SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Jesus Only?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 | 3 Next Page )
PosterThread
logan_trky
Member



Joined: 2006/9/14
Posts: 29


 Jesus Only?

Hello! I have been raised Pentecostal. (Trinitarian) I believe in the Trinity 100%. The church I have always belonged to has always baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, I have never seen this in scripture. Everyone was always baptized in Jesus name. I guess I'm just torn here. Can I get some thoughts from both Trinitarian, and Unitarian believers PLEASE?

 2008/8/6 23:57Profile
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re: Jesus Only?

I can't find one place in Scripture where we see any baptismal formula used during water baptism. Acts mentions folks being baptized "in Jesus name," but it never cites such as a saying invoked over somebody from the lips of one baptizing another. "In Jesus name," instead of being a formula invoked, is simply stating in whose authority (name) the baptism was conducted. This, I believe, distinguishes one from having received "the baptism of John" over that of Christ. If there is any baptismal formula that is suggested in Scripture, it comes at the end of Matthew 28 during the great commission. However, it cannot be absolutely proven such is a commanded baptismal formula, even though, traditionally, it has been seen as such.

As it is, such debates I believe come from those who hold to a works based mentality, instead of people who understand anything of grace. The letter killeth, but the Spirit gives life. Is it no surprise then, that those who generally hold to a "Jesus only" view of baptism also hold to a works based salvation scheme? Why the fuss over it unless such is one's approach?


_________________
Jimmy H

 2008/8/7 8:50Profile
rbanks
Member



Joined: 2008/6/19
Posts: 1257


 Re: Jesus Only?

The scriptures tell us that what ever we do in word or in deed to do all in the name of Jesus.
The only name under heaven where by we must be saved is the name of Jesus.

There is only one passage of scripture in the whole bible where it says to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
All though the book of Acts it is very obvious that they baptized in the name of Jesus because we are to do everything in the name of Jesus.

I believe the devil loves to use scripture to divide us over doctrine. We all need to be clear about who saves us. We all know we are not saved by physical water but by the blood of Jesus applied by the Holy Spirit. I always baptized in the name of Jesus because He is who I’m representing when I am standing in the water to baptize one who has trusted in Jesus for salvation. I always say something like I baptize you in the name of Jesus into His death and raised by his Spirit to walk in newness of life in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. I say more than this when I pray over them.

I believe there is no argument when we understand how we are saved. We are standing in His name and in His stead when we baptize and we know that fullness of the Godhead is in Jesus. We couldn’t know the Father without coming to Jesus and we couldn’t receive the Holy Ghost without receiving Him through Jesus. People need to know that God is triune and that there is a relationship with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They also need to know the name of Jesus and that He is the only way to the Father.

Blessings to all!

 2008/8/7 10:00Profile
PaulWest
Member



Joined: 2006/6/28
Posts: 3405
Dallas, Texas

 Re:

Here are some older SI links that touch on this very thing:

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=23220&forum=35]Jesus-Only Movement?[/url]

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/articles/index.php?view=article&aid=2145]Baptism - A matter of Obedience (John MacArthur)[/url]

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7893&forum=36&start=10&viewmode=flat&order=0]Godhead (Highly Recommended)[/url]


_________________
Paul Frederick West

 2008/8/7 10:38Profile
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4526


 Re: Jesus Only?

Hi Logan...

I am most definitely a "trinity" guy. But I have noticed that this topic can become quite divisive amongst some people.

Personally, I don't think that those words ("[i]In the name of Jesus[/i]" or "[i]In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost[/i]") mean quite the same thing as people place into them. Of course, I understand that the name of Jesus is the name above all names (Philippians 2:9-11). But I have noticed that some people use the name of Jesus almost in a "token" or "ritualistic" sense.

I currently live in Texas. The name "Jesus" (pronouced "Heh-zoose" or "Hey-Zoose") is a common name. In fact, my neighbor's name is Jesus (they call him "Chuey" for short). His name, although named after our Lord, is just a name. There is no power in the name of Jesus Garza. In fact, the name "Yeshua" was actually somewhat common at the time of Christ's birth. The name itself is a just a word. But the association and direction of that name with our faith in God is what gives it power. Philippians 2:9 even says that God gave him the name! But that name must be directed at our Lord.

I've even heard people who believe in the concept of the trinity who still prefer to be baptized "in the name of Jesus." I even attended a youth camp where two sets of baptisms were performed -- one in "the name of Jesus" and the other in "the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit." Ironically, both sides seem to point to verses that validate their preference. There were even people who felt strongly that baptism performed without such a certain set of words was void of significance! It was almost as that certain little phrase was an incantation!

But is this what our Lord had in mind? Must those words be uttered aloud during baptism in order to make it "authentic" or "certified?" Or is the important thing that people are baptized into the faith of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ?

I’ve often wondered if, somewhere, there might be a mute congregation who performed water baptism. Without an ability to speak, what “words” would they utter? Would their baptism be obsolete based solely upon the significant lack of use of a certain set of words? Or would their baptism still matter – because of the faith in our Lord for which they are baptized?

