How Does Your Pastor Baptize?
Hopefully your Pastor baptized by immersion. That is not where my study is going, so if he does not immerse in his baptisms I suggest you do a quick study on that.
What does your Pastor speak over the baptizee in the baptism ceremony? Does he do it like Peter, Paul or the Pope?
How did Peter baptize?
Acts 2:38
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.
Acts 10:46-48
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
It is evident by these two passages that Peter baptized in Jesus name.
How did Paul baptize?
I have heard some refer to a passage in 1 Corinthians and say that Paul only baptized two or three people in his ministry. They forgot to read the book of Acts. In that passage in Corinthians Paul was speaking to the Corinthian church that he had only baptized a few of them. He was not referring to his entire ministry.
Acts 19:4-5
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Paul thought it so necessary to be baptized in Jesus name that he had these twelve believers get rebaptized in Jesus name!
Is there anyone in the Bible that baptized like the Pope? NO! Not one single person. Was there anyone in the Bible that was baptized in the titles? No!
A number of years ago I was studying with a trinity Pentecostal Pastor in Illinois. We were studying about baptism. During the study this Pastor told me that he was baptizing "in the name of the Father, Son, Holy Ghost, Jesus name" and what did I think about it? I told him that the titles needed to be left out because we have no example for it in the Bible! That the Bible teaches that we need two or three witnesses for a doctrine. He had no Bible witness of the baptism that he was administering.
He agreed with me and I baptized him that week in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. That really took some humility to obey that as a Pastor and then change his way of baptizing! About a month after this event he came to my church with about 25 of his members and baptized them in the name of Jesus!
His statement to me was that "the Word of God is like a lion and it will fight for itself".
Don't hang on to the "Mother Harlot" doctrines of Rome! Come out of her my people God says! Revelation 18:4
Visit the World of Pentecost Ministries in N.W. Indiana.
What does your Pastor speak over the baptizee in the baptism ceremony? Does he do it like Peter, Paul or the Pope?
How did Peter baptize?
Acts 2:38
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.
Acts 10:46-48
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
It is evident by these two passages that Peter baptized in Jesus name.
How did Paul baptize?
I have heard some refer to a passage in 1 Corinthians and say that Paul only baptized two or three people in his ministry. They forgot to read the book of Acts. In that passage in Corinthians Paul was speaking to the Corinthian church that he had only baptized a few of them. He was not referring to his entire ministry.
Acts 19:4-5
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Paul thought it so necessary to be baptized in Jesus name that he had these twelve believers get rebaptized in Jesus name!
Is there anyone in the Bible that baptized like the Pope? NO! Not one single person. Was there anyone in the Bible that was baptized in the titles? No!
A number of years ago I was studying with a trinity Pentecostal Pastor in Illinois. We were studying about baptism. During the study this Pastor told me that he was baptizing "in the name of the Father, Son, Holy Ghost, Jesus name" and what did I think about it? I told him that the titles needed to be left out because we have no example for it in the Bible! That the Bible teaches that we need two or three witnesses for a doctrine. He had no Bible witness of the baptism that he was administering.
He agreed with me and I baptized him that week in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. That really took some humility to obey that as a Pastor and then change his way of baptizing! About a month after this event he came to my church with about 25 of his members and baptized them in the name of Jesus!
His statement to me was that "the Word of God is like a lion and it will fight for itself".
Don't hang on to the "Mother Harlot" doctrines of Rome! Come out of her my people God says! Revelation 18:4
Visit the World of Pentecost Ministries in N.W. Indiana.
Friend, Indeed the Word of God is like a lion. How sad that the brothers faith failed and he did not trust it.
Jesus Himself said that we are to be baptized in the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. The Name of the Holy Ghost is not Jesus, neither is the Name of the Father Jesus.
The Bible is clear in that it teaches both ways are acceptable to the Father. Otherwise Jesus erred doctrinally and could not have been the perfect spotless Lamb that was required to wash away humanities sin.
To reject this is unwise at the least.
I still cannot fathom how so many people are snared by the trap of modalism and can still deny the truth that God is three persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost after being shown so many scriptures.
But I do know one thing beyond any shadow of doubt. They will catch on real quick when they step into eternity.
Notice that here it says that God gave the Revelation to Jesus so that He could show it to His (Christs) bond servants. There are 2 separate persons right there.
