Jesus could have been disapproved.

[Runningman]

God was manifest in the flesh in exactly how Jesus said he was. By word, deed and spirit.
And the word that is eternal life was manifest in the mortal flesh when Jesus was raised bodily to die no more.

Do you mean that Jesus spoke the truth the Father gave him, he did what he saw the Father doing, etc? In that sense, yes. But what Alfred Persson was trying to say with 1 Timothy 3:16, if I understand him correctly, is that God incarnated in human form. In other words, he's saying God became a man which isn't right.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Peter didn't "deny" the Trinity. There is nothing to deny because it doesn't exist in Scripture. I assure you, this imagined Trinity is neither explained or described in the Bible.

Peter's speaking against Jesus is forgivable because Jesus isn't God. Contrasted with speaking against the Holy Spirit being unforgivable. Therefore, speaking against God is not equal to speaking against Jesus.

Matthew 12
31Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. 32And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

Didn't you read what I said? Jesus knows the future, therefore when He cited the "trinitarian baptism" in Matthew 28:19, He knew the church would use it to prove the Holy Trinity, One Name in a compound unity, Father Son and Holy Spirit:

Therefore, when Jesus commanded His disciples baptize in the compound unity of the Name of God, Father Son and Holy Spirit, He knew Trinitarians would cite it for proof of the Holy Trinity:

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. (Matt. 28:19-20 NKJ)

 

[Runningman]

Didn't you read what I said? Jesus knows the future, therefore when He cited the "trinitarian baptism" in Matthew 28:19, He knew the church would use it to prove the Holy Trinity, One Name in a compound unity, Father Son and Holy Spirit:

Therefore, when Jesus commanded His disciples baptize in the compound unity of the Name of God, Father Son and Holy Spirit, He knew Trinitarians would cite it for proof of the Holy Trinity:

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. (Matt. 28:19-20 NKJ)

There would need to be some precedent of the Trinity to understand that to be a reference to the Trinity. Since there isn't, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are understood in different ways. The Father is God, Jesus is Lord and His Son, and the Holy Spirit in this context is an anointing.

 

[Alfred Persson]

There would need to be some precedent of the Trinity to understand that to be a reference to the Trinity. Since there isn't, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are understood in different ways. The Father is God, Jesus is Lord and His Son, and the Holy Spirit in this context is an anointing.

The Greek "Name" is singular, yet Three Persons are named = Trinitarian Compound Unity

Jesus knew the future, if He wanted to end Trinitarian Truth, He could have easily did that.

Jesus says He is God in so many ways, its incredible. Here is an example, just ask "who is teaching them what they learned from the Father, at this point in time:

"It is written in the prophets,`And they shall all be taught by God.' Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me. (Jn. 6:45 NKJ)

 

[LeviR]

Do you mean that Jesus spoke the truth the Father gave him, he did what he saw the Father doing, etc? In that sense, yes. But what Alfred Persson was trying to say with 1 Timothy 3:16, if I understand him correctly, is that God incarnated in human form. In other words, he's saying God became a man which isn't right.

Yes, you and I both know that when it’s said God was manifest it refers to the Father..His will, His words, His works, and finally His eternal life.

 

[Runningman]

The Greek "Name" is singular, yet Three Persons are named = Trinitarian Compound Unity

Jesus knew the future, if He wanted to end Trinitarian Truth, He could have easily did that.

That isn't what God or Jesus does. If someone wants to believe something, whether it's right or wrong, then they are free to do it.

Jesus says He is God in so many ways, its incredible. Here is an example, just ask "who is teaching them what they learned from the Father, at this point in time:

"It is written in the prophets,`And they shall all be taught by God.' Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me. (Jn. 6:45 NKJ)

Who taught Jesus though? Since God taught Jesus and then Jesus taught them then yes they are being taught by God. It's like if you repeat the teachings God taught Jesus then, in effect, those you teach are also taught by God. They are not taught by God because you are God, but because you are giving God's teachings. You can't take credit for that.

John 8
28Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
40But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

 

[Alfred Persson]

That isn't what God or Jesus does. If someone wants to believe something, whether it's right or wrong, then they are free to do it.


Who taught Jesus though? Since God taught Jesus and then Jesus taught them then yes they are being taught by God. It's like if you repeat the teachings God taught Jesus then, in effect, those you teach are also taught by God. They are not taught by God because you are God, but because you are giving God's teachings. You can't take credit for that.