In this sense, I am persuaded that these “two” baptisms are actually one and the same. They are both the result of individuals who are being baptized into the faith that recognizes our Lord and Savior as Jesus Christ! I certainly believe in the concept of the “trinity” (a separate “Father, Son and Holy Ghost” aspect to the one true God). However, I wouldn’t have doubted the validity of my baptism if the man who dunked me had proclaimed either set of words. In my heart, it was not those words that mattered. It was my faith in the God who saved me! It was a public proclamation that I had accepted the atoning sacrifice of Christ and was now laying down the “old” man (like the Earth at the great flood) and becoming something entirely new.

When God speaks to me, He hardly speaks English. Usually, his “speech” results with the impartation of a thought, an image or a strong emotion into my thoughts and heart. Sometimes, it is just a knowledge that simply overwhelms me. What am I saying? I don’t believe that God is confined to our earthly language. Our earthly languages are just so flawed. There could never be human words that could ever describe the awesome greatness and love of our Lord and King! Then why do we try to “confine” Him to a set of words? Like KingJimmy expressed, are we placing an emphasis upon a particular verbal “formula”…or in the Savior?

These are just a few things to think about...

:-)


_________________
Christopher

 2008/8/7 13:52Profile
BlazedbyGod
Member



Joined: 2007/8/22
Posts: 462


 Re: Jesus Only?

Quote:

logan_trky wrote:
Hello! I have been raised Pentecostal. (Trinitarian) I believe in the Trinity 100%. The church I have always belonged to has always baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, I have never seen this in scripture. Everyone was always baptized in Jesus name. I guess I'm just torn here. Can I get some thoughts from both Trinitarian, and Unitarian believers PLEASE?



Matt 17:8 And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only

 2008/8/7 14:36Profile
Thommy2
Member



Joined: 2008/6/3
Posts: 60
Wisconsin

 Re:

Matt 17:8 And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus - BlazedbyGod

29The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! 30This is he of whom I said, 'After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.' 31I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel." 32And John bore witness: "I saw the Spirit descend from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him. 33I myself did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.' 34And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God."

Without a Trinity this confession from John could be put directly in the mouth of a crazy man. His circular talk would be crazy nuts...truly crazy nuts... Also read John Chapters 14-17... no Trinity...Jesus is a total nut-job. So a JESUS ONLY(!!!) view...


_________________
Thom

 2008/8/7 16:20Profile
BlazedbyGod
Member



Joined: 2007/8/22
Posts: 462


 Re:

Quote:

Thommy2 wrote:
Matt 17:8 And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus - BlazedbyGod

29The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! 30This is he of whom I said, 'After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.' 31I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel." 32And John bore witness: "I saw the Spirit descend from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him. 33I myself did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.' 34And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God."

Without a Trinity this confession from John could be put directly in the mouth of a crazy man. His circular talk would be crazy nuts...truly crazy nuts... Also read John Chapters 14-17... no Trinity...Jesus is a total nut-job. So a JESUS ONLY(!!!) view...



1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three [b]ARE[/b] ONE.

Trinity doctrine teaches that there are 3 IN 1, but the Holy Writ teaches that the 3 ARE 1-major difference.

Col 2:9 9 For [b]in him[/b] dwelleth ALL the fulness of the Godhead bodily. 10 And ye are complete [b]in him[/b], which is the head of all principality and power:

Trinity doctrine teaches Christ is IN the trinity,as the second person-but Holy Word of God teaches, the Godhead is IN Christ-and that Christ is the "..alpha and omega" .."first and the last"-

John 5:43 [color=FF3300]I am come [b]in my Father's name[/b], and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. [/color]

Whose name did Jesus come in?

What is the NAME of the Father?

When Matt 28:19 is read correctly, you will understand that the "..3 are 1" (as 1 John 5:7) says, and that the name of the Father, AND OF the Son are exactly the same.

Isa 9:6For unto us a [b]child[/b] is born, unto us a [b]son[/b] is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: [b]and his name shall be called[/b] Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, [b]The everlasting Father[/b], The Prince of Peace.

Isaiah clearly called the " son" that was given, the Everlasting Father.

 2008/8/7 17:39Profile
Thommy2
Member



Joined: 2008/6/3
Posts: 60
Wisconsin

 Re:

Hermenutics bro

the term "in the name of..." is an idiom. So the Father's name is...a bunch of names (El Shaddai, El Elyon...etc) Not one singular name

Don't take an idiom mistranslate and come up with a doctrine. So I will (if i ever baptize folk) in the authority of God, because of the work of Jesus. But I won't put on a yolk b/c of a catch phrase.


_________________
Thom

 2008/8/7 17:43Profile
adamdawkins
Member



Joined: 2006/11/13
Posts: 140


 Re:

Quote:
John 5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. Whose name did Jesus come in? What is the NAME of the Father?



In the passage you've quoted, Jesus didn't say He came in the name of "the Father", He said:

"I come in MY Father's name"

Is He then His own Father? This verse does not lead to the conclusion you've drawn from Isaiah - that's an extrapolation at best!

To come "in the name" of someone means to represent them and have their authority invoked through that name. A bit like how we approach the Father "in the name" of Jesus, it doesn't mean we always have to say "in the name" of Jesus, we approach in His name, which is how we enter through the veil - because He has entered before us as a High Priest BEFORE GOD, Haleilujuah!

Are you actually saying that when Jesus said "I come in My Father's name" He meant:

"I am the father, because my name is the father - I come in my own name." ?!

Adam

 2008/8/7 18:41Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy