Baptism in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!

You guys sure like to argue about nothing. Jesus is the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. So when I baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, I am baptizing in the name of Jesus.
So there!

Brother Villa

[Felicity]

So would it follow then that other denominations that baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are also baptizing in the name of Jesus? ;) :D

[nytxn1971]

This should be interesting...
;)

[Thelordisone]

Got Revelation?

[Felicity]

Who needs revelation? Matt. 28:19 - Jesus told His disciples to go baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost and make disciples of all nations.

;)

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!

My point exactly! So, are we wrong?

Brother Villa

[mfblume]

We must SPEAK his name. TO INVOKE is the greek terms for CALLING UPON in Acts 22:16. And invoking the name is not giving its titular descriptions.

[Felicity]

Don't you think that a lot of people who are baptized in the "titles" are speaking the name of Jesus when they're baptized? If not audibly - at least "silently" calling to Him or on Him?

:)

[drummerboy_dave]

When a person says, "...in the name of the father and the son and the holy ghost", they haven't said the name! Remember, Acts 4:10-12.

[Felicity]

Correct. But actually according to Paul in Acts 22:16 the baptizee is supposed to be the one calling on the "name" of the Lord.

So if the individual being baptized is calling on Jesus either audibly or inaudibly, he is doing as the scripture commands.

;)

[In His Service]

Are we to follow Acts 2:38 as stated by Peter or not?

What did the apostles proclaim they needed to do?

Before long many will have every trinitarian making it to heaven without having to change what they believe, :~(

Bro. Timothy

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!

Did Jesus say, or did he NOT say to baptize them in the name of the Fatherm, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost?

Brother Villa

[In His Service]

Yes, and that name is Jesus Bro. Villa, and we state it in baptism as found in Acts 2:38!

Jesus told them what to do, and Peter understood it and proclaimed it precisely on the day of Pentecost.

Bro. timothy

[In His Service]

Bro. Villa,
I think you might be wanting to further the point that the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the Holy Ghost is Jesus which many trinitarians do not understand. Is this the case with this thread?

Bro. Timothy

[Sandy]

I know a pastor that baptizes in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and in the name of Jesus too. Yet he taught the truth to those he was baptizing about what the purpose was for this baptism. By the way, he was not the one that baptized me into Christ.

Honestly, is it not what God does in us by faith at this baptism, and not necessarily what someone speaks over you when you go under? But rather asking the Lord to do all that He promied in His Word to do within this person in prayer? Isn't that more in line with why it says what it does about the name of Jesus? We are to pray in the name of Jesus in faith, believing for God to move according to His Word doing what He has promised when that one is baptized.

I don't know about any of you, but if God doesn't do anything, then baptism in water is just a religious tradition, thus being in vain. And really nothing more than what the Trinitarians are doing.

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!

Baptism For the Gentiles?

“…baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost….” (Matt. 28:19). It has been argued that this baptism is for the Gentiles, while the baptism found in Acts 2:38 is for the Jews. This doctrine has been very widely accepted by many denominations professing Christianity.
Upon a closer examination of the Lord’s last instructions to his disciples in Matthew 28:19, we discover the following. First, Jesus was speaking to Jews. Second, the Holy Spirit had not yet been poured out. Third, the instructions were mostly to those whom He had chosen to propagate the Gospel: His apostles.
On the day Jesus was to ascend to heaven, he gave the apostles his final instructions. Listen closely. “…he (Jesus) showed himself alive…commanded them…not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the Promise…you shall be witnesses of me both in 1) Jerusalem and in all Judea, and in 2) Samaria, and 3) unto the uttermost parts of the earth.”[/I] (Acts 1:2-8) The Gospel was to first be preached to Jerusalem and Judea; next, to the Samaritans; and finally, to the Gentiles; fulfilling the Lord's final instructions in Matt. 28:19. The preceding is the actual order for the preaching of the Gospel which we need to apply today!
The previous particulars should compel us to make the following assertion. If anyone should be baptized “…in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit…”, it should be the Jews! It is apparent that they first were the ones to receive the Lord’s final instructions!
The scriptures also lead us to understand that the only ones who refused to be baptized were the ones that “…rejected the counsel of God against themselves…”, as the Pharisees and the lawyers had done. (See Luke 7:29-30) Conversely, the testimony of those who received the message that brings salvation since the Day of Pentecost this that all were baptized “…in the NAME of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins.”.
This is, then, my conclusion: The NAME of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit is [I[Jesus![/I]

Brother Villa

[Sandy]

What I am going to say about that scripture in no way is trying to proclaim God as being a trinity, as I know He isn't. And have known that even before I was ever baptized in His name, not seeing God as such for years. Simply because he spoke to me one day Father, Son and Holy Ghost was not three persons, but one, just as I am basically spirit, soul and body, yet not three persons but simply one as well. And after that I never saw God as three persons again. And this happened not long after I repented and received the gift of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of tongues. It happened because I asked. And at that time, I needed a simple explanation that would allow me to begin to see this truth. So I have actually not believed what the majority of Trinitarians believe for a long time now. So what I am going to say does not mean I believe that God is a trinity.

Often, I would imagine Jesus stated things so that His apostles could understand, in what was then a simple way. And after all guys, there is three basic actions we are to obey in order to begin on the foundational principles of Christ, which most know. And they are, of course, repentance, baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, and the baptism in the Holy Ghost. Well, what if he said what he did there, not speaking of water baptism only, but speaking of the three things one is to do in order to begin that Peter preached according to Acts 2:38. Not to proclaim God to be a trinity at all, but to proclaim what they were to preach to all to obey to begin. In other words, what if Matthew wrote the same identical thing that Mark and Luke wrote in their account of this, yet stated it completely differently. And when he said Baptize in the name of the Father, he was referring to teach and preach repentance, "and of the Son", he was speaking of what is to take place at water baptism, and of the Holy Ghost, he was simply speaking of their preaching and teaching to receive the fullness or baptism in the Holy Ghost. Which was what all the others said as well, but wording it differently than Matthew did, saying repent, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, which you also need to receive as well. Which is exactly what they all went proclaiming to begin with. I know you might not like the idea that repentance is a form of baptism to it, but does it not require the light to shine in unto your hearts revealing the Christ to you, which is Jesus to begin with. And then water baptism to be for us to be put into Christ, no matter what else you might believe takes place there. And of course, the God wants all to be filled with the HolyGhost in order to continue to walk as He walked from that day forth.

And you know what? If you see it that way, and tell it to others that way, you are then saying the same thing as Peter did on the day of Pentecost. And not only that. The Trinitarians does not have much to say that says differently when you point out to them that this lines up with what Peter said in Acts 2:38, rather than contradicting it. Because what you have done is eliminate that contradiction to them totally.

Funny too, the only ones I have had say no, that says God is three persons to them instead, and that is not right, because those scriptures are talking about Jesus only is Oneness people. But that is not true either, because God has manifested himself to us in the Word as Father, and Son and Holy Ghost, to begin with. And it says specifically that it is the God as the Father, that reveals the Son in Mt. 16:16, which is what this is all about anyway. Revealting Jesus. And so what if they don't see God as one. They will once they get into Him, because the Lord will reveal it to them, their having a clearer picture of this to begin with.

And that is really what I believe that scripture is saying in Matthew. The same thing that Mark and Luke wrote, but very simply stated differently, which happens in the scriptures all of the time. That is why it is up to us to rightly divide.

But the main thing is to eliminate this contradiction that exists regarding the issue of what man is to speak over someone being baptized into Christ. Because there are no contradictions in the Word of God other than what man has decided to believe by themselves thru their own mind rather than the mind of Christ.

Something to think about anyway. Especially to those that God has sent to minister to Trinitarians anyway. And it just could be right too ya know. In fact, I do not believe for one minute I made up what I am writing there by myself. So either it came from the Lord, or a spirit trying to decieve. But if it coincides with the Word, then wouldn't you think it was probably God? Which it does. Otherwise, you have a big discrepancy between what Jesus said compared to what Peter and the others stated regarding this occasion, that is eliminated entirely when you do see it that way. Whether we like the wording or not.

[mfblume]

Since baptism is done by people and speaking is involved, it is comparable to anything we do in His name where we must speak.

For example, casting out a devil demands speaking the name of Jesus. Would the devil come out if the name was not spoken? No. I do nto think so. But I also know that it is more than speaking the name of Jesus that makes the devil come out. Its the power of God through our faith that works with us.

So baptism without God's power is only getting wet. So speaking the name is not all there is to it. We must do so in faith, and so must teh person being bapitzed have faith as well.

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!

Beloved Sandy, you are a little nervous; rest, sister.

Yes, Brothers Mark, Luke and Peter all proclaimed "...the same thing..."; just worded it a little different.

Matthew wrote: '...make disciples...baptising them..."
Mark wrote: "...whosoever believes AND is baptised..."
Luke wrote: "...that repentance AND remission of sins..."
Peter said: "Repent AND be baptised..."
The end result is salvation: which is receiving the Holy Spirit.
(Receiving the Holy Spirit BEFORE baptism is another topic) s\

Repentance, baptism, and receiving the Holt Spirit each address an particular area in man. Man is a spirit, lives in a body of clay, and has a soul. He believes in his spirit, repents with his soul, and obeys with his body.
Obeying is the most difficult; that's probably why we have to wait so long for the "...redemption of our bodies..."!

Invoking the NAME of Jesus over a person is 'indispensable'. It is the NAME in which we are saved, for there is none other NAME that can remit sins. Yes, the blood washes away our sins, but it is the NAME that applies the blood to our hearts as we are baptized!
Beloved, therein is the danger to those who don't believe. They are DENYING THE NAME in the waters of baptism! In effect, they are denying the remission of sins. They need to be instructed in righteousness. Yes, Beloved, baptism in His NAME is a part of righteousness; and there is no part of righteousness that we must not preach.
Then there are those that WILL NOT believe. The Lord what to do about them.

Brother Villa

[Janice Alvear]

So glad I know the name..........

[Sandy]

Nervous Bro. Villa. How so?

[Sandy]

I do agree Bro. Blume. But I also agree that when someone says Father, son and Holy Ghost, they are also speaking the name of Jesus too.

The problem is not what they are speaking when the one being baptized goes under, but rather whether there is faith in action to believe for what God is to do at that time. And if you are believing for nothing, nothing plus nothing equals of course nothing. Which is what those that are baptised for an outward show of an inward confession are believing from God at that time. Nothing.

That is why Al and I were baptized again once we saw the truth. Not because some man told us to, but because God did, revealing to us we had not received what we should have when we were baptized before, even after repenting and receiving the baptism in the Spirit and why.

I believe that anyone that has been baptized for nothing should be baptized again. And if they are already in Christ, well they just get wet the second time. But if they go in faith again, asking and believing for God to do all that He has promised to do this time, and that one is not "in Christ" already, then they are now where they should be.

Doesn't that make sense? To me it certainly does.

[mfblume]

Would we successfully cast out a devil if we used the invocation, "In the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost"? I think not.

[In His Service]

Sandy,
Do you feel that if a person was baptized in the titles and truly wanted it to be a change of life for them, that they would be saved? They did it because the felt they needed to do something, and the trinitarian minister told them they needed to be baptized in the titles to have thier sins forgiven, does that make the titles used in baptism then correct?

That seems to be what I am seeing from what you are saying, that if they person did it out of a true desire, to make a difference that it would not require them to be then baptized in Jesus name to have thier sins remitted. If I am wrong please correct me, ok sis.

Bro. Timothy

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!

Amen, Brother Blume.

"...so your minds should be corrupted..." Make no mistake about it; invoking the titles IS NOT calling upon the NAME of Jesus. There are two primary reasons why my Brothers and Sisters have been martyred: for NOT REFUSING to call on the NAME of Jesus; and for REFUSING to call upon the titles.
The terminology "Father, Son and Holy Ghost" are representatve of the 'trinity' doctrine, as much as "in the NAME of Jesus" is representative of apostolic doctrine. To embrace one, is to deny the other. They are in no way compatible.
Men have been deluded into attempting to dilute the NAME. They 'SEE' the truth in the NAME of Jesus, but refuse to relinquish their man-made doctrines. Therefore, they have come up with baptising somethihng like: "In the name of Jesus, I baptise you in the name of the father, and of the son..." What a FARCE. The very sad thing about this? Apostolics are swallowing their lies.

When I was pastoring, a fellow ( an illegal immigrant) once came into one of our services, and after the service said: "Bother Villa, I am sure glad I found "your church". I felt God urging me to come in here. I went to another Church where they do not believe in the father or the holy ghost! YOU do, right?" I said, "Sure."
I sat him down and exlained on a blackboard why I believe in the Father, son, and Holy Spirit. He got all excited and shouted AMEN!
He stayed with us about three months, until it came time to follow the crop. He left as an apostolic.

It is time for some of us to pick up and don our apostolic garments, and cast away the other. We are not called upon to compromise, but to proclaim His NAME.

Brother Villa

[Felicity]

Originally posted by mfblume
Would we successfully cast out a devil if we used the invocation, "In the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost"? I think not.

Using the name of Jesus (and I believe we should of course) is not a guarantee that devils will flee. It's the **authority** invested in that name that makes the devil go. There's also the "faith and believing" aspect to this as well but the point stands that many people use the "name" but nothing happens.

[mfblume]

Sister, I already addressed that 9 posts back. :)

[Felicity]

*grin*

Ohhhhh. Well...shoot me then. ;) How was I to know? You don't expect me to read every single post in all these threads do you? LOL

[Felicity]

Found the post Mike. Good one. I see you agree with me. Haha! :D

[mfblume]

You bet! Gotta agree with that! :D:D:D

[Sandy]

Bro. Tim,

Do you believe Jesus to be the one God, thus being Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? I do believe that wholeheartedly. And that when I pray, if I said, that prayer in the name of the Father, Son and Holy ghost and Jesus Christ our Lord God, I would be praying in His name.

Think about it, then consider how easy it is for we as men to come up with religious rituals sometimes whether we mean to or not.

[intheblood]

And whatsoever ye do in word or deed , do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him! The Apostles didn't seem to think the titles were close enough! This verse also shows that God the Father gets the glory when its done properly in the NAME,( His name),therefore using the titles is un-nessasary, even for trinitarians!
:D nuff said.
God bless,
Bro. Jimmie

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!

"All" does mean ALL, doesn't it, Beloved?

"...whosoever believes IS NOT condemned; but whosoever believes not is condemned already, because he has not believed in THE NAME of the only begotten son od God..."

Brother Villa

[barbara]

the scripture matthew28-19 say go ye therefore,and teach all nations,baptizing them in the NAME[singular]of the father and of the son and of the holy ghost,we know that the sons name was jesus matthew 1-25 pharaphrased,and they called his name jesus .but look at the scripture verse 23 it says they should call his name emmanuel,which being interpreted is GOD WITH US .THE FATHERS NAME In JOHN5-43 and jesus said i came in my fathers name,so we see that the fathers name was jesus.now lets see what the bible says about the holyghost,john 14-26,but the comforter,which is the holyghost,whom the father will send in my name[jesus]so here we have the holyghost name is jesus,the formula for baptism is in the name of jesus not the titles,it was a revelation and peter understood what he meant .thats why jesus said he gave peter the keys to the kingdom because that god had revealed the truth to him.if you will notice ,nowhere in the scripture will you find the titles father son and the holyghost being even mentiond any where else in the bible and especialy not in baptism

[tufluv]

Why anyone would even consider praying mentioning the titles (totally unnecessary) is beyond me! that is trini thinking and way.
I myself when I was a trini, and began to get home bible studies, thought and said the same thing
But I also agree that when someone says Father, son and Holy Ghost, they are also speaking the name of Jesus too.
After all, it made perfect sense to me, I said "well HE is included there too"! And of course HE is, (as Son of GOD) but HE is all-in-one.HE can't be just "the son" HE is HG/Father as well.
That thought got 'shot down' by JESUS HIMself! Using the minister man called by HIM, during such a study, that minister said just the word that opened up my understanding, (I said this some posts back in this or maybe another thread) which was "manifestations". The right terminology (for me-I'm so-o picky)!! Hehe! I was a tough nut (somewhat) to crack up till then. So what a glorious revelation that was to me.
It has to be by revelation from GOD! Plain ole English is not enough, yet spoken words by annointed men does help!
That is why so many trinitarians will argue to the death. My parents are such. So is a friend of mine who told me the other day that ten years from now, we'll still be arguing about this! :eek:
Oh no! I've been praying for her. I know that I cannot open her eyes and ears of understanding. Only JESUS can.
The "NAME" is JESUS.

[Sandy]

Tufluv, would you not say that saying Father, Son and Holy Ghost depends on whether they see Jesus Christ as being the Father and Holy Ghost as well as the Son.

Don't you realize that when you say that if one is not baptized speaking "Jesus" over that one only, that nobody in another country that speaks a different language is baptizing properly if they pronounce the name of God in their language instead of English.

I realize that is not the same as someone speaking the three offices of Christ over that one entirely, but it would be a similar circumstance none the less in the event the one doing the baptizing did understand Jesus to be all three. I realize most of you cannot see that, or else refuse to see it, but none the less it is true anyway.