John 8
28Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
40But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

Given Jesus' knowledge about the future, He taught the Trinitarian Baptismal formula because the Holy Trinity is truth, God is a compound unity in one Name, Yahweh.

While your argument is possible, its less likely as John 1:1 "the Word was God" is the net result of decades of thinking on what Christ said. John contemplated everything Christ taught, then wrote his gospel.

 

[Runningman]

Given Jesus' knowledge about the future, He taught the Trinitarian Baptismal formula because the Holy Trinity is truth, God is a compound unity in one Name, Yahweh.

While your argument is possible, its less likely as John 1:1 "the Word was God" is the net result of decades of thinking on what Christ said. John contemplated everything Christ taught, then wrote his gospel.

Then why are there no examples of the disciples going forth and teaching people to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?

 

[Alfred Persson]

Then why are there no examples of the disciples going forth and teaching people to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?

They would have if someone disputed it. Evidently, they didn't think it necessary to refer to the full formula, condensing it as "Baptise in Jesus' Name" meaning according to His teaching.

Not giving examples doesn't mean it didn't happen:

And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen. (Jn. 21:25 NKJ)

 

[Runningman]

They would have if someone disputed it. Evidently, they didn't think it necessary to refer to the full formula, condensing it as "Baptise in Jesus' Name" meaning according to His teaching.

Not giving examples doesn't mean it didn't happen:

And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen. (Jn. 21:25 NKJ)

That isn't a satisfactory explanation of the Trinity. It could mean that since the Trinitarian baptismal formula doesn't exist outside of one verse in Matthew 28 then it must mean something.

So what I believe is Matthew 28:19 refers to authority. Acts 19:1-7 is super useful here. Getting baptized into a name didn't require that name be God's name; Paul also spoke of the holy spirit as something they could receive. Based on other examples of water baptism, I see the holy spirit as an anointing and empowerment, but not a third person. So why they only ever used the name of Jesus in their baptizing is being they were being baptized into Jesus, Jesus is in the Father, and in that way we become one with them and receive the holy spirit anointing.

 

[LeviR]

That isn't a satisfactory explanation of the Trinity. It could mean that since the Trinitarian baptismal formula doesn't exist outside of one verse in Matthew 28 then it must mean something.

So what I believe is Matthew 28:19 refers to authority. Acts 19:1-7 is super useful here. Getting baptized into a name didn't require that name be God's name; Paul also spoke of the holy spirit as something they could receive. Based on other examples of water baptism, I see the holy spirit as an anointing and empowerment, but not a third person. So why they only ever used the name of Jesus in their baptizing is being they were being baptized into Jesus, Jesus is in the Father, and in that way we become one with them and receive the holy spirit anointing.

It seems to me the reason the disciples baptized only in the name of Jesus was because the Father was kyrios and so was the son.
When the Father is called kyrios it refers to his name YHWH.
And knowing that Jesus had come in the name of his Father it would be unnecessary to baptize in the name of YHWH and Jesus. Or to baptize them in the name of Lord Father and Lord Jesus.
Coming in the name of the Father Jesus is representing the Father as kyrios. And therefore baptized in the name of Jesus only.
The Holy Spirit is not kyrios so being baptized in the Holy Spirit would refer to the gifts they would then receive from the Father.
Like tongues, prophecy, knowledge, healing, handling snakes etc.

 

[Runningman]

It seems to me the reason the disciples baptized only in the name of Jesus was because the Father was kyrios and so was the son.
When the Father is called kyrios it refers to his name YHWH.
And knowing that Jesus had come in the name of his Father it would be unnecessary to baptize in the name of YHWH and Jesus. Or to baptize them in the name of Lord Father and Lord Jesus.
Coming in the name of the Father Jesus is representing the Father as kyrios. And therefore baptized in the name of Jesus only.
The Holy Spirit is not kyrios so being baptized in the Holy Spirit would refer to the gifts they would then receive from the Father.
Like tongues, prophecy, knowledge, healing, handling snakes etc.

yes good point. Also on many occasions it seems like they were "filled up" with the Holy Spirit more than once. So if they are filled up more than once with the Holy Spirit then that would suggest God is a thing that eventually depletes and needs to be replenished to get the power back; a bit like how a car uses fuel then won't drive again until it's filled with gas. I don't believe God is like that! That's why I lean more toward the Holy Spirit usually being an anointing, but sometimes God is actually called the Holy Spirit because He is a holy Spirit after all. So we got to somehow sort it out based on context.

