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

Print Thread (PDF)

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



Joined: 2005/1/14
Posts: 2164
Arkansas

 Re:

Quote:

KingJimmy wrote:
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.



Well, it's great to see I'm not the only one who holds that view on the "baptism formula" thing. It's a sad thing when people turn it into some magic chant that if you don't say it right the person just may not be saved.


_________________
Josh Parsley

 2008/8/7 19:50Profile
BlazedbyGod
Member



Joined: 2007/8/22
Posts: 462


 Re:

Quote:

Thommy2 wrote:
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.



So according to you, JESUS name is a "yoke". or the phrase " In the name of Jesus" is an "yoke" -I guess you don't tell people to pray "[color=FF0000]in my name[/color] " either?

Oh, and I might add, he did not say" I am come in my father's nameS"-he said " I am come in my Father's NAME.." -That ONE name that was comprised of; and fullfiled ALL the names/titles of God in that ONE name.

But even if you want to talk about all the other names/titles of God, there still is:

Acts 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is [b]none other name[/b] under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved

Phillipians 2:9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is [b]above every name[/b]: 10 That at the name of Jesus [b]every knee should bow, of things in heaven[/b], and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father

 2008/8/7 20:15Profile
BlazedbyGod
Member



Joined: 2007/8/22
Posts: 462


 Re:

Quote:

PreachParsly wrote:
Quote:

KingJimmy wrote:
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.



Well, it's great to see I'm not the only one who holds that view on the "baptism formula" thing. It's a sad thing when people turn it into some magic chant that if you don't say it right the person just may not be saved.



Then I don't know what you think Matt 28:19 is, but to me, that is clearly a/the formula:

Matt 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them [b]in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost[/b]:

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, [b]Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ[/b] for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Mark 16:17 [color=FF0000]And these signs shall follow them that believe; [b]In my name[/b] shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;[/color]

John 14:13 [color=FF0000]And whatsoever ye shall [b]ASK in my name[/b], that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. [/color]

Acts 16:18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and SAID to the spirit, I command thee [b]in the name of Jesus Christ[/b] to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.

What did Paul "say" to the spirit?

Magic phrase, NO, but all power in the name of Christ through the Spirit of Christ unto the obedience and glory of Christ-

I guess it is good to know that there is still:

Acts 5:40 And to him they agreed: and when they had called the apostles, and beaten them, they commanded [b]that they should not speak in the name of Jesus[/b]. 41 And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name.

I guess the next thing that will happen, is someone will log on to this thread and say to me:

Acts 5:28 Saying, [b]Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name[/b]? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem (SI) with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.

And me, I will have to say, exactly what Pete said:
Acts 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, [b]We ought to obey God rather than men[/b]

All hail the Power of; and in the name of JESUS.

 2008/8/7 20:32Profile
BlazedbyGod
Member



Joined: 2007/8/22
Posts: 462


 Re:

Quote:

adamdawkins wrote:
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



No, I am not saying that.

" I am come IN MY FATHER'S NAME"

I am asking, what is, his Father's name?

 2008/8/7 20:37Profile
BlazedbyGod
Member



Joined: 2007/8/22
Posts: 462


 Re:

Oh, and by the way=the caps, and bold are NOT meant to offend anyone, neither is it me yelling at anybody-that is just my way of highlighting the part of the verse I am putting emphasis on. :-)

 2008/8/7 20:40Profile
PreachParsly
Member



Joined: 2005/1/14
Posts: 2164
Arkansas

 Re:

I'm not going to respond to your post Blazed. We have already been down that road. :-)

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=22430&forum=36&start=40&viewmode=flat&order=0]In the "About" Section of SI - Trinity Baptism[/url]


_________________
Josh Parsley

 2008/8/7 20:51Profile
BlazedbyGod
Member



Joined: 2007/8/22
Posts: 462


 Re:

Quote:

PreachParsly wrote:
I'm not going to respond to your post Blazed. We have already been down that road. :-)

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=22430&forum=36&start=40&viewmode=flat&order=0]In the "About" Section of SI - Trinity Baptism[/url]



I am not sure which post you are referring to. It is understandable if you do not wish to respond-I am not arguing with you (at least that is not the way I see it)

 2008/8/7 20:54Profile
PreachParsly
Member



Joined: 2005/1/14
Posts: 2164
Arkansas

 Re:

Sorry, I probably posted a link to the wrong page. If you click next it will show where we discussed this topic.