My husband baptizes using or speaking the name of Jesus. But he also prays over the one he is baptizing before, asking the Lord to do all that He has promised to do at the time the person is baptized too. Because of knowing this is what is important to begin with. What God does then for that one by faith. Because if God is not involved, it is nothing but vanity. Just speaking the name alone as a ritual is vanity as well, that baptism becoming something accomplished then under the law rather than grace. Because there is a very fine line between the two IMHO. We are to do ALL things in His name by faith. Otherwise it is law we are walking in. Does not in any way mean we are not to obey the Word either. But if faith is not involved when we do so, then it is a dead work of obedience then.

[BroRutledge]

Everybody remember

The GNC is a YOU MUST BE BAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF JESUS Chat program and there is no argument about that here.

Anybody who does not believe that or believes that you are being baptized in the name of Jesus when only the titles are spoken should not post their argument about that on the GNC.

That is ban territory.

There is no other name given whereby we must be saved.

Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is not the name.

There is no trinity of three persons in the godhead, and we are not in fellowship or in agreement that idol worshippers are saved. This includes the trinity false three person god believers who are not baptized in the name of Jesus..and even if they are baptized in the name of Jesus they need to repent and turn away from the belief in a three person god that does not exist.

Matt 28:19 is calling for the Name of Jesus and not titles of an idlol. Jesus is the NAME of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.

If you do not agree with this please do not try to defend your belief on the GNC. Send me email if you wish and I will proclaim to you the TRUTH....JESUS .... There is no other way..

JESUS is the name.

Trinitarians are welcome to be here and post in the various discussions on any subject but please be aware that trying to convince anyone on this One God Apostolic Chat program that there is something good about denying the name of Jesus in baptism ...NO NO NO NO NO...That is a NO NO. Understand?????

The next poster that makes an effort to convice us that you can be saved any other way outside of the repentance baptism in the name of Jesus Holy Ghost way will be treated as a thief and a robber and as a rule breaker on the GNC..... Get it?

If you mess up and get yourself banned please know that I love you and didn't want to do it.

I am being patient and giving everybody this one warning. This is the one and only final warning about this just as the warning about fighting was the final warning.

I am banning people that I love. Thus far only 4 had to go. Who is next? I hope nobody else will get banned.

God bless
BroRutledge

[BroRutledge]

Mr 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved...

1Pe 3:21
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us...

Since baptism is very necessary for salvation, It would be the good pleasure of satan and his friends to convince every sincere person that what Jesus meant to say was... The name of Jesus is Father Son and Holy Ghost.

If everybody could be convinced that the Name is Father Son and Holy Ghost... everybody would be lost forever. The only way to be baptized in the NAME of the father and of the son and of the holy Ghost is to do all in the NAME. Not names. Matt 28:19 declares the NAME just as strong as Acts 2:38. Matthew stood with Peter on the day of Pentecost and what Peter said concerning repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus was exactly the way Matthew understood it when he heard it from Jesus.

If we want to be saved we MUST repent and be baptized in the Name of Jesus and receive the Holy Ghost.... also endure until the end.

The answer to winning the trinitarians is not in accepting them as they are and trying to make excuses for their lack of obedience to the command of God... The answer will be found in taking a firm stand on this important act of obedience to God and on no uncertain terms let them know that they are lost. This can be done with love and concern and people who really want to serve God will convert.

We are possibly going to open another chat program in the future where trinitarians and oneness people can freely debate and express what they believe freely. It will also have a rule that we cannot attack, but the rule of not being able to try to convince people to be baptized in the titles will be lifted in that program and also people can discuss about what they think it takes to be saved.

This is not the trinity - oneness debate program. What it takes to be saved on the GNC has already been established as the message of Acts 2:38 and it is the common ground fundamental belief of the people who discuss various subjects on these threads. Although people who do not agree with this are allowed to be here and enjoy it with us, they are not allowed to post any idea that there is another way to be saved on the GNC.

God bless
BroRutledge

[Hnovilla]

His Name is Jesus!

AMEN and AMEN! Beloved, I began this thread to urge my Brethren to THINK..but when I saw where it was leading, I posted a solid APOSTOLIC view.
Personally, I am very surprised that many who claim to hold apostolic views (in this forum and outside of it) SEEM to also embrace the trinity doctrine, or borderline it. Maybe it's because of their love for those souls. Our love for the Lord and his Gospel should be paramount.

Brother Villa

[BroRutledge]

amen

[John Atkinson]

Personally, I am very surprised that many who claim to hold apostolic views (in this forum and outside of it) SEEM to also embrace the trinity doctrine, or borderline it.

There is a movement within the Apostolic ranks to go that way, accept the trinitarians as our brethren. A high level official in the UPCI got on TV and bid godspeed to sinners, thus saying they are all right. He also supports his backslidden son's "God Chaser" movement that goes around saying you can be saved without Acts 2:38.

I not mentioning names, I think everybody can figure it out. But that is a high profile example of a large number of Apostolics who are swinging that way.

I am very happy to be a part of a group of people who will not be moved from steadfast and sure Apostolic Truth.

Now because I make this strong stand and statement I will be labeled as not having any love or wisdom. Fine.

It is possible to reach to people without becoming what they are.

Not a one of you would tell a pedofile or murderer that he was fine. People who emnbrace the trinity are just as big of sinners and are headed for the exact same place. So why on earth are we patting them on the head and saying, I'm fine, your'e fine, hey we are all fine.

No we are not!

We are not fine unless we have been baptized in the name, name spoken in baptism however it is pronounced in the language it is spoken. In english we say Jesus, in Iraq they might say Isa, In Nicaraugua they might say Heysoos, what ever, they WILL NOT say Father Son and Holy Ghost.

Apostolic Network Ministries will not bow to the "Golden Idol" that some people calling themselves Apostolic are setting up. When you play your little music and bow to it. We will still be standing. Throw us in the fire, quit using our internet business, call us names, what ever, we will not bow.

[Adoniyah]

It seems to me that for one to EVEN mention the titles, F/S/H in water baptism, even though the name of Jesus is called, is a HUGE compromise.

I see no reason to give the least appearance of compromise.

[intheblood]

So satan has changed tactics again it would seem. It used to be,
right or wrong, now its right or light, which is still right or wrong, just new wording. Satan has always tried to change the WORD huh.
I must admit i was getting weak and leaning towards the light doctrine. That is just one area of many that this board has helped me with! I saw the error of this lighter thinking here and have gained alot more strength and wisdom here, thanks for NOT compromising the faith, it helped at least one more stand strong!!
God bless you all,Bro. Jimmie

[BroRutledge]

Praise The Lord Bro Jimmie

It just gets better from here forward. Let's win this race with Jesus.

Thanks for your post.

God bless
BroRutledge

[John Atkinson]

Bro Jimmie,
This is why we have a Good News Café

God Bless,

[Sandy]

Oh wow. I was honestly not aware that I was doing something wrong once again. Since I see it as I do to begin with.

Oh well, such is life on the GNC anymore.

[BroRutledge]

and we end with such is life on the GNC EVERMORE.

JESUS NAME ONE GOD HOLY GHOST NON TRINITY TRUTH.

We love you sis Sandy.

God bless
BroRutledge

[CRNewton]

I give that three "Amens" and all three are for the ONE true and Living God--Jesus Christ!

IS there any god beside me? Yea, I know not any.

If God doesn't know any other gods, I certainly don't!

[Thelordisone]

Originally posted by John Atkinson
There is a movement within the Apostolic ranks to go that way, accept the trinitarians as our brethren. A high level official in the UPCI got on TV and bid godspeed to sinners, thus saying they are all right. He also supports his backslidden son's "God Chaser" movement that goes around saying you can be saved without Acts 2:38.

I not mentioning names, I think everybody can figure it out. But that is a high profile example of a large number of Apostolics who are swinging that way.

I am very happy to be a part of a group of people who will not be moved from steadfast and sure Apostolic Truth.

Now because I make this strong stand and statement I will be labeled as not having any love or wisdom. Fine.

It is possible to reach to people without becoming what they are.

Not a one of you would tell a pedofile or murderer that he was fine. People who emnbrace the trinity are just as big of sinners and are headed for the exact same place. So why on earth are we patting them on the head and saying, I'm fine, your'e fine, hey we are all fine.

No we are not!

We are not fine unless we have been baptized in the name, name spoken in baptism however it is pronounced in the language it is spoken. In english we say Jesus, in Iraq they might say Isa, In Nicaraugua they might say Heysoos, what ever, they WILL NOT say Father Son and Holy Ghost.

Apostolic Network Ministries will not bow to the "Golden Idol" that some people calling themselves Apostolic are setting up. When you play your little music and bow to it. We will still be standing. Throw us in the fire, quit using our internet business, call us names, what ever, we will not bow.