" The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John,"
Shalom and love,
earl an apostle
Reply to this
Let me put out a challenge to you. You show me in the Bible all the people that were baptized your way and I will show you in the Bible all the people that were baptized my way. Let us see who has the most. I will have thousands, you will have none, and you know it.
Give me now on this blog one person and one preacher in the Bible that baptized or was baptized your way, "in the name of the father, son, Holy Ghost, Jesus name". You can't do it!
Give me one person in the Bible that was baptized in the titles, just one! You can't do it! If you do I will convert and let you rebaptize me. Are you sincere enough to say that to me? Are you willing to do it the Bible way?
You say that Jesus is not the name of the Father. What is the name of the Father?
Jesus is the name of the Father.
Isa 9:6
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
John 5:43
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.
Did anyone ever call Jesus Jehovah? No.
Heb 1:4
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Jesus as every son does inherited his name from his father. The father's name is Jesus.
John 14:26
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
The Holy Ghost's name is Jesus! Jesus is the Holy Ghost in Spirit form.
How many verses do you need? I have more if needed.
This should not make you angry. The Bible is what we should go by isn't it?
Reply to this
Sir are you aware that rhe name
"Jesus" was not devoloped until the late 1600's. In fact the first three english bibles, including the 1611 KJV did not even contain the name Jesus but the name Iesus which came from the Latin.
It then is not true that everyone in the New Testamant were baptized using the name Jesus.
I do believe in baptizing in Jesus name because that is our English name for the Son Of God, but I do not believe that everyone up until today were baptized in Jesus name or they were not baptized correctly.
I also assume that you do not believe that the New Testament was written in English or that anyone that wrote the New Testament spoke english either.
I would like your reply .
God Bless
Reply to this
You have brought up a very good point on the name of JESUS. I will be writing more detailed on this subject soon but let me give you a bit of truth here that possibly you are not aware of.
The fact is, that the name Jesus is spelled the way it is for our pronunciation. As you mentioned the original spelling is IESUS. The letter "J" basically did not exist in 1611 but the sound of the letter "J" did exist.
The letter "I" was in the place of the "J" but had the "J" pronunciation. The letter "I" had three sounds. The three sounds were the letters "I", "Y" and "J".
Examples
The "J" was created with its own personal sound to give more clear and personal pronunciation to the word "Jesus" and other like words. Again the pronunciation has not changed and everyone MUST be baptized with the name of Jesus invoked over them as used in the New Testament. Remember, we don't spell the name Jesus when we baptize but SPEAK the name Jesus for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38).
Reply to this
Friend, it appears that Jesus Himself gave us a command; one for the ages according to His context, and His followers did something else. For it was Christ Jesus the Son of God who gave the command to baptize in the titular manner as you call it. I am not offended by obedience to what Christ has clearly said.
In Biblical hermeneutics there is a rule called the law of first mention. It dictates that a divine pattern is revealed and set when something is first mentioned. That is what we have in Matthew 28:18-20.
“..make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; ..”
Let me more correctly ask this: How about you "give me now on this blog one person or one preacher" that did what Jesus said to do here in Matthew 28?
Jesus is described by Isaiah at verse 9:6 as ‘the everlasting Father’ because his death, burial and resurrection was the seed that brought many sons and daughters unto an eternal glory. The Father sent Him for this. That is the very nature of being a sent one or apostle. They are sent, and in order to be sent one must be sent by someone other than oneself. Otherwise you are not sent but you have made a conscience decision to go and do something on your own authority. Apostles may be described as ambassadors and they operate in the authority of the one who sent them.
John 5:43 is Jesus teaching them that He was sent by the Father and has the authority to use the Fathers name. To think that Jesus is the Father and yet is saying to us he is coming in the name of His Father is really taking the main and plain of what is being said and twisting it to fit one’s own poor doctrine. A common error among pastors unfortunately.
You said in the above post...
"Heb 1:4
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Jesus as every son does inherited his name from his father. The father's name is Jesus."
If Jesus inherits his name from his father that would imply that he had no name at one time and thus was a created being. Heresy. He is the eternal Son, the second person of the God-head. The scripture does not show that a son must inherit his father’s name. It was a common practice perhaps but John the Baptist clearly broke that pattern, if indeed it is one. And God is sovereign which means He can reveal Himself to us in any way He chooses.
The Comforter was sent in Jesus Name, he is not Jesus. Jesus obtained authority when he obeyed the Father. His name is above every name and it is on his authority that the Holy Ghost is sent.
It is not "How many verses do you need," it is how many verses can be brought to the table properly. One must always be alert as heresy and cults are always founded on truth that is bent to fit someone’s own personal agenda.
Shalom and love, earl
Reply to this
Yes, this is a direct command from Jesus himself. The apostolic people that baptize invoking the name of Jesus are the only ones obeying Matthew 28:19!
Your statement "His followers did something else" is completely wrong. The original apostles obeyed exactly what Jesus taught and baptized in the name as Matthew 28 :19 commands. When one baptizes in the titles he is not obeying Matthew 28:19 but repeating a command. Jesus did not say repeat after me, he said to baptize in that singular name, not names.
You know as well as I do, that father, son and Holy Ghost are NOT names but titles.
Your statement "His followers did something else" would only say that Jesus was either not a good enough teacher for them to understand or that they the apostles were in willful rebellion. Rebellion is the same as witchcraft! If the apostles were in disobedience why then read the New Testament because they are the men that God used to pen it. Maybe with your theory they "wrote something else" other than what God told them to.
All the apostles baptized as I do according to Matthew 28:19. You do not obey this but only like a parrot repeat it.
The reason you do include the name of Jesus in your baptism is that you see it but refuse to let go of the trinity dogma.
When you feel you are above the original twelve apostles and have a better understanding than them is very dangerous. To say that they "did something else" than what Jesus' commanded is error!
No, it is not who has the most verses to support his teaching but still to this moment you have not produced one person or preacher in the Bible that baptizes as you do. Is this not dangerous to feel that you can go forward with that teaching and have no examples for it?
To say that the apostles "did something else" says that they were in a cult. No, that is not true. They did exactly as Jesus commanded baptizing all their converts in Jesus name for the remission of sins.
Yes, Jesus is the name of the Son, Father and Holy Ghost.
Reply to this
Friend, It is obvious that your whole position, one which is very legalistic in its interpretation concerning specifics on baptism, hinges on your error in regards to the very nature of God Himself.
If you cannot hear God in something as main and plain as the trinitarian nature of the God-head one must assume that other error is in your doctrine.
God is, beyond any dispute, three persons in perfect unity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. When Jesus walked on earth, he taught HIS followers to pray to His Father,(our Father for all who are believers) who was in heaven.
He did not morph into a "Son' and then appear on earth to perform the function of a Son, God the Father remained in eternity and SENT His Son. The Son fulfilled His mission to humanity and part of the fruit was that He might SEND the promised Holy Spirit. It is the ignorant or hard hearted who deny the truth that God is three persons.
And it is not necessary for you to call me a 'parrot'
I am a servant of the Living God who has the testimony of being transported in the spirit just as Phillip the evangelist was and this has occurred twice. I say this, and I could share thousands of other such events, only to show that I walk with God. Does God do such things for those he opposes? No. It is a sign and wonder that affirms the words He has sent me to say.
Not once has God denied His trinitarian nature to me, He has however said that He would anoint my words to help people such as yourself better understand the real nature of God. And if you have the courage pray into this and see what He might say to you.
I must also say that He has given me revelation in so many different scriptures as to trinatarian truth that I would have to be a fool to deny what I have been taught by God.
I am not some wishy-washy seminarian who lost his faith in Bible college and live a backslidden lifestyle wavering on a weak fence being tossed to and fro.
I am a bond slave of Christ and follow the Lamb wherever He goes.
Shalom and may the Spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him be upon you. In Jesus Name Amen.
Reply to this
I did not say that you are a parrot. I apologize. I said that you like a parrot only repeat what Jesus said in Matthew 28:19 but do NOT obey it. I don't have a motive to cut you down or belittle you because we disagree.
You refuse to provide one person in the Bible that was baptized in the titles as you do. You also have not provided one preacher in the Bible that baptizes as you do. You have not because you cannot. Your teaching is not in the Bible. You follow the Popes of Rome. "Come out of her my people" God said in Revelation. The way you come out of her is to repent and forsake her teachings.
God has denied a trinitarian nature to you but you ignore it. His Word is forever settled in Heaven. God owes you nor anyone else a vision, dream, audible voice or any special revelation of who or what He is. His Word the Bible shows clearly what He is.