EDIT: [url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=22430&forum=36&start=50&viewmode=flat&order=0]Click here[/url]

I'm mainly putting it here for others to reference.


_________________
Josh Parsley

 2008/8/7 21:16Profile
crsschk
Member



Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 9192
Santa Clara, CA

 Re: About words to no profit

Quote:
Then I don't know what you think Matt 28:19 is, but to me, that is clearly a/the formula:

Matt 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.



Strikingly odd that you would match those two together brother;


[i]baptizing them [b]in the name of the Father[/b], [u]and[/u] ... of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost[/i]

[i]be baptized every one of you [b]in the name of Jesus Christ[/b][/i]

All 3 in the first instance and Jesus singularly in the second.

Which just proves the point of the many here and elsewhere have been attempting to get across ... Both-either, it makes no difference whatsoever, the only differentiating being done is not by the scriptures but by those that insist that there is some distinction to be made. Besides that you are flatly contradicting yourself.

Blazed this has long been a contention with you that is drummed up every time the subject is broached, the past links bare this out. You are neither making sense nor a point and are in this error;

[i]Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.[/i] 2Ti 2:14

Furthermore;

Quote:
I guess the next thing that will happen, is someone will log on to this thread and say to me:

Acts 5:28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem (SI) with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.



That is the height of audacity and biting cynicism. Worse is it a incredible insinuation and patently absurd. No one here would even entertain that notion - That you have only shows forth your bitterness.

The scriptures are replete with an interchange of names, an interplay if you will even of God Himself, how many in the Old Testament alone? I am looking right now at "[i]Knowing God by Name[/i]" by David Wilkerson in which he states in the introduction;

[i]Many books have been written about the names of God. Most of these are scholarly works, exploring the deepest theological meanings behind each of God's names. They are exhaustive, covering the 23 compound names of God found in scripture, as well as the more than forty compound names of Jehovah.[/i]

Striving over [i]words[/i]. Words have [i]meaning[/i] or they have nothing, they have description and intention and place and context. Not to forget history, especially in the scriptures. Forcing them to do that which they were not intended to do or to say that which matters not is only to argue for arguments sake - The grand point of [i]strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.[/i]



Php 3:14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

1Jn 2:24 Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

2Ti 1:2 To Timothy, my dearly beloved son: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.

Rom 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.

Rom 15:6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Rom 15:30 Now I beseech you, brethren, for the Lord Jesus Christ's sake, and for the love of the Spirit, that ye strive together with me in your prayers to God for me;

1Co 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

2Co 13:14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen

1Jn 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.


Of God, of the Spirit - Jesus Christ, Christ Jesus, the Lord Jesus Christ- The Father, my God, of God in Christ Jesus, God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord, of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost.

Search it out - There is no formula to be found anywhere but the greatest variety of expression -And, in, of - through. Interchangeable and expressive, sometimes one way and sometimes another. And note that it matters not what the subject matter is, be it baptism or be it prayer. Why does this reasoning not apply then across the board? I am not now speaking of [i]distinctives[/i] of the godhead nor of a misconstrued contorting of the trinity - which in itself is expressive in language far beyond our ability to even grasp and the reason for our fleshly knee-jerk reaction to think we even have the capacities to actually explain it. When will we grasp the fact that many things in scripture are [i]stated[/i] not explained to our satisfaction? When will we cease replicating Job's friends and forget the chastening they received from God Himself over their opinionating? This 'issue' is not one and never was made one in scripture - If it were there would be cohesion to the so called argument, but what is found instead is a complimentary expression that says the same thing, means the same thing, is the same thing; [i]Baptize them - Be Baptized[/i]- Do the thing. Even the notion and argument over whether or not it is necessary, goodness is this not just an extrapolation of the same, arguing over it ... "Explain it to me first then I might consider it?" Is it any wonder the Church is as fouled up as it is when the simplest of matters are convoluted and dissected to strain out a gnat. No longer is 'obey' an instantaneous reaction but something to be quarreled over ...

