Results 1 - 8 of 8
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Jesus' name baptism? | Acts 2:38 | kalos | 271 | ||
'According to Jesus [in Matt 28:19], baptism is to be administered "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" . . . Evangelicals accept this verse as Jesus' words and agree that the Trinitarian formula was spoken by the Son of God himself.' (NRSV Harper Study Bible, note at Matt 28:19) Acts 2:38 is 'not a contradiction to the fuller formula given in Matt 28:19. In Acts the abbreviated form emphasizes the distinctive quality of this baptism, for Jesus is now included in a way that He was not in John's baptism . . . ' (Zondervan NASB Study Bible, p. 1576) | ||||||
2 | Does Jesus' name satisfy Matt 28:19? | Acts 2:38 | charis | 284 | ||
Does it not seem that the "fuller" formula does not call upon the name of Jesus? Col 3:17 says '...do all in the name of the Lord Jesus...' Fuller seems neuter, and TV agrees. Father-Son-Holy Spirit is not metioned after Christ's resurrection, But Jesus' name invoked often. Though brief, Jesus' name seems powerful, and apparently satisfies Jesus' command in Matthew. | ||||||
3 | Does Jesus' name satisfy Matt 28:19? | Acts 2:38 | kalos | 316 | ||
What follows may not entirely answer all that you asked in your question, but it does address some of the issues raised. Matthew 28:19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit." In this verse JESUS HIMSELF commands the disciples to baptize "in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit." . . . It is misleading to say "Father-Son-Holy Spirit is not metioned after Christ's resurrection. Perhaps not that exact phrase, but see such passages as 2 Cor 13:14 where the Lord Jesus Christ, God, and the Holy Spirit are most definitely MENTIONED. . . . Moreover, in the New Testament after the book of Acts rarely is Christ referred to as merely Jesus. The majority of times that His name is mentioned, He is called Christ, Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus. . . . It should be noted that the name of Jesus is not a magic word to get whatever we want. 'To ask in Jesus' "name" does not mean to tack such an expression on the end of a prayer as a mere formula. It means: 1) the believer's prayer should be for His purposes and kingdom and not selfish reasons.' (MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1613) | ||||||
4 | Does Jesus' name satisfy Matt 28:19? | Acts 2:38 | charis | 374 | ||
Dear JVH0212 (again), Though I agree that Jesus Himself commanded that we baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, this command was pre-church. The church was created when the Holy Spirit was poured upon the gathered believers in Acts 2. Thereafter, I find no reference to any act being done in any other name than that of the Lord Jesus, the Christ. I find no action 'in the name of God,' or 'in the name of the Holy Spirit.' (Rom 2:24 is OT quote) Rather, I find that the name of Jesus (or Christ Jesus, or the Lord, etc.) is used extensively. I can't think of this as a 'formula.' Was Luke being brief or flippant? Were the apostles being disobedient to Jesus' command? I find it interesting to note that on TV we often hear 'in the name of God' or in a wedding scene 'in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost,' but never hear 'in the name of Jesus.' Is this because Jesus is a 'rock of offense' as the Bible (OT and NT) so clearly states? I well understand that abusing the name of Jesus by heartless and mindless utterance or meaningless repetition is not holy. However, the simplicity of His name should not be underestimated, nor should we become too 'religious' in our interpretation of scripture. I am not 'Jesus only' and I believe strongly in the Trinity, or triune nature of God. But that cannot negate the authority and the power of the name of Jesus, in fact it bolsters and confirms it. | ||||||
5 | Does Jesus' name satisfy Matt 28:19? | Acts 2:38 | inHzsvc | 2104 | ||