MMMMM, Yummy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"For I have reserved myself 7000 men that shall not bow their knee!!"

Gracias Señor!!

[HermanMelville]

Sandy is a great person, she post on usenet also.

It's not people that are getting banned, it is their opinions that get banned.

The last time I questioned the faithfulness of someone, I soon found out that there was much about me that would be found inadequate according to others.

[BroRutledge]

Amen..

We love those who cannot post right now...

It is just a chat program with rules that are being enforced.

The opinions are not banned unless they are expressed opinions that try to teach that there is any way to be saved, any other way to be baptized and/or any other God... The only other way to get banned is start a fight, bash, call names...etc.

And sometimes there are reasons behind the scene that are not shared with others...

All those who have been warned and still break rules can expect to be loved and banned.

They will all be invited back at a later time and the rules will still be here.

God bless
BroRutledge

[acts238defender]

Originally posted by John Atkinson
Apostolic Network Ministries will not bow to the "Golden Idol" that some people calling themselves Apostolic are setting up. When you play your little music and bow to it. We will still be standing. Throw us in the fire, quit using our internet business, call us names, what ever, we will not bow.

Pardon me for expressing this, but this is how strongly I feel about this...
I will die before I bow again to the dog-gods of this world, return to the charismatic foolishness, or in any way compromise The New Covenant Message!
Do Y'all Hear Me?! I Say It Again...
I WOULD RATHER DIE PHYSICALLY BEFORE I EVER, AND I DO MEAN EVER, RENOUNCE THIS WONDROUS FAITH I LOVE!!!
Enough said.

[Berean]

Hello Brothers and Sisters,

I have enjoyed what I have read here, ESPECIALLY from Brother Rutledge. Good to see an Apostolic Administrator on the World Wide Web Message Boards who still has a backbone, and that backbone is solid on the Apostle's Doctrine.

God bless you Brother Rutledge, keep standing for the Truth.

I am behind you.

I am Acts 2:38 to the core, NO OTHER NAME I KNOW!

Bless that wonderful name!

Jesus Christ the King of Israel

Take care and keep standing!

Be encouraged!

Brother Berean

[3tree]

Thelordisone:

Trinitarians are not sinners, just christians who haven't reached full truth. They have a limited understanding of the scriptures.

You don't really think that if a person entered into the trinitarian doctrine from atheism and died that they would go to hell do you?

[seguidordejesus]

Almost don't count except in horseshoes and hand grenades...

[seguidordejesus]

I would think it'd be easier to go from 0 to 1 than from 0 to 3

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!


3tree:
"Trinitarians are not sinners, just christians who haven't reached full truth. They have a limited understanding of the scriptures.
You don't really think that if a person entered into the trinitarian doctrine from atheism and died that they would go to hell do you?

This is what you have stated:
(1) trinitarians are not sinners
(2) just christians
(3) haven't reached full truth
(4) limited understanding of the scriptures
(5) entered...the trinitarian doctrine from atheism
(6) would go to hell?




What is a sinner?
One who sins, practices sin, tries NOT TO sin, but nevertheless sins, and whose sins have NOT BEEN remitted.
So, are trinitarians sinners according to the Word? Let's see.

[B]What is a Christian?
One who BELIEVES in the need to repent, and to be BAPTIZED, and who believing this will RECEIVE the "Gift of the Holy Spirit".

What is 'full' truth?
Christians believe we will eventually know ALL truth; but we CANNOT know all truth ASIDE from the truth of the Gospel. Christians KNOW the Gospel.

...limited understanding of scriptures...
A limited understanding of the Gospel will hold ANYONE to a limited understanding of the rest of the scriptures.

...entered trinity from atheism...
An atheist can COME OUT of a void of truth, to a place of LIMITED truth; but still needs to ENTER into the Truth of the Gospel.

...would go to hell?
The Gospel DOES NOT send anyone to 'hell'. It is their REJECTION of the Gospel that could send someone there.

Beloved, the summary of God's love and mercy, enclosed in the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, is this: Repent, and be baptized EVERYONE of you in the NAME of Jesus Christ for the remission of sin, and YOU SHALL receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the PROMISE is unto YOU, and to you're children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call."
Now rejoice, Beloved. The Lord is calling YOU!

Brother Villa

[BroRutledge]

ADMIN:

Trinitarians are sinners. Sinners do not go to Heaven. There is no pergatory.

Figure it out for yourself.

God bless
BroRutledge

[BroRutledge]

Admin:

We are sorry to report 3tree has gone on a long vacation and will not return for at least a year.

[AnointedByHim]

Originally posted by Hnovilla
His NAME is Jesus!

You guys sure like to argue about nothing. Jesus is the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. So when I baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, I am baptizing in the name of Jesus.
So there!

Brother Villa

Hnovilla,

Actually, that is not true, because you are baptizing in the titles and not His name. Are you trinitarian? From what you have said, you must be.

[AnointedByHim]

Originally posted by Felicity
Who needs revelation? Matt. 28:19 - Jesus told His disciples to go baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost and make disciples of all nations.

;)

Felicity,

Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not a name or names, but they are titles of the One true God. The name is Jesus and that is what Jesus is saying. I have heard that the way Matthew 28:19 is wrong because it has been said that this is the way it was originally written, " Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the My name:"

That was written on a Jewish website and I am not sure which one though.

Baptizing in the titles don't remit your sins and baptizing in Jesus name doesn't remit your sins, but the blood covering is what remits your sins and that is done in the name of Jesus. Of course, you have to repent of your sins to have them forgiven.

Let's look at it like this: If you are married, how do you know and how do others know that you are married? Wouldn't you take on your husband's last name? This is basically the same way that we know that we are the bride of Christ, because we have taken on His name through baptism.

Colossians 3:17 says it best, which is, " And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him."

Now, trinitarians do everything in Jesus name except baptize. Why do they not baptize in Jesus name? Colossians 3:17 says to "do all" in the name of the Lord Jesus. Doesn't that mean baptism too?

[nytxn1971]

She was being facetious, Annointed.

[AnointedByHim]

Originally posted by nytxn1971
She was being facetious, Annointed.

Brother,

I don't know how to take some of the things that are said here, so I take it from a standpoint that they are serious. You never know because people can say that they baptize in Jesus name when they baptize in the titles and that would be going against His Word.

[nytxn1971]

Understood... but she had a ;) face below it...

Anyway, I was just letting you know... no big deal.

[AnointedByHim]

Originally posted by nytxn1971
Understood... but she had a ;) face below it...

Anyway, I was just letting you know... no big deal.

Brother,

So is Hnovilla a trinitarian? He sure sounds like one if he isn't.

[nytxn1971]

Actually, I believe he was "playing devil's advocate".

To the best of my knowledge, he believes in baptism in Jesus name 100%.

[Faithchild]

Speaking of playing "Devil's Advocate" I'm going to slip into that role for a question.

If the titles are not to be used in baptism, why do some use the formula--"In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ"? Aren't "Lord" and 'Christ' titles? If that is permissible, why wouldn't, "I now baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost which is Jesus Christ" be proper?

There is no record of what the disciple's actually spoke at a baptismal ceremony. All reporting was after-the-fact. All we really know is the name of Jesus was spoken at every ceremony. So why would the combination of Matthew 28:19--as the commandment--and Acts 2:38--as the fulfillment--be biblically incorrect? It appears that the disciples DID use some titles in baptism.

What do you think? :shrug:

[BroRutledge]

Faithchild

I have never known this to be an issue with the people who have the understanding of Jesus being the name.

I don't know of any Jesus name people who would have a problem with saying some of the titles of God during the baptism.

I often Say to the person that is about to be baptized that this baptism will be in the NAME of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and there is only One Name that given for baptism. I explain to them that Father is not the name. Lord is not the name. Son is not the name. Christ is not the name and Holy Ghost is not the name. Then I baptize them in the Name of Jesus. Some times I say Lord Jesus. Sometimes I say Jesus Christ. Sometimes I say Lord Jesus Christ. Sometimes I say in the salvation name God and that name is Jesus. I ALWAYS USE THE NAME OF JESUS.... There is no other name, and that name is not left out when titles and attributes of God are mentioned along with the name.

We must not leave out the name of Jesus. If we baptize and say I now baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost and then immerse the candidate, we will have lied to the person being baptized.

Saying Father Son and Holy Ghost with no name mentioned after telling the person that you are going to baptize in the NAME is a sin against God and an eternal blunder for the person being baptized. If we tell them that they are going to be baptized in the name we should keep our word and baptize them in the name of JESUS.

We can say I now baptize you in the name of JESUS and leave off the titles... That will be fine....We should never say I now baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost and leave off the name. JESUS is the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.

The name without the titles is complete and all titles of God are in that name. The titles without the name are incomplete, because we are instructed to do all that we do in word or in deed in the name of JESUS.

We have no example or instruction in the word of God to baptize with titles only. We have many examples and a commandment to be baptized in the name of JESUS.

God bless
BroRutledge

[Felicity]

Anointed.....
Ron is right. It's important to pay attention to the ;)s.

Thanks for the clarification Ron. ;)

[AnointedByHim]

Originally posted by Felicity
Anointed.....
Ron is right. It's important to pay attention to the ;)s.

Thanks for the clarification Ron. ;)

Felicity,

Like I said before, I don't know how to take people sometimes because some people may be serious and that is why I wrote what I wrote. I didn't know if you were serious or not.

[Whosoever Will]

I won't settle for anything less than the name of Jesus!!!

[krazeeboi]

If I were to baptize one someone, here's what I would say:


"Upon your confession of faith in Jesus of Nazareth as Lord and Christ, and in obedience in His holy command to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, I now baptize you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

Personally, I don't have a problem with someone using triune terminology in baptism, but the name of Jesus Christ has GOT to be present. Just my take on it. [Copy Edited out by admin. You know the rules, if you don't think Jesus Name baptism is absolutely essential for salvation DO NOT POST IT HERE! This is warning #1, Three strikes and you are out. I am not asking for your agreement, I am demanding your obedience to the rules of this forum. - Bro John]

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!

Beloved, it is NOT being baptized in the titles that will "automatically" send a person to hell; rather, it is the REJECTION of the NAME!
'Jesus' is the "...there is none other NAME under heaven..." spoken by the Apostle Peter. It is not solely a NAME; rather, the ONE-NESS 'doctrine' is behind it just as surely as there is a doctrine (trinity) behind invoking the "...name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."
As long as the "trinitarians" reject any aspect of the NAME, they will emain blind, and void to its saving power. Please note: I do not believe they are blind to ALL the power in the NAME. Did the Lord not say that many shall come to him and say that they "...prophesied in your name?and in your name cast out devils? and in your name done many wonderful works?" You see, Beloved, they neglected to embrace the NAME in the waters of baptism "...for the remission of sins..." Can ANYONE die and be with the Lord while in sin?
There is much more.

Brother villa

[samdriver1]

His NAME is Jesus!

You guys sure like to argue about nothing. Jesus is the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. So when I baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, I am baptizing in the name of Jesus.
So there!

Brother Villa baptizing according to MAT 28:19 was meant as an example for us to all follow, not literal. Go on into the book of acts and further if you please, and see how the apostles preached & baptized. If they were following christ's example , and were endowed with power from on high , they were all being ledby the holy spirit, meaning the inspiration of the holy spiritwhen they preached and taught, as wellas baptizing.acts 4:12 speaks very clearly, no other namebut jesus, titles never come into play anywhere in the NThttp://goodnewscafe.net/images/icons/icon3.gif

[milady]

Baptizing in titles of Jesus is not the same as baptizing in his name. Father,son and holyghost are titles. His name is Jesus

[DAVIDE]

If I were to baptize one someone, here's what I would say:


"Upon your confession of faith in Jesus of Nazareth as Lord and Christ, and in obedience in His holy command to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, I now baptize you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

Personally, I don't have a problem with someone using triune terminology in baptism, but the name of Jesus Christ has GOT to be present. Just my take on it. [Copy Edited out by admin. You know the rules, if you don't think Jesus Name baptism is absolutely essential for salvation DO NOT POST IT HERE! This is warning #1, Three strikes and you are out. I am not asking for your agreement, I am demanding your obedience to the rules of this forum. - Bro John]


Seems to me krazeeboi wants to covers all bases! Any male parent is a father and a son, so; the only way one can baptize in the Father's name is to first find out what is the Father's name. To find this out, we have only to find out the Son's name and how he got it. Look at Hebrews 1:4..."Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they." If the Son obtained His name by inheritance, the possibility from whom He inherited it is limited to One: His Father. Read the words of Jesus in John 5:43, "I am come in my Father's name..." If Jesus inherited his name as Heb 1:4 says, can there be any doubt that the name of the Son has to be the same as the Father?

John 14:9
"Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?" Jesus also said that he and the Father were one. Accordinig to the Word of God, my wife and I are one...however, I can't say he that has seen me has seen my wife! (oh, no!).

Nowhere in the Bible was anyone ever baptized using the titles of Father, Son and Holy Ghost.From what I recall of history, it was Justin Matyr in the second century who got this trinity baptizm started (via the RCC). There are several verses in Acts where baptizm was administered in the name of Jesus or Jesus Christ. None using the titles. Reference Acts 2:38-39, 8:16, 10:48, 19:3-5, and, for Salvation, 4:10-12... and we are admonished in Col 3:17..."And whatsoever you do in word or deed do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.."

[krazeeboi]

[Copy Edited out by admin. You know the rules, if you don't think Jesus Name baptism is absolutely essential for salvation DO NOT POST IT HERE! This is warning #1, Three strikes and you are out. I am not asking for your agreement, I am demanding your obedience to the rules of this forum. - Bro John]


I do believe "Jesus Name baptism is absolutely essential for salvation," but I also believe that to be baptized "in Jesus' name" means volumes more than what we traditionally preach and teach it to be. Sorry if you disagree with that.

[krazeeboi]

DAVIDE:

There are several verses in Acts where baptizm was administered in the name of Jesus or Jesus Christ. None using the titles.
In reality, we don't have any actual accounts of what was said at baptism, even in the Acts accounts. In other words, Luke only gives later reflections on the events; he never records, "And as Ananias baptized Paul, he saith, 'I baptize thee in the name of Jesus Christ.'" Now, I do believe that the original Greek definitely implies that the name of Jesus Christ was invoked over the baptized, but this doesn't mean that "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" wasn't referenced at all. Possibly, the reference could have been used to illustrate how in Jesus, the fullness of the Godhead resides bodily, and the triune terminology was used to illustrate that fact, thereby giving baptism "in the name of Jesus Christ" even more emphasis and significance.

[Oldpreach]

"and the triune terminology was used to illustrate that fact," --Krazi

Uhh , this is trinitarian speech ALL the way. Also , saying we dont know what they said and saying that they might have included the 3 titles is akin to the same thing. You are speaking like you are just a hairs breath away from being trinitarian your self ! :eek:

[DAVIDE]

DAVIDE:


In reality, we don't have any actual accounts of what was said at baptism, even in the Acts accounts. In other words, Luke only gives later reflections on the events; he never records, "And as Ananias baptized Paul, he saith, 'I baptize thee in the name of Jesus Christ.'" Now, I do believe that the original Greek definitely implies that the name of Jesus Christ was invoked over the baptized, but this doesn't mean that "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" wasn't referenced at all. Possibly, the reference could have been used to illustrate how in Jesus, the fullness of the Godhead resides bodily, and the triune terminology was used to illustrate that fact, thereby giving baptism "in the name of Jesus Christ" even more emphasis and significance.

...No actual accounts? Brother it's all over Acts! Acts 2:38 tells how to be baptized(in the name of Jesus Christ), Acts 8:16, and Acts 10:48. Satan has never liked the name of Jesus. Down through the annals of time, the arch enemy of our souls has tried to stamp it out and delete it from man's mind for centuries. Consider how the apostles were warned and later beaten for administering and teaching in the name of Jesus...Acts 4:16-20, 5:28, 5:40-42. If this name was/is not that important why then were men's lives threatened at the mention of his name. Power-there is power in that name.

Obviously, there were words said during the baptizm of the early saints in the Book of Acts. When Peter and John went to Samaria to pray for the new converts that they might receive the Holy Ghost..."For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." How could the writer of Acts (Luke) know this unless it was heard what was said? The same thing can be said of Acts 10:48

Anyone who is a tongue talking, Holy Ghost filled, Apostolic, Jesus Only brother or sister in Christ should not even put this to question.

[John Atkinson]

[/color]


I do believe "Jesus Name baptism is absolutely essential for salvation," but I also believe that to be baptized "in Jesus' name" means volumes more than what we traditionally preach and teach it to be. Sorry if you disagree with that.If you don't agree with that you better not post it here because I will ban you at the drop of a hat and not feel the least bit bad about it.

Baptising using the titles and the name shows a) a lack of understanding of the identity of God, b) a lack of faith that the name, the only one given among men whereby we must be saved is good enough, and c) seems to be some attempt to "cover all the bases" as was mentioned previosly. Jesus Name spoken in baptism is the only way, no other.

DO NOT POST AN OPINION CONTRARY TO THAT ON MY BOARD!

Is that clear enough? Strike 2.

[krazeeboi]

Wow. I haven't visited this thread in a while, so I was unaware of the comments to my post.

Bro. Atkinson, I sent you a PM. As I have apologized for possibly offending you privately, I now do the same publicly. In no way did I mean to disrespect you on this discussion board, surely that was not my intent.

Personally, I don't see how me saying that essentially there's nothing wrong with using the titles "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" as long as the name of Jesus Christ is DEFINITELY included and given the highest importance and significance in the rite of baptism is any different than BroRutledge saying:

I don't know of any Jesus name people who would have a problem with saying some of the titles of God during the baptism...I ALWAYS USE THE NAME OF JESUS.... There is no other name, and that name is not left out when titles and attributes of God are mentioned along with the name.
But anyways....

OldPreach said:

Uhh , this is trinitarian speech ALL the way. Also , saying we dont know what they said and saying that they might have included the 3 titles is akin to the same thing. You are speaking like you are just a hairs breath away from being trinitarian your self !

This was in response to me saying, "Possibly, the reference could have been used to illustrate how in Jesus, the fullness of the Godhead resides bodily, and the triune terminology was used to illustrate that fact..."

If you understood me to use the phrase "triune terminology" as equal to espousing Trinitarian theology, then surely, surely, you are waaayyy off base. That phrase simply references the "Father, Son, Holy Spirit" terminology found in the text. It's pretty much a shorthand way of saying "Father, Son, Holy Spirit." This hardly means I believe that they are three eternal persons within the essence of the Godhead (and I do not). If you have a problem with the FSHG terminology, then you have a problem with the Bible, not me. I recognize that the terminology is there for a reason. I'm not scared of it. I don't run from it. I don't explain it away. It's there because God intended it for it to be there. The way I see it, it buttresses the truth of God's oneness, and isn't detrimental to it. So I don't shun it, I embrace it. God's Word is truth, and I'll take truth over any theological construct any day of the week.


DAVIDE said:

...No actual accounts? Brother it's all over Acts!

You missed my point. But what's amazing is that you go on to actually agree with what I said indirectly.

Acts 2:38 tells how to be baptized(in the name of Jesus Christ), Acts 8:16, and Acts 10:48.

My point exactly. It tells us exactly how to be baptized, but my point is that an actual account doesn't follow any of those passages mentioned which describes the exact wording of the "baptismal formula." Of couse, the actual account would not contradict the directive, and I am not implying this. It's just that we don't know exactly what was said, and how it was said, when someone was baptized in those accounts in Acts.

Satan has never liked the name of Jesus. Down through the annals of time, the arch enemy of our souls has tried to stamp it out and delete it from man's mind for centuries. Consider how the apostles were warned and later beaten for administering and teaching in the name of Jesus...Acts 4:16-20, 5:28, 5:40-42. If this name was/is not that important why then were men's lives threatened at the mention of his name. Power-there is power in that name.

And I definitely agree wholeheartedly. And nothing I posted would imply the opposite.

Obviously, there were words said during the baptizm of the early saints in the Book of Acts. When Peter and John went to Samaria to pray for the new converts that they might receive the Holy Ghost..."For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." How could the writer of Acts (Luke) know this unless it was heard what was said? The same thing can be said of Acts 10:48

Yes, but again, my point is, we do not have a verbatim account of what was actually said during the baptisms. Yes, there were words said. Yes, the name of Jesus was included. We can deduce that much. But is this to the exclusion of some of the titles and attributes of God being mentioned as well? All I'm saying is that this is entirely possible. No one knows for sure, but there IS a possibility. And that possibility in NO WAY undermines the saving significance of the name of Jesus Christ.

Anyone who is a tongue talking, Holy Ghost filled, Apostolic, Jesus Only brother or sister in Christ should not even put this to question.

I'm simply testing all things, holding fast to that which is good, as the Bible instructs me to do. Nothing's wrong with asking questions. When everything that can be shaken has been shaken, only the truth will remain. And that's what I want: truth. If you disagree, you're certainly at liberty to do so.

[disciple]

Hey, if you're going to baptise "in the titles", you might as well do all 2000 of them! Or, you could just say "In JESUS NAME" and cover all of them at once! :)

[DAVIDE]

Hey, if you're going to baptise "in the titles", you might as well do all 2000 of them! Or, you could just say "In JESUS NAME" and cover all of them at once! :)


Right on, disciple....right on!!!:bow:

[BroRutledge]

Here is a quote that was referred to earlier in this thread.

QUOTE: I don't know of any Jesus name people who would have a problem with saying some of the titles of God during the baptism...I ALWAYS USE THE NAME OF JESUS.... There is no other name, and that name is not left out when titles and attributes of God are mentioned along with the name. END QUOTE:

If that quote was taken to mean that I believe that there is any way to be baptized other than ONLY in the name of Jesus it was totally misunderstood.

I often baptise people and explain to them in the water who the Father is.. and the Son and the Holy Ghost. I also talk about the rock and the Cloud and the Morning star and the Lamb of God, but when I baptise them I always baptise only in the name of Jesus and not in any title.

There is no other name given whereby we must be saved. No matter how many titles are mentioned when talking to a convert we are only to baptise in the name of Jesus. Arise be baptized calling on the name of the Lord.

I have no problem with the baptism formula that was posted providing that the words are not spoken to make sure that the trinitarian concept is covered.

QUOTE: "Upon your confession of faith in Jesus of Nazareth as Lord and Christ, and in obedience in His holy command to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, I now baptize you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." END QUOTE:

As far as I am concerned those words spoken in water baptism are fine and that is a good valid baptism in the name of Jesus.

Here is where we had a problem with the earlier post.

QUOTE: Personally, I don't have a problem with someone using triune terminology in baptism, but the name of Jesus Christ has GOT to be present...END QUOTE:

Those words and other words that were deleted by the admin caused us some concern. Our friend seemed to indicate that the words in Matt 28:19 were triune terminology.

Matt 28:19 Is a Jesus name commission and has nothing to do with trinity whatsoever. The Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is not triune terminology. It is Oneness all the way. That name is JESUS.

The NAME called for in Matt 28:19 Is the same name mentioned in Acts 2:38. Other words which were deleted by the admin also seemed to indicate that there may have been a trinitarian question in the mind of the baptizer and a suggestion that we should say all those words so we can be sure that we will get one of the baptisms right.

Maybe that was not the intention of the poster, but it seemed that way, and I am sure that bro John gave warning as a result of the fact that it seemed that the poster was saying that he does it that way to make sure that all those words are used so that the trinity minded people will feel that they have covered all bases. If the words "TRIUNE TERMINOLOGY" etc had not been mentioned in the post there would have been no warning.

There are other ways that the false triune suggestion can be introduced in baptism by ministers who can baptise either way.

Those who say I now baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost and this I do in the name of Jesus seems to be a trinity suggestion in baptism which is like saying I baptise you into the Titles of God in Jesus Name. In other words to me they seem to be saying, "I now baptise you in the name of the Trinity and I am declaring you to be a trinitarian in the Name of Jesus.

I know of some who baptise that way because to them it makes no difference. They believe that you can be baptized just using Father, Son & Holy Ghost or in the name of Jesus... and they will do it either way or include both depending on what the convert wants. I am not of that crowd.

I feel that the word of God is against that, and I suggest all who have been baptized in the name of compromise and idolatery should still yet arise and be baptized calling on the NAME of the Lord washing away sins.

Since my quote was posted I wanted to make it clear for those who may not have revelation or understanding...We baptise ONLY THE NAME OF JESUS...period. If this has not made clear how I stand, I can explain in more detail and will be glad to do so.

Titles spoken during baptism have nothing to do with the baptism. No matter how many titles are mentioned baptism ONLY IN THE NAME JESUS is correct.

Any thought or suggestion that an idol known as a trinity (three person) god is present would mean that the sin of idolatery is included in the waters of baptism.

Whatsoever ye do(baptism included) in word (spoken word included) or in deed (baptism included) Do ALL (baptism and spoken words included) in the NAME.... IN THE NAME... IN THE NAME.....WHOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I FEEL LIKE PREACHING....IN THE NAME OF JESUS...............HALLELUJAH!!!!!!!!

I will be happy to read a post where the person who was warned by the admin with some of his words deleted will explain to us that we jumped to a wrong conclusion about his intentions.

I have a feeling that we may have. But just to make sure, I am requesting that the poster come out and say that he believes it would be a sin to baptise a convert using these words. I now baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. (no mention of the name of Jesus)

If the poster will write that I will know that we have misunderstood his intention.

God bless
BroRutledge

[TodayAGiftFrGod]

Here is a quote that was referred to earlier in this thread.

QUOTE: I don't know of any Jesus name people who would have a problem with saying some of the titles of God during the baptism...I ALWAYS USE THE NAME OF JESUS.... There is no other name, and that name is not left out when titles and attributes of God are mentioned along with the name. END QUOTE:


If that quote was taken to mean that I believe that there is any way to be baptized other than ONLY in the name of Jesus it was totally misunderstood.

I often baptise people and explain to them in the water who the Father is.. and the Son and the Holy Ghost. I also talk about the rock and the Cloud and the Morning star and the Lamb of God, but when I baptise them I always baptise only in the name of Jesus and not in any title.

There is no other name given whereby we must be saved. No matter how many titles are mentioned when talking to a convert we are only to baptise in the name of Jesus. Arise be baptized calling on the name (NOT TITLES) of the Lord.

There is no other way.

Those who say I now baptise you in the name of the father and of the son and of the holyghost and this I do in the name of Jesus is a trinity suggestion in baptism which is like saying I baptise you in the Titles in Jesus Name.

I am against that and since it was brought up, I wanted to make it clear for those who may not have revelation or understanding... ONLY THE NAME OF JESUS...period.

Titles spoken during baptism, have nothing to do with the baptism. Only the name.

God bless
BroRutledge
Bro. Rutledge,

Have you heard of the Church of Jesus or a similarity... They will use name of Jesus, but refuse to say Jesus Christ..... I ran across that one time out east (western VA)... They were very country folks who's ladies still wore black skirts and long sleeve white blouses to every service.... Based on my background, that seemed a little strange to me... Just wondering if you had ever encountered such practice?

[BroRutledge]

Bro. Rutledge,

Have you heard of the Church of Jesus or a similarity... They will use name of Jesus, but refuse to say Jesus Christ..... I ran across that one time out east (western VA)... They were very country folks who's ladies still wore black skirts and long sleeve white blouses to every service.... Based on my background, that seemed a little strange to me... Just wondering if you had ever encountered such practice?Yes I have seen that and just about everything you could imagine. I have met people who believe the first name is Jesus and the last name is Christ. Others tell me the first name is LORD the middle Name is JESUS and the last name is Christ. Some say you must say the words LORD JESUS CHRIST ... Others say Just say Jesus. Some say You must say Jesus Christ and others proclaim that you must say the words LORD JESUS.

God said do it in the NAME... That name is JESUS.

LORD is not his Name. CHRIST is not his name. JESUS is the name. And If we do it in the name of the Lord JESUS... we are calling Jesus our LORD but only baptizing in the name of Jesus which is the name of our LORD. When we say Lord Jesus Christ we are calling him our Lord and our Christ but still baptizing only in the name of Jesus which is the name of our Lord and Christ.

When we say I now baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost and that wonderful name is JESUS... we have called him our Father and made mention of the Son of God our redeemer and spoken of the great gift of the Holy Ghost but the baptism is in the Name of Jesus, and when that convert goes under the water he or she has taken on the name of Jesus which is the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. But to say I baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost and this I do in the name of Jesus is like saying... I baptise you into the titles in Jesus name.

If anybody cannot see the difference in what I just wrote it very well could mean that you have not yet come to the understanding and revelation of that Name above all names and that name which is not a title that Matthew clearly understood and agreed with in one mind and one accord when Peter preached the message of Jesus name baptism on the day of Pentecost.

It is possible that I am an extreme on this, but I believe we need to be sure that it is done in Jesus name. We are talking about baptism which "DOTH NOW SAVE US..."

It may be possible that those who say in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost and this I do in the name of Jesus... may be approved of God. I don't know, but if I had been baptized that way by a person who teaches that either way will do, I think I would find a fanatic Jesus Name Apostolic like me and do it in the name of Jesus and go from that point forward proclaiming to the world that JESUS is the only name given under heaven whereby we must be saved and JESUS is the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost that Matthew wrote about in Matt 28:19. I would get wet one more time just to be absolutely sure.

Most people I know who say I now baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and Of the Holy Ghost and this I do in the name of Jesus.... are trinitarians and Apostolic who have compromised with trinitarians. Many of them are called charismatic Pentecostals.

I hear talk about Apostolic people who have gone charismatic. As far as I am concerned this is not possible. Apostolics will either stay Apostolic or backslide. There is no other way. People may go charismatic from dead catholism or some protestant movement and possibly that will be a step in a good direction, but to claim to have gone charismatic from the Truth is to leave the truth and follow error into hell.

But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.

God bless
BroRutledge

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!

"It is possible that I am an extreme on this, but I believe we need to be sure that it is done in Jesus' name. We are talking about baptism which "DOTH NOW SAVE US..."
Most people I know who say I now baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and Of the Holy Ghost and this I do in the name of Jesus.... are trinitarians and Apostolic who have compromised with trinitarians. Many of them are called charismatic Pentecostals.
I hear talk about Apostolic people who have gone charismatic. As far as I am concerned this is not possible.
(Emphasis mine)

I am also known as an extremist, even among the apostolics! Amen, Beloved, without the NAME there can be no remission of sin: for it is in the NAME that the blood is applied.
"For it is impossible for those who were (1) once enlightened, and (2) have tasted of the heavenly gift, and (3) were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and (4) have tasted the good word of God, and (5)the powers of the world to come..."; if these fall away, with what can they replace the ONLY Gospel that will save? They will have cast away wisdom to chase a whirlwind.

It's the Gospel, Church!
Brother Villa

[deecota]

I was raised pentecostal but baptised in the trinity. It was not until last year that while studying the Bible I received the Jesus name revelation and the Lord placed me with a wonderful apostolic minister. So last September I was rebaptized in the name of Jesus. Praise HIM!!!! The thing the Lord showed me was that if Peter would have baptized all those on the day of pentecost with the trinity then there would be confusion. The Romans would have thought father would be Zeus or some other god and son could have been hercules. The Jews normally referred to Abraham as father and they all knew Isaac was the son of promise. So by baptizing in the name of Jesus Christ they knew that it was that man from Gallilee that was crucified praise the Lord! So I believe by looking scripturely and historically we see that there is only one way of baptism.

[RevDooley]

I copied this from deecosta:
I was raised pentecostal but baptised in the trinity. It was not until last year that while studying the Bible I received the Jesus name revelation and the Lord placed me with a wonderful apostolic minister. So last September I was rebaptized in the name of Jesus. Praise HIM!!!! The thing the Lord showed me was that if Peter would have baptized all those on the day of pentecost with the trinity then there would be confusion. The Romans would have thought father would be Zeus or some other god and son could have been hercules. The Jews normally referred to Abraham as father and they all knew Isaac was the son of promise. So by baptizing in the name of Jesus Christ they knew that it was that man from Gallilee that was crucified praise the Lord! So I believe by looking scripturely and historically we see that there is only one way of baptism.
That is one of the best explanations on why Peter was so specific on the day of Pentecost. I had never thought about it like that. Hope you don't mind if I use it when I preach? :yeah:
I am deeply saddened when I hear about people going charismatic. I used to be a charismatic. They can't touch what we have folks.
Oh, they have some exciting services, but that won't get you into heaven.
They do have miracles, but that won't get you into heaven.
People's lives are changed, but that doesn't mean they are going to heaven.

You MUST be apostolic in doctrine as well as pentecostal in experience. They go hand in hand. If you are not baptised in Jesus' name, then what hope do you have?
Does anyone honestly thing that God is going to honor something that is not in His word? I think not. If His word is settled in heaven, let's get it settled in our own lives and live for Him like we have never done before.
Has He been good to you?
Has He saved you from death and hell?
Has He touched your life?
Why not serve Him according to His excellent word?

[Freedom]

:angel: Acts 4:7-13--And when they had set them in the midst, they asked, By what power, or by what name, have ye done this?

Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel,

If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means is he made whole;

Being it known unto you all, and to the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.

This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner,

Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heavengiven among men, whereby we must be saved.

Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marveled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.

[TodayAGiftFrGod]

Yes I have seen that and just about everything you could imagine. I have met people who believe the first name is Jesus and the last name is Christ. Others tell me the first name is LORD the middle Name is JESUS and the last name is Christ. Some say you must say the words LORD JESUS CHRIST ... Others say Just say Jesus. Some say You must say Jesus Christ and others proclaim that you must say the words LORD JESUS.

God said do it in the NAME... That name is JESUS.

LORD is not his Name. CHRIST is not his name. JESUS is the name. And If we do it in the name of the Lord JESUS... we are calling Jesus our LORD but only baptizing in the name of Jesus which is the name of our LORD. When we say Lord Jesus Christ we are calling him our Lord and our Christ but still baptizing only in the name of Jesus which is the name of our Lord and Christ.