This contending and parsing is hubris - go look it up and cease from it's practice, [i]subverting of the hearers[/i].


_________________
Mike Balog

 2008/8/8 9:28Profile
BlazedbyGod
Member



Joined: 2007/8/22
Posts: 462


 Re:

"Besides that you are flatly contradicting yourself."

I am not contradicting myself, by using Matt 28:19 & Acts 2:38 in the harmony in which they do not oppose each other, but rather reveal each other.

By using those two verses, I am merely stating that JESUS (as it is written in Matt 1:21) is the NAME of the Father, AND of the Son, AND of the Holy Ghost, because, as 1 John 5:7 states "....and these 3 ARE 1".

I find it quite absurd, that I am judged by being called "bitter" or "having bitterness"-where not one single post in this thread shows any hostitlity or offense in any of my posts here. May I call to rememberance, that I am not even the one who started this thread-and neither have I started any threads pertaining to this topic since about sometime late 07, early 08-yet I am accuses of trying to supposedly subvert the hearers.

Even when speaking with Preachparsely I made it quite clear, that there was NO bitterness involved. plainly telling him that I was not arguing with him-yet upon the opinions of man (and I am not referring to PreachParsley) I am held or called as "being in error"-simply because the majority of people on SI believe another way-

I fint it interesting that everytime this topic comes out, the only person that ends up being called any names of judged, is myself, when I myself have never done anything of that sort=but I am the accused one.

Matt 28:19 is the command given by Jesus.
Acts 2:38 was the obedience to that command.

Jesus Christ clearly taught us to directly pray in his name, cast out devils in his name, heal the sick in his name-but all of a sudden when it comes to baptism, it doesn't make a difference, or supposedly there is no clearity on the issue.

The authority of God, is the Spirit of God, the finger of God, the WORD of God-when Paul cast out the demons, with authority that is in the name of Jesus did the demon come out. The Spirit bears the authority of God upon the NAME (Jesus)

The clear emphasis of the Book of Acts, is that every water baptism done referred to JESUS.

"...in the name of Jesus Christ.."
"...in the name of the Lord Jesus.."
"...in the name of the Lord.."

Even when John Baptist baptized, it was called " JOHN'S Baptism" (Acts 19), why would it be any different pertaining to Christ?

JESUS is the name of the Father...."AND OF the Son

Matt 1:21And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name [b]JESUS[/b]: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Why is JESUS written in all capital letters in this verse, and in Luke 2:21?

Gen 2:4These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the [b]LORD[/b] God made the earth and the heavens,

Who made the world-God, or the Son of God
Gen 1:1 In the beginning [b]God[/b] created the heaven and the earth.

Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: [b]all things were created by him[/b], and for him. 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Did Jesus reconcile us unto God, or unto himself?
Col 1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, [b]by him to reconcile all things unto himself[/b]; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

Eph 2:16 And that he might [b]reconcile both unto God[/b] in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby

Who is the Saviour-God, or the Son of God?
Isaiah 43:3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, [b]thy Saviour[/b]: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.......11 I, even I, am the LORD; [b]and beside me there is no saviour[/b]

Luke 2:11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a [b]Saviour, which is Christ the Lord[/b].

John 4:42 And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world

Who sent the Holy Ghost-God, or the Son of God?
John 14:26 [color=FF0000]But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, [b]whom the FATHER WILL SEND in my name[/b],... [/color]

John 15:26 [color=FF0000]But when the Comforter is come, [b]whom I WILL SEND unto you from the Father[/b], even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:[/color]


I believe in the name of JESUS, yet I am called as being in error, ONLY because I believe in his name. I am not teaching no other means of salvation, I am not teaching any type of works of man, I am not even teaching "another Jesus"-but because I believe in his name I am accused as being in error, bitter, contentions,and subverting the hearers.

Grace & Mercy, unto Peace like a rive be unto thee all. :-)

 2008/8/8 10:16Profile





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