My take on this is that "in the name" of always means "authority". We know that Christ said "all power is given me in heaven and in earth." That is authority. Then, he passed that authority onto His church. That authority came from God the Father, through His Spirit, through His Son. You did say something there that I disagree with heartily. You said that the church was "created" in Acts 2, on the day of Pentecost. I believe the Scripture teaches otherwise. Let me give you a few reasons I believe the church was founded before Pentecost. 1) The literal meaning of church (ekklesia) means "a called out assembly." Christ called out His assembly early in His ministry. 2) They preached the gospel prior to Pentecost(Mat. 10:14, Luk. 10:1-17). 3) They baptized prior to Pentecost(Jhn. 4:1,2). 4) They received the Lords' Supper prior to Pentecost(Mat. 26:26). 5) They had an ordained ministry prior to Pentecost(Mrk. 3:14). 6) They had been taught (by Christ) about church discipline prior to Pentecost (Mat. 18:15-17). Christ actually uses the word "church" in this passage. 7) They had Christ as their Head before Pentecost(Jhn. 13:14). 8) They had a membership of 120 prior to Pentecost (Act. 1:15). Notice the people saved on Pentecost were "added to them" (Act. 2:41). 9) They had a business meeting and elected officers prior to Pentecost (Act. 1:15-26). 10) They had a treasurer prior to Pentecost (Jhn. 13:29). 11) They had the Great Commission prior to Pentecost (Mat. 28:19,20). 12) Christ was building His church prior to Pentecost (Mat. 16:18). 13) The Bridegroom was with His bride (the church) prior to Pentecost (Jhn. 3:29, Eph. 5:22-23, II Cor. 11:2). 14) Christ sang in His church prior to Pentecost (Mrk. 14:26; this was in fulfillment of Psa. 22:22; see Heb. 2:12). 15) There is NO Scripture anywhere to indicate that the church began at Pentecost. 16) Prior to Pentecost they were a body of baptized believers banded together by His authority to carry out the will of Jesus Christ. This is a church. I hope this helps all who read. God bless you and yours. |
||||||
6 | Without the Spirit? | Acts 2:38 | charis | 2133 | ||
Dear inhzsvc, Talk about a 'blast from the past!' I am sure that you win the 'answers to previous postings' prize, and I congratulate you :-) On a more serious note: How can you forget the importance of the pouring out of the Holy Spirit? This is truly the only time I have heard anyone deny the 'creation of the church' on the Day of Pentecost. Your 'few reasons' (16, no less!) are thorough and well-presented. I would have a hard time arguing against any of them, except for one thing. Israel had all the facilities and functions and organization to be called a 'church,' too. Indeed, Christ "...chose us in Him before the foundation of the world..."Ephesians 1:4 NASB, but without the Spirit, nothing could begin! Nothing! That is precisely why He had to send the Comforter and Helper. We needed this "Power from on high." Luke 24:49 NASB The glorification of the church started on the Day of Pentecost. (It's like having a Ferrari without gasoline, or a 1 GHz notebook PC without a charged battery, useless, though very impressive :-) Friend, if I read it right, all that was to prove that we have to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit? What about anything else we do? In the name of Jesus, or otherwise? Blessings to you in Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
7 | Without the Spirit? | Acts 2:38 | inHzsvc | 2139 | ||
Charis, No, that was not all to prove to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. That was simply a side note. Your example about a Ferrari without gasoline is interesting. However, the Ferrari is still a Ferrari without gasoline. While Christ was on Earth with His Church, there was no need for them to be empowered by the Holy Spirit. However, after He left them, He told them to wait for the empowering of the Spirit. That didn't make them a church(ekklessia--called out assembly). It simply enabled them to carry out what He had previously instructed them to do. God bless. I appreciate your brotherly kindness. |
||||||
8 | Without the Spirit? | Acts 2:38 | charis | 2162 | ||
Dear inhzsvc, without gasoline, a Ferrari is red and beautiful, and expensive, but inanimate. Also a Ferrari without the growl, the roar, and assorted engine music is only eye-candy :-) In any case, I cannot experience anything but the sights and sounds of the one, but I can experience the animate power of the other. Though I agree with you in the semantic sense, the church was almost totally impotent until His Spirit indwelled them. That I why I said they were 'created' on the Day of Pentecost. I was under the impression that this was a commonly held view. If I am mistaken, I stand corrected. Friend, I apologize for my assumption regarding baptism. The flow of the conversation up to that point was getting a bit heated on that issue. Truly, I do consider this forum to be fellowship (koinonia), and the many different opinions expressed by yourself and all the saints do nothing to change that in my mind and heart. Indeed, you and I agree on very much more than we disagree. Blessings and peace to you in Jesus' name, charis |
||||||