For example, in Acts 2:4 Peter and the others were filled with the Holy Spirit. After that, Peter prayed in Acts 4:24-31 and was filled again when he prayed. There are a bunch of little examples like this around Acts.

 

[LeviR]

Mar 16:15 - And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

Mar 16:16 - He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Mar 16:17 - And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Mar 16:18 - They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

 

[LeviR]

yes good point. Also on many occasions it seems like they were "filled up" with the Holy Spirit more than once. So if they are filled up more than once with the Holy Spirit then that would suggest God is a thing that eventually depletes and needs to be replenished to get the power back; a bit like how a car uses fuel then won't drive again until it's filled with gas. I don't believe God is like that! That's why I lean more toward the Holy Spirit usually being an anointing, but sometimes God is actually called the Holy Spirit because He is a holy Spirit after all. So we got to somehow sort it out based on context.

For example, in Acts 2:4 Peter and the others were filled with the Holy Spirit. After that, Peter prayed in Acts 4:24-31 and was filled again when he prayed. There are a bunch of little examples like this around Acts.

Mar 16:15 - And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

Mar 16:16 - He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Mar 16:17 - And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Mar 16:18 - They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

They were baptized in Jesus name and then baptized with the Holy Spirit gifts.

 

[LeviR]

Those type of miraculous gifts as described above are no longer being manifest by the believers since that age ended.
It was in Jesus name they were baptized and Jesus said he would be with them til the end of the age. So when the age ended they would no longer receive those type of gifts as they were being baptized.
Just as Paul said, they would cease.
The end of that age came with the destruction of the temple in 70

 

[Alfred Persson]

That isn't a satisfactory explanation of the Trinity. It could mean that since the Trinitarian baptismal formula doesn't exist outside of one verse in Matthew 28 then it must mean something.

So what I believe is Matthew 28:19 refers to authority. Acts 19:1-7 is super useful here. Getting baptized into a name didn't require that name be God's name; Paul also spoke of the holy spirit as something they could receive. Based on other examples of water baptism, I see the holy spirit as an anointing and empowerment, but not a third person. So why they only ever used the name of Jesus in their baptizing is being they were being baptized into Jesus, Jesus is in the Father, and in that way we become one with them and receive the holy spirit anointing.

Your theory is speculation, not exegesis.

The precise Greek phrase εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ "in the name of" occurs only four times in the NT and each time it is idiom identifying "the precise authority" authorizing the action.

This is similar to modern usage: "Stop in the name of the Law", therefore the Name cannot be inaccurate. It must denote what is Named.

In each of its four occurrences "in the name of" refers precisely to specific information in the name:
The evidence:

BYZ Jn. 3:18 Ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν οὐ κρίνεται· ὁ δὲ μὴ πιστεύων ἤδη κέκριται, ὅτι μὴ πεπίστευκεν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ μονογενοῦς υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ.

18 "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. (Jn. 3:18 NKJ)

He who does not believe "in the name of" Jesus THAT HE IS the only begotten Son of God is condemned. That precise information must be believed" for salvation to occur.

BYZ Acts 8:16 οὔπω γὰρ ἦν ἐπ᾽ οὐδενὶ αὐτῶν ἐπιπεπτωκός, μόνον δὲ βεβαπτισμένοι ὑπῆρχον εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ.

14 Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them,
15 who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit.
16 For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
17 Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.(Acts 8:14-17 NKJ)

Baptized "only in the name of Jesus" is a statement they lacked important information about Christ that must be publicly confessed for salvation to occur. This confirms "in the name of" is in reference to specific information.


BYZ Acts 8:16 οὔπω γὰρ ἦν ἐπ᾽ οὐδενὶ αὐτῶν ἐπιπεπτωκός, μόνον δὲ βεβαπτισμένοι ὑπῆρχον εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ.

14 Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them,
15 who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit.
16 For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
17 Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.(Acts 8:14-17 NKJ)

The parallel to this event at Acts 19:1-7 illuminates what happened here. They were baptized "in the name of the Lord Jesus" only, His Messianic authority. "In the name of" refers to specific information about Jesus that was lacking in details necessary to be believed and publicly confessed for salvation to occur. When informed of Christ's full identity, they received the Holy Spirit.

