It is important to understand two things about this verse, "baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" Matth 28:19
1. It is undisputed that a better translation of the word "in" should be "into". Being baptized is to be submerged without the ability or intent of rising to the surface. While it does mean to be dipped it is not used in the case of a metaphor in for a Jewish purification ritual.
2 The word "name" means the nature and character of something or someone.
3. This verse should be translated "Baptizing them into the nature and character of the Father, son and Holy Spirit."
There is no command in the Bible to baptize anyone in water.
4. Jesus defined what he meant by this baptism when he said, "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you . . .
Jesus' definition of baptism into the nature and character of God is "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you". How are they to be baptized into the character and nature of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost? By being taught to observe all of the commandments of Jesus. This is discipleship not water baptism.
Versavia, Have you read about Apollos who was mighty in the scriptures and instructed in the way of the Lord, but he knew only the baptism of John? He apparently listened when the way of God was expounded to him more perfectly...
Acts18.
24 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man and mighty in the Scriptures, came to Ephesus.
25 This man was instructed in the Way of the Lord; and being fervent in the Spirit, he spoke and taught diligently the things of the Lord, though he knew only the baptism of John.
26 And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Aquila and Priscilla had heard him, they took him unto them and expounded unto him the Way of God more perfectly.
27 And when he was disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him. And when he had come, he helped them much who had believed through grace;
28 for he mightily refuted the Jews (and that publicly), showing by the Scriptures that Jesus was Christ.
Somebuddy, Thank you for your post, which is brilliantly clear and simple:
--------------------------------
It is important to understand two things about this verse, "baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" Matth 28:19
1. It is undisputed that a better translation of the word "in" should be "into". Being baptized is to be submerged without the ability or intent of rising to the surface. While it does mean to be dipped it is not used in the case of a metaphor in for a Jewish purification ritual.
2 The word "name" means the nature and character of something or someone.
3. This verse should be translated "Baptizing them into the nature and character of the Father, son and Holy Spirit."
There is no command in the Bible to baptize anyone in water.
4. Jesus defined what he meant by this baptism when he said, "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you . . .
Jesus' definition of baptism into the nature and character of God is "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you". How are they to be baptized into the character and nature of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost? By being taught to observe all of the commandments of Jesus. This is discipleship not water baptism.
Please look up the word Baptizing in Matthew 28:19,along with the two words " Teach"verse 19 and " Teaching " verse 20..
Next look into the 'tense' which these words are being used.
Then ask ABBA,what He is saying in this His Word.. Remember the context of this is about ' Discipleship ', not dunking people in water.
Yeshua has commissioned these Jewish men to be going to the Nations / the Ethnos-Unclean ones.
They are to be making Disciples / learners " unto Yeshua the Jewish Messiah.
What the Lord shows you should be understood and taught by the Church,for this is not talking about water Baptism.
This is talking about immersing People into the Names Of GOD,as revealed in the Old Covenant.
To baptize a person in water,is a one time event.
To be baptizing/immersing believers into or with the names of GOD,is an on going continuous process,which requires that I have a deep understanding of the Lord and His revealed names myself.
Each name reveals His character,attitude,personality;Who He is and what He is like.
Baptism,in water is unto the Remission/Forgiveness/the release of sins from the sinful ones..And in the name of Yeshua,ONLY:
Please read Acts 2 :38 ,I hope that you will be having a Blessed day in Messiah Yeshua.
We do not force cults members and fake Christians and unbelievers to be baptized.
They actually should NOT be baptized because they are UNBELIEVERS.
We shall call them to repentance like John the Baptist did.
And those who REPENTED and converted/turned from sins, ABANDONING them, became Christians and they were baptized like Jesus Himself.
Our God Jesus commanded us to do it and we-Christians- are baptized in His name and in the name of His Father and the Holy Spirit.
Guys, if you are NOT true Christians then forget about baptizing...it will NOT work in your case if you do NOT believe in the Creator of the universe Jesus and what He commands us in the Bible. lol
I'm intensely skeptical of this "no water baptism" concept. The logic fails in that "Jesus fulfilled something so it means we don't need to do it anymore" doesn't work at all, and you end up with no moral landmarks for being and living as a new creature, our only guidepost is Jesus. I think the simple "do as Christ did" and "follow in Christ's footsteps" should be all the proof one needs for water baptism and every other thing that Jesus did and Christians are to do. The article does not touch every positive proof of water baptism, I'm not sure it even touches any. The story of Phillip and the Eunuch isn't mentioned. I will concede that spirit baptism is the only necessary and "practical" baptism, but that does not eliminate water baptism or make it evil. I believe separating water baptism and spirit baptism is also unnecessary, I don't see any difference between the two. The water part is simply supposed to be a personal experience of death to self and new life in Christ, sometimes witnessed by other people, and not always required under extenuating circumstances. The call to ignore water baptism is uncalled for, there is no biblical reason NOT to baptize people by submersion. If it were in the same class as circumcision, I would expect the same amount of negative discourse on the subject. Just the fact that the article so terribly misrepresents Paul is incredibly suspect.
1 Corinthians 1:13
13Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? 14I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; 15Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. 16And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. 17For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
Paul is indicating that he did indeed baptize new believers, but that he is grateful that he did not baptize very many because he did not want people to think that he was doing all this work for his own gain or in his own name. Paul also provided his own money to support his own work for a similar reason. He was going out into new territory full of people who had no direct knowledge of Christ, and he labored intensively to make sure they did not get the wrong impression. However, he did say that other laborers in the gospel should receive church funds for support. Paul was the tip of the spear, spreading the word. He left most of the baptizing to others, but he does state that he did baptize some.
Catholic tradition has nothing to do with water baptism and I would say that it is definitely in error according to the scriptures, even in the context of water baptism. Implying "Catholics added the words" opens all kinds of other theological problems which there is no reason for. Catholics don't even follow the biblical standard of water baptism at all. As someone pointed out, the concept of water baptism is throughout the bible and in Jewish tradition, at worst, baptism is Jewish, not catholic.
John 3:5
Jesus answered, 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 14:12
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