I notice that you evade my request of where your Bible examples are for your baptism. You have no examples. It is not in the Bible. You said in your last comments that the early Apostles "did something else" than what Jesus said do. Do you know Mathew was an Apostle. Matthew penned Matthew 28:19. You say that the Apostles "did something else". That is error. They obeyed perfectly what Jesus said. They baptized in Jesus name without the titles of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Did you know Matthew was there on the day of Pentecost when Peter commanded all to be baptized in Jesus name? (Acts 2:38) Why don't we have record of Matthew standing up and telling Peter he was wrong and the titles should be repeated? The fact is Matthew understood clearly that Jesus is the name referred to in Matthew 28:19.
Ask a child what his mothers name is. Will he say "mother"? Ask a father what his son's name is, will he say "son"? May I ask you what your dad's name is? Are you going to say dad? These are titles that we hold as humans. God also holds titles. Each title God holds does not make him another person. If that is the case God is MANY persons! The "rose of sharon", "lilly of the valley", "the Mighty God", "the Prince of Peace", "father", "Son", "Holy Spirit" and many more.
God is ONE with many titles.
To all of our readers go be baptized in "Jesus" name. Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5, 22:16, Col 2:12, 1 Peter 3:21, Col 3:17, Rom 6:2, Matthew 28:19, Luke 24:49 and many more.
Reply to this
Apostolic Contender you are exactly right. God does not owe us a dream vision,etc. He gave us his word. God has specifically shown us WHY we must be baptized in the NAME. And the word is straight forward in telling us who he is. What more do we need. The only thing people need is a open heart. Forget the mind. It is carnal. If people reject that fact that God manifested himself in the flesh 1Tim 3:16 Being Jesus, they have rejected the God of their salvation. God plainly STATES he IS ONE!! The bible is full of this info. Yet the trinity ignores it. And they also ignore the fact that baptism is a must. Something that Christ ordained CANNOT be deemed unimportant. Jesus walked many miles to be baptized though he was without sin, but it was to fulfill all righteousness. NOW how much MORE important is it for us to be baptized?
Reply to this
Friend, when I spoke to my Father I never once thought of it as a title, it is who he was. He was MY Dad and this was the closest term of endearment I had for my love, my honor and respect for him. I never once called my Father Earl as that was his name. I could have, it was his name after all, but he was much more then the man named Earl to me. I had gone beyond the formality of the name into the heart of the relationship. When I ask 'Father, in Jesus name,' as the Lord Jesus Himself commanded us to do this is how I view my approach to the throne. As coming to the awesome and love filled Father who created me. And that can only be done by faith in the name of His only begotten Son Jesus Christ.
When one is baptized in the name of the Son the inherent understanding beneath that is that the Son is Jesus. We do not baptize in the name of any fathers son, we baptize in the name of the Most High God's Son and honor the Father and the Holy Spirit in the process as Jesus Himself commended us to in Matthew 28:19. Jesus describes the trinity clearly here naming the three persons directly in the Gospel of Matthew. Why do you reject His counsel?
As the Lord asks all here so I ask you?
"Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended?
who hath gathered the wind in his fists?
who hath bound the waters in a garment?
who hath established all the ends of the earth?
what is his name, and what is his son’s name, if thou canst tell?" (Proverbs 30:4, KJV)
I have found that the 'oneness' people focus way to much on this so called 'Jesus Name Only' baptism issue. In my humble opinion they use it as a fear based means of contention and control. Much like the pope does the Catholics in his heavy handed use of the Word of God to motivate them to follow Catholicism via fear. It is a subtle form of witchcraft.
Shalom and my His truth permeate your heart fully, in Jesus name. Amen.
Reply to this
earl- you are not going to convert any oneness believer to your theology- this is a oneness website- the creator of this website is a oneness believer-we focus on the name JESUS because He is GOD- Jn 8:58, Is 9:6, Jn 20:28
Reply to this
Amen Brother....no one except those that are filled with the Holy Ghost would Jesus reveal this to...Preach it
Reply to this
Wait... I do agree w/ earl. The instruction of Jesus is clearly in the name of the trinity.
What I do see that is missing here is what happens during baptism...
May be this is the main point of disagreement.
Is baptism a step necessary for salvation - (Jesus sacrifice not enough??) or is it a public testimony of being saved by the grace of God - through Jesus' sacrifice.
I do believe it's the 2nd option. As such, I forward the simple compromise... (I hope!
