On Baptising...

[Jake Huether]

According to the Oneness doctrine, one must be Baptized "in the name of Jesus" only, because it is in the Name and Power of Jesus that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all the same - i.e. one person... i.e. the Oneness doctrine.

They use Acts 2:38, etc. to prove that Baptism then was done with the formula "I baptize you in the name of Jesus".

And just yesterday, while on the way home from work, I was totally heart broken to hear an evangelist on the Christian radio station TEACHING that Baptism isn't salvific! Basing his teaching on 1Corinthians1:10 (verse 17 specifically). Because according to this person, if Baptism was salvific, than Paul would have been called to Baptize also.

Well, if we study what Paul says, and what Scripture says in whole, we know that both of these theories can be debunked.

I wanted to focus on 1 Cor. 1:10 though, because it seams to disprove the Oneness doctrine, and at the same time, if you don't take it out of context, it shows nothing of Baptism NOT being salvific. On the contrary, it proves that Baptism imparts Saving Grace!

Here we go:

[quote]10 I appeal to you, brothers, [b]in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ[/b], that all of you agree with one another so [b]that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought[/b]. 11 My brothers, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. 12 What I mean is this: One of you says, "I follow Paul"; another, "I follow Apollos"; another, "I follow Cephas[a]"; still another, "I follow Christ."
    13 Is Christ divided? [b]Was Paul crucified for you[/b]? [b]Were you baptized into[b] the name of Paul[/b]? 14I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, [b]15so no one can say that you were baptized into my name[/b]. 16(Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don't remember if I baptized anyone else.) 17For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. [/quote]

First lets take care of the Oneness doctrine:

If the formula for Baptism was mean to be "I Baptize you in the name of Jesus", then this whole section would make no sense". Because it would appear that with certain Baptisms that had taken place, the formula was "... in the name of Paul", or "Apollos", or "Cephas". In other words, this paragraph would indicate that the formula for Baptism was "I baptize you in the name of (insert the name of the one doing the Baptism)". But no, it is clear from this passage that "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ " indicates a following of the command of Jesus Christ! Which was to Baptize "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit".

If they were indeed Baptized "in the name of Jesus", then their probably would have been no division, because they would have known that the Baptism was by Jesus Christ's command. But since it was "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" it is more plausible that this would have allowed for the one being Baptized to think that it was by the command of the one baptizing. Therefore, the confusion as to who they were following (Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas).

Indeed the formula was the same for all the Baptisms that were done, but people were being confused as to who had commanded the Baptism. This is why Paul was glad not to have Baptized them, so that they wouldn't think that he was the one making it up!

It is clear from this passage that "in the name of" or "into the name of" indicates from where the command came. And the command came from Jesus Christ. The command being to "...go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,..."

As for Baptism not being salvific, based on Paul not being "sent" to Baptize...

The assertion that Paul wasn't called to Baptize, therefore it must not be salvific, is just silly since Paul readily admits to Baptizing an entire household!

Baptism doesn't require a calling to administer! Paul isn't relating the importance of Baptism to any particular calling. He is simply saying that some are called to be devoted to the administration of Baptism. But the fact that he himself has administered it proves that even those NOT called, NEED to administer it when required! It is the reverse of what this evangelist was saying then! You see? Even though Paul isn't called to Baptize, if the need is there, he will do it! He is just thankful that the calling wasn't his, so that the church-members wouldn't attribute the command of baptism to him. He asks, regardless, "was Paul Crucified for you?" because in Baptism we die IN Christ, so that we will be raised with Him. And therefore, for salvation, we MUST die in Christ. And there is no other way to die in Christ, except through the waters of Baptism (ordinarily speaking, because one can die in Christ via desire or blood - which becomes their Baptism).

It is in instances like this that I wish I had a cell phone to call in and correct this guy. Ah, well. A house built on sand will topple when the storms come.

God bless.

[StColette]

Aren't they missing out on a verse in the Bible?

18 Then Jesus approached and said to them, "All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
19 [b]Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, [/b]
20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. 13 And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age."

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='StColette' date='Aug 11 2005, 12:29 PM']Aren't they missing out on a  verse in the Bible?

18 Then Jesus approached and said to them, "All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
19 [b]Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, [/b]
20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. 13 And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age."
[right][snapback]682012[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I talked to one about this. He said that the "name" of the Father Son and Holy Spirit, is "Jesus". He says that the verse doesn't say "baptise in the name[b]S[/b] of them. He says there is only one name for all of them, Jesus.

[StColette]

[quote name='goldenchild17' date='Aug 11 2005, 01:38 PM']I talked to one about this.  He said that the "name" of the Father Son and Holy Spirit, is "Jesus".  He says that the verse doesn't say "baptise in the name[b]S[/b] of them.  He says there is only one name for all of them, Jesus.
[right][snapback]682093[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Okay now I say that's pushing it a little too far.

[sweetpea316]

See, there's this thing called the Trinity...

[Jake Huether]

Yes, one of my good friends is a Penticostal, who believes in the Oneness doctrine.

And like goldenchild17 said, they explain that the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is Jesus. They don't believe in the Trinity. They believe that Jesus is manifest differently in three different ways.

Totally doesn't mesh with Scripture (like Jesus praying to... Himself? in the Garden). Or Jesus sending "another Helper", who happens to be Himself?

But then they also don't have a deep theology on the God/Man, Jesus anyway. Some go so far as to say that Jesus is to God as a cup is to water... They don't understand the hypostatic union of the Natures of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.

But that's why St. Paul's writing is so helpful. If Baptism was in Jesus' name, then there wouldn't have been a confusion as to who was following who!

Anywho... yeah... prayers for our bretheren.

Edited August 11, 2005 by Jake Huether

[Fides_et_Ratio]

so, for a Oneness person... do they ignore the word "kai" (in the Greek) "and/also" (in English)?

"baptizing in the name of the Father AND ("kai") (the name of) the Son AND ("kai") (the name of) the Holy Spirit"

[StColette]

I had a Penticostal person tell me that their Bible didn't have

Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit

In it

[phatcatholic]

if anyone needs ammo, check out the articles on [url="http://www.phatmass.com/directory/index.php/cat_id/534"][b]Trinitarian Baptism[/b][/url]

btw, jake, i think u just wrote a tract! i'll add it to the list