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. I, p. 241).

Canney Encyclopaedia: “The early church always baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus until the development of the Trinity; afterward they were baptized in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost” (p. 53).

American Encyclopaedia, International Edition: “The term Trinity was used by Theophilus of Antioch in AD 180? (Vol. 27, p. 116).

Encyclopaedia Britannica: “The triune and Trinity formula was not uniformly used from the beginning, and up until the third century, baptism in the Name of Christ only was so widespread that Pope Stephen, in opposition to St. Cyprian, said that baptism in the Name of Christ was valid. But Catholic missionaries, by omitting one or more persons of the Trinity when they were baptized, were anathematized by the Roman church. Now the formula of Rome is, “I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and in the name of the Son and in the name of the Holy Ghost” (11th Ed., Vol. 3, p. 365-366).

Encyclopedia of Religions: “Persons were baptized at first in the Name of Jesus Christ, or ‘in the Name of the Lord Jesus.’ Afterwards, with the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, they were baptized in the Name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost” (p. 53).

New International Encyclopaedia: “The Trinity doctrine. The Catholic faith is this: ‘We worship one in Trinity, but there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. The glory equal—the majesty co-eternal.’ The doctrine is not found in its fully developed form in the Scriptures. Modern theology does not seek to find it in the Old Testament. At the time of the Reformation, the Protestant Church took over the doctrine of the Trinity without serious examination” (Vol. 22, p. 476).

Hastings Encyclopedia of Religion: “Christian baptism was administered by using the words ‘in the Name of Jesus.’ The use of a Trinity formula of any sort was not suggested in the early Church history. Baptism was always in the Name of the Lord Jesus until the time of Justin Martyr when the Triune formula was used” (Vol. 2, p. 377-378, 389. )

“NAME was an ancient synonym for “Person.” Payment was always made in the name of some person referring to ownership. Therefore one being baptized in Jesus’ Name became His personal property. “Ye are Christ’s.” (Acts 1:15; Revelation 3:4; I Corinthians 3:23).

LIFE Magazine: “The Catholics made this statement concerning their doctrine of the Trinity to defend the dogma of the assumption of Mary in an article by Graham Green: ‘Our opponents sometimes claim that no belief should be held dogmatically which is not explicitly stated in the Scripture but the Protestant churches have themselves accepted such dogma as the Trinity for which there exists no such authority in the Gospels’” (October 30, 1950, Vol. 29, Number 18, p. 51).

Catholic Encyclopaedia: “The true doctrine of the sacrament of baptism is not taught by the Roman church. Baptism given by heretics in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost with the intention of performing what the church performs, is not true baptism” (Vol. 2, p. 259).

New Catholic Encyclopedia: “With regard to the form used for Baptism in the early church, there is the difficulty that although Matthew (28:19) speaks of the Trinitarian formula, which is now used, the Acts of the Apostles (2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5) and Paul (I Corinthians 1:13; 6:11; Galatians 3:27; Romans 6:3) speak only of Baptism ‘in the Name of Jesus.’ Baptism in titles cannot be found in the first centuries. . .” (McGraw Hill Publishing, p. 59).

William Phillips Hall: “In this very ancient version (Syriac Peschito Version) which is believed by good authorities (Gwilliam, Boners, and others) to represent a text much older that of the Greek manuscript from which our English Old Testament was largely derived, ‘The Name of the Lord Jesus Messiah or Christ’ appears in all four readings given (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5)” (A Remarkable Discovery, p. 70).

International Encyclopaedia: “The doctrine of the Trinity did not form part of the Apostles’ preachings, as this is reported in the New Testament” (First Edition, Vol. 18, p. 226).

New International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: “The term ‘Trinity’ was originated by . . . Tertulian, a Roman Catholic church father. No record of the Trinitarian formula can be discovered in the Acts of the Apostles. . . At the time of the Reformation, the Protestant Church took over the doctrine of the Trinity without serious examination” (Vol. 1, p. 396).

“Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon.” “Trinity,” in The Oxford Companion to the Bible, Oxford University Press, 1993, p. 782.

“The adoption of a non-biblical phrase at Nicea constituted a landmark in the growth of dogma; the Trinity is true, since the Church — the universal Church speaking by its Bishops — says so, though the Bible does not! We have a formula, but what does that formula contain? No child of the Church dare seek to answer.” “Dogma, Dogmatic Theology,” in Encyclopedia

 

[donfish06]

Col 3:17 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.

Do all things in the name of the Lord Jesus, except for baptize?

Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

So, Peter tells us to baptize in Jesus' name, and Paul tells us to do ALL things in the name of Jesus, and when we are baptized we are baptized into Christ, yet we are to baptize in the name of trinity, which was invented by the catholic church?

There are no historical accounts of the original church ever baptizing in the father son and holy ghost until 2nd or 3rd century.

Eph 4:4-6 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; (5) One Lord, one faith, one baptism, (6) One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

Joh 14:16-26 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; (17) Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. (18) I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. (19) Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also. (20) At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. (21) He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. (22) Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? (23) Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. (24) He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me. (25) These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. (26) But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

So who dwells in us? The Father, the Son, or the Holy Ghost? Or is it all three? Why would all three need to dwell in us?

 

[ViaCrucis]

It's unfortunate that none of the Scriptures you posted by any stretch of the imagination denies the Holy Trinity, that there is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; three distinct and yet unconfused hypostases.

More remarkable is that you post a Scripture which has Jesus (the Son) saying the Father will send another Comforter, the Holy Spirit. Almost as though there are three in that passage.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[donfish06]

So there are two Fathers?

So there's the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ is also Father, so there's the Father of the Father?

Or are you saying that Jesus is His own Father?

No, There is only ONE God, ONE Faith, ONE Lord

Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

God is an invisible spirit. God wants to have communion with us. How can an invisible spirit have communion with us?

He creates a body to dwell in. This is the MAN Jesus. He then descends into this body, and Jesus becomes Christ (which is translated, annointed)

Jesus is God in flesh (Mat 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.)

Jesus was completely human just like all of us, but he was full of the complete spirit of God, which we cannot be, as we are sinners. That is why Jesus had to be sinless.

Because we are sinful, we cannot contain the full measure of God. Thus God dwells his church, which is himself split into a many-membered body. Every member of the TRUE church has some attribute of God (Rom 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Since a perfect sacrifice was made, God can now dwell in us... in part. If Jesus was the first among many brethren, then we are that many brethren! If we are baptized into Christ, and have received the Holy Spirit, then we are now (as a whole) Christ! (the annointed)

In short, the Father was God above us, the Son was God WITH us (Emmanuel) and the Holy Spirit is God IN us.

ONE God, manifesting himself in one flesh, then in many! We are his epistles, read of all men! This is why the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, is the LORD JESUS CHRIST!!!

Satan has had thousands of years to deceive. The last thing he wants is for us to realize who we are! If we are sons and daughters of God, then that makes us equal to God!

Joh 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

If God is YOUR Father then you are equal with him too!