What is common in both "in the name of the father, son and Holy spirit" and "in the name of Jesus"
It is "in the name" which is in the authority of Jesus, and of course following His command of Baptism.
The important thing, as far as baptism is concern, is that it follows His instructions. Context of baptism passages suggest (to me) that the big thing is not the formula the minister speaks, but that you accept Jesus as Lord and Savior and obey His commands and ordenances!
What happens if the minister quotes the instructions of Jesus in Mat 28 before the baptism - following His command and forgets to state the formula at the actual baptism act?... Is the person not saved? Or the baptism failed to be a public display of acceptance of Jesus?
If this was the case... We are starting to believe in "magic" words and formulas in order to be saved... This my friends is totally oppostite of what Jesus instructed to us.
The disciples of Jesus were baptising people in/by the authority given to them by Jesus and if they did not use the name (notice it's sigular) of the Father, Son and the Holy the baptism is still according to the instructions of Jesus... With all that said... there is no denying that Jesus' instructions of Baptism were in the name of the trinity!
Reply to this
If you had no book of Matthew, where would you find your baptism? Much of the New Testament was written before the book of Matthew. The early Christians in Acts had no book of Matthew. They understood the "Name". Jesus is the name to be baptized in.
Maybe you like Earl do not understand why the Apostles did NOT repeat the titles in their baptisms.
Show me one person in your Bible that baptized in your titles. It is not there and you need to find out why.
Reply to this
Praise the Lord everyone. I had a question concerning this blog:
To start, i'd like to clarify that i do believe in the trinity and happen to attend a church that believes in it but also baptizes in the name of Jesus and not F,S, HG (weird huh?).
I believe that the Apostles of Jesus would have in no way disobeyed the command of Matt 28:19. (For those who think that this was added later, the latest would be mid second century because it is quoted in 170AD).
They were under the power, conviction, and guidence of the Holy Spirit sent from God Almighty (may He be praised!). Therefore, either Jesus meant, in code, to baptized saying his name, or he was speaking plainly and Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, and 19:5 do not mean formula but rather something else.
Case 1: In the first 20-30 years after the death of John the disciples of the apostles, who were being marytred for faith in Jesus, changed th baptismal formula from Jesus' name to Trinity dispite 1) conviction from the holy spirit and 2) tradition handed down from the apostles. They would have left Jesus' "coded" message to the more literal and, in my opinion makes sense, formula. Also, they would do this for no apparent reason
1) not to fight heresy because what heresy would be refuted by a baptismal formula?
2) for the development of the "trinity". The trinity is evidenced in the whole NT, letter of Polycarp (disciple of apostle John) and first letter of Clement of Rome (perhaps the co-worker of Paul. He was the bishop of rome around the time of the death of John.) Scripture for trinity: Hebrews 5:7, Acts 4:23-31, Rev 1:1, Rev 5:7 + 13, Matthew 28:18, Luke 10:21, 1 Peter 1:3, Hebrews 3:1 (an apostle is sent/commissioned by someone).
So, do the acts scriptures mean formula? Couldn't acts 2:38 mean authority? (the whole serman is about Jesus' authority). In fact, Acts 2:38, 8:16 and 19:5, and 10:48 all use different greek words for "in". this may imply a different thought being conveyed by Luke the author. Was Luke's intent to clarify formula? Or to describe baptism as by Jesus' authority, on his behalf, or into the property of Jesus (as a bank account in my name simply means it belongs to me).
Just some thoughts. I have been wondering and thinking on this issue for quite some time!
I pray that we all, including myself, may only yield to the Holy Spirit and the precious Word of God.
Blessings from God
Jay
Reply to this
You are correct. The disciples did NOT disobey the command of Jesus. In looking at the scripture after His resurrection we see that the name of Jesus is only used in water baptism.
Acts 2:38
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.
Acts 8:16
16(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
Acts 10:48
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
Acts 19:5
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Acts 22:16
16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
Acts 2:38 tells us what to do, who should do it and why.
Acts 8:16 tells us what they did.
Acts 10:48 tells us how they were commanded by Paul.
Acts 22:16 tells us how the Apostle Paul was baptized and why (calling on the name of Jesus).
There is an audio sermon on this blog called "The Terrible Parable". In this teaching I go into detail of Matthew 28:19.
The trinity is not referred to in the NT. God is ONE and not three. The Jews of the past and the Jews of today NEVER believed that God is three. To them that is heresy. Find a true Jew and ask him.