BYZ Acts 19:5 Ἀκούσαντες δὲ ἐβαπτίσθησαν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ.

NKJ Acts 19:1 And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples
2 he said to them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" So they said to him, "We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit."
3 And he said to them, "Into what then were you baptized?" So they said, "Into John's baptism."
4 Then Paul said, "John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus."
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.
7 Now the men were about twelve in all. (Acts 19:1-7 NKJ)

As with the Samaritans, their knowledge of the Triune God was deficient, knowing only the coming Messiah John preached. Upon being baptized in all the information contained "in the name of Lord Jesus", that He is God the Son His Only Begotten and that the Holy Spirit is the Third Person of the Holy Trinity, they received the Holy Spirit, the Salvation that comes ony through the Narrow Door of Christ. Evidently Luke sees a microcosm of the twelve tribes of Israel: how intermarrying had spiritually killed the Samaritans but now in Christ Israel's dead bones are coming to life (Ezek. 37:1-14).


BYZ 1 Jn. 5:13 Ταῦτα ἔγραψα ὑμῖν τοῖς πιστεύουσιν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα εἰδῆτε ὅτι ζωὴν αἰώνιον ἔχετε, καὶ ἵνα πιστεύητε εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ.

9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is the witness of God which He has testified of His Son.
10 He who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself; he who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed the testimony that God has given of His Son.
11 And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son.
12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.
13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God. (1 Jn. 5:9-13 NKJ)

The Father declared specific information about Jesus, He is God the Son and Jesus was proven to be this though the signs and wonders only God could do. He who believes in Jesus the Father revealed receives the eternal life that comes only through the Narrow Door that is Christ.



So now we revisit our "target text": What does being baptized "in the name of" mean?

BYZ Matt. 28:19 Πορευθέντες μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, βαπτίζοντες αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ Ἁγίου Πνεύματος·

18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
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.(Matt. 28:18-20 NKJ)


Disciples are to be immersed in specific information: In the One Name subsists equally Three Divine Persons, Father Son and Holy Spirit. Yahweh is a compound unity, Father Son and Holy Spirit is One (0259 אֶחָד 'echad Dt. 6:4) Yahweh.


John 3:18 says not believing "in the name of the only begotten Son of God" results in condemnation. Because of this Paul says:

8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.
9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.
10 For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ.
11 But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man.
12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ. (Gal. 1:8-12 NKJ)

 

[Runningman]

Mar 16:15 - And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

Mar 16:16 - He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Mar 16:17 - And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Mar 16:18 - They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

They were baptized in Jesus name and then baptized with the Holy Spirit gifts.

And also Simon the sorcerer or magician wanted to buy the Holy Spirit. They were transferring the Holy Spirit to other people with their hands and referred to the Holy Spirit as a gift. God isn't a gift that you can swap around to other people, fill up when you need a fix, or give away like a gift is He? I really don't think God ever describes Himself this way. So I see the Holy Spirit not as God sometimes, but as a thing sometimes and I prefer to say holy spirit (emphasis on lower case) when it's an anointing. The holy Spirit is also God because God is holy and Spirit right? Context always lends to the intrerpretation.

Acts 8
17Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. 18And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, 19Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. 20But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.

 

[LeviR]

And also Simon the sorcerer or magician wanted to buy the Holy Spirit. They were transferring the Holy Spirit to other people with their hands and referred to the Holy Spirit as a gift. God isn't a gift that you can swap around to other people, fill up when you need a fix, or give away like a gift is He? I really don't think God ever describes Himself this way. So I see the Holy Spirit not as God sometimes, but as a thing sometimes and I prefer to say holy spirit (emphasis on lower case) when it's an anointing. The holy Spirit is also God because God is holy and Spirit right? Context always lends to the intrerpretation.

Acts 8
17Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. 18And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, 19Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. 20But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.

The spirit of the Father actually sustains all life because if He were to withdraw His spirit and His breath all flesh would die. The Holy Spirit is an element of His spirit sent only for certain purposes. To achieve certain things according to His will.
It’s not God the Holy Spirit but the spirit of the Father.
The latter is an invention of the RCC. Like so many other inventions of theirs.