Reply to this
Right, God is one, not three. God is one, the Father. And there is one mediator between God and man, Jesus Christ( 1 Tim 2:5). How can Jesus be a mediator and one of the parties at the same time? They are mutually exclusive. You cannot be a mediator and one of the parties. If you are one of the parties in the litigation or disucssion, you are biased and cannot be the mediator (in law today). A mediator is a third party. Therefore, Jesus cannot be the Father.
Jesus is the Son of God. Whome God begot. He was annointed by the Holy Spirit (Acts 10:38). God raised Him from the dead (Acts 2:32). He did not raise Himself, God raised Him. The Jews had no problem becoming Christians because Christians were monotheists. They were not oneness, but saw the Father as Jehovah and Jesus Christ as the Messiah/Son of God.
Jesus will one day turn all authority back of to His Father (1 Cor 15: 20-28). No, I am not an arian. No, I am not JW. But, i cannot see how The Father is not greater than the Son ( John 14:28).
Anywho, i really hope you check out some of those scripture references I posted last time. This is probably my last comment. Just wanted to stop by last time.
Peace
Jay
Reply to this
Thanks for your insight Jay and Paul. I enjoyed it. Some of the points you made I had never heard before. I especially liked this comment.
"How can Jesus be a mediator and one of the parties at the same time? They are mutually exclusive. You cannot be a mediator and one of the parties. If you are one of the parties in the litigation or discussion, you are biased and cannot be the mediator (in law today). A mediator is a third party. Therefore, Jesus cannot be the Father."
I am considering that some of the problems we have in understanding the real nature of God is rooted in the word 'person' which has so many limiting social and cultural thoughts tied to it that it may be different now days then what the early church understood it to mean.
Another is the word begotten which some now think had as its intended meaning 'unique' when John penned it. But that may be more of interest in a discussion on Father and son.
shalom and love, earl
Scripture in context is valid for argument, reproof and teaching that sound doctrine may be established. Those who intentionally take scripture out of context and misuse it are on a course to be seen as liars in the eyes of God. The lie always begins in the heart and has its root in pride.
Reply to this
I will comment on a few of the remarks here.
1."How can Jesus be a mediator and one of the parties at the same time?" When you understand the dual nature of Christ then you can understand how that Jesus is the only mediator between man and God. It was the flesh (son of God) that is the mediator not the Spirit. There was no mediator until God came in flesh (1 Tim 3:16).
This is why God came in flesh. In his Spirit form He could not be a mediator. It was the blood of bulls and goats that pushed ahead the sins of the people another year in the OT.. Acts 20:28 tells us where the blood came from. It did not come from a seperate person. It came from God. The blood of God flowed through Jesus because Jesus is God in flesh.
You say that Jesus cannot be the Father. What are you going to do with all the times where he himself calimed to be the Father?
Let me address YOU EARL. You may debate and dissagree on this blog but you will not refer to me and other oneness people as liars and proud. If you want to debate as a believer, fine. There have been several times you have written with the hate of the Popes of the past that have murdered an estimated 60+ million oneness Christians. It is in your history, read it.
Debate if you will but stop your name calling and other hateful remarks. Write about history, the Bible and your understanding thereof but NO name calling and hateful divisions. This is a place to learn. If you disagree, fine but not in a hateful tone.
I write about the scriptures, the Roman past and more but I do NOT hate trinitarians. I disagree, strongly and this is a place to do that. I invite any trinitarian to disagree with my comments, that is fine. Let us disagree if we must, in the spirit of love.
As you all probably I have the authority to ban anyone who violates these principles.
Let us debate in love.
Reply to this
I just came across this site and love it just to let you know my pastor baptizes in Jesus name like the bible says so i been in the Apostolic church for 15 years and will continue till the day i die i have family who are following the trinity doctrine and they dont believe me any thing i say they think your post to be baptized according to the scripture in matthew i know its wrong you must be baptized in jesus name cause peter and all of them where baptized in jesus name please tell me how i can witness to my family to get baptized in his name.
Reply to this
We are dealing with religious spirits that bind people. It will take lots of love and patience. If one is not open minded to why Jesus said in Matthew 28:19 and how the Apostles baptized there is little you can do but pray. Group discussions will not work if they are all against you but if you can find one really hungry for more than alone share the scriptures with him.
Pray for guidence and wisdom.
Reply to this