When we say I now baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost and that wonderful name is JESUS... we have called him our Father and made mention of the Son of God our redeemer and spoken of the great gift of the Holy Ghost but the baptism is in the Name of Jesus, and when that convert goes under the water he or she has taken on the name of Jesus which is the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. But to say I baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost and this I do in the name of Jesus is like saying... I baptise you into the titles in Jesus name.

If anybody cannot see the difference in what I just wrote it very well could mean that you have not yet come to the understanding and revelation of that Name above all names and that name which is not a title that Matthew clearly understood and agreed with in one mind and one accord when Peter preached the message of Jesus name baptism on the day of Pentecost.

It is possible that I am an extreme on this, but I believe we need to be sure that it is done in Jesus name. We are talking about baptism which "DOTH NOW SAVE US..."
. . .

God bless
BroRutledge

Two comments:


My main problem with those who baptized in the name of Jesus only rather than Jesus was the fact they were so adamant against using Jesus Christ. It's like they refused to accept him as the Christ.


Why did Peter say name of Jesus Christ rather than just Jesus? Is there a significance to that?

[ShiningEpistle]

Good point Bro Rutledge. I figure if you say exactly what Peter said you'll be alright. God bless.

[krazeeboi]

QUOTE: Personally, I don't have a problem with someone using triune terminology in baptism, but the name of Jesus Christ has GOT to be present...END QUOTE:

Those words and other words that were deleted by the admin caused us some concern. Our friend seemed to indicate that the words in Matt 28:19 were triune terminology.

Matt 28:19 Is a Jesus name commission and has nothing to do with trinity whatsoever. The Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is not triune terminology. It is Oneness all the way. That name is JESUS.My purpose in using the phrase "triune terminology" was simply a shorthand way of saying Father, Son, Holy Ghost terminology. "Triune" doesn't necessarily mean "trinitarian"; context determines the meaning, and my using of the term "trinue" was not in connection with a Trinitarian understanding. Even some Apostolic pastors and bishops will say that God is triune, but not a Trinity. "Triune" simply means "three in one"; whatever the "three" is and whatever the "one" is not specified. "Trinity" means "three persons within the one essence of God." So there is a difference. So, the Father, Son, Holy Ghost terminology is triune terminology in that it references the three manners in which God has revealed himself to mankind. So there's no need for us to be afraid of that term, LOL.

The NAME called for in Matt 28:19 Is the same name mentioned in Acts 2:38. Other words which were deleted by the admin also seemed to indicate that there may have been a trinitarian question in the mind of the baptizer and a suggestion that we should say all those words so we can be sure that we will get one of the baptisms right.

Maybe that was not the intention of the poster, but it seemed that way, and I am sure that bro John gave warning as a result of the fact that it seemed that the poster was saying that he does it that way to make sure that all those words are used so that the trinity minded people will feel that they have covered all bases. If the words "TRIUNE TERMINOLOGY" etc had not been mentioned in the post there would have been no warning.Perhaps the "triune terminology" phraseology was misunderstood by some (matter of fact, I know it was), but aside from that, I don't see anything wrong with mentioning Jesus' own personal command to His disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (which, by the way, I think is an interpolation, but I have no qualms with the present rendering of the passage), and then to actual FULFILL that command by baptizing the candidate in the name that actually reveals all that God is, even in His revelation as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the Name of Jesus.

I have a feeling that we may have. But just to make sure, I am requesting that the poster come out and say that he believes it would be a sin to baptise a convert using these words. I now baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. (no mention of the name of Jesus)Personally, I won't say that such is a sin; I leave that up to God to determine. What I will say, though, about such terminology is that it is not in accordance with apostolic tradition and practice, it is not in agreement with early church history, and at the least, it misses and even bypasses the reasons for which we are baptized in the first place (even the reasons given by those who believe we are not baptized to obtain remission of sins), and at most, is outright deceptive.

For as long as I live, I will continue to believe and proclaim that the true, biblical way to be baptized is in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, period.

NOW, everything that that actually entails is another subject altogether. ;)

[LoveEverlasting]

krazeeboi said: "So, the Father, Son, Holy Ghost terminology is triune terminology in that it references the three manners in which God has revealed himself to mankind. So there's no need for us to be afraid of that term, LOL."

I agree. Some of this is semantics. The verse that is in question is God's Word and not "trinitarian terminology." I'm sorry that trinitarians misunderstand what Jesus was speaking of here but just because they do doesn't mean that those who have THE revelation of THE NAME cannot use certain Scriptural phrases being fearful of "sounding" trinitarian. I could care less how trinitarians do it (or don't do it). They do not dictate how I baptize in any way. The One God who is F, S and HG is Jesus. We are to baptize in the NAME of Jesus which is the NAME of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. That is Biblical revelation.

Blessings to all in Jesus Name

heisone.churchinacts.com

[SingingHoly]

Hi,
I was freshly baptised in Jesus Name. I am going to a great Pentecostal Church. But my husband not only refuse to recognise the need of the baptism, he also doesn't beleive n Oneness. Filled with the Holy Ghost I of course know the Truth. But would it be too much to ask some of you to give me some scriptures supporting the Oneness? I am studying the Bible, but ifI could find some verses where the Oneness is so obvious, I could tell my husband about it.
Thank you so much!

[BrotherBallard]

SingingHoly,
Welcome to GNC!!! Congratulations on your new found LIFE!!!

Absolutely, we can help with all the Oneness scriptures you need! Here is a short list, from both the Old and New Testament:

Deut. 6:4
Isa. 9:6
Matt. 1:22,23 (This is the fulfillment of Isa. 9:6)
John 10:30
Acts 4:12
I Tim. 3:16
James 2:19
Revelation 1:8

If you need more please do not hesitate to ask!!!

In His Name!!!

Hi,
I was freshly baptised in Jesus Name. I am going to a great Pentecostal Church. But my husband not only refuse to recognise the need of the baptism, he also doesn't beleive n Oneness. Filled with the Holy Ghost I of course know the Truth. But would it be too much to ask some of you to give me some scriptures supporting the Oneness? I am studying the Bible, but ifI could find some verses where the Oneness is so obvious, I could tell my husband about it.
Thank you so much!

[BrotherD]

Singing Holy,

Best thing you can do is leave him alone. If you've already talked to him about your beliefs and he's not ready, then i wouldn't keep pushing. Don't worry, he'll notice the change in you even though he might not say anything to you at the moment. It's hard to keep quiet sometimes, but you can still be happy and content about your understanding of scripture until he comes around. JMO.

[Abigail4476]

Singing Holy,

Best thing you can do is leave him alone. If you've already talked to him about your beliefs and he's not ready, then i wouldn't keep pushing. Don't worry, he'll notice the change in you even though he might not say anything to you at the moment. It's hard to keep quiet sometimes, but you can still be happy and content about your understanding of scripture until he comes around. JMO.My husband was raised in an Assembly of God home...his father was a minister...he was witnessed to several times by Pentecostal kids in his school, but never understood or believed any of it...then later, he visited our church(prior to our marriage) and heard teaching on Jesus' name baptism and One God Doctrine and suddenly the scriptures that were shared with him earlier made sense...and he was converted...my point? Even if someone seems stubborn, or seems not to understand or seems to disagree, you are still laying a gentle foundation for revelation of truth. Don't rush God's work. He will complete it at the perfect moment.

You will win your husband by being a godly wife, treating him with kindness, being gentle, having a quiet spirit, and fulfilling your marital obligations without complaint or without basing your own behavior on his [good or bad] behavior. Your husband will be more impressed with how godly you behave than with how knowledgeable you are in Scripture. When He sees the changes in your speech, conduct and dress and sees that they are a permanent change, he will want to know more. Seek God consistently for help and strength, be kind and patient with your husband, and wait for him to ask you to share more.

A little secret: One of the easiest ways to pique someone's curiosity is to not say a word. If you wait till your husband asks you for more information, you will insure that it is the right moment for him. Wait for God to convict his heart and do the work. Quietly study and pray in the meantime, so when you are asked, you will be ready.

[Abigail4476]

My husband was raised in an Assembly of God home...his father was a minister...he was witnessed to several times by Pentecostal kids in his school, but never understood or believed any of it...then later, he visited our church(prior to our marriage) and heard teaching on Jesus' name baptism and One God Doctrine and suddenly the scriptures that were shared with him earlier made sense...and he was converted...my point? Even if someone seems stubborn, or seems not to understand or seems to disagree, you are still laying a gentle foundation for revelation of truth. Don't rush God's work. He will complete it at the perfect moment.

You will win your husband by being a godly wife, treating him with kindness, being gentle, having a quiet spirit, and fulfilling your marital obligations without complaint or without basing your own behavior on his [good or bad] behavior. Your husband will be more impressed with how godly you behave than with how knowledgeable you are in Scripture. When He sees the changes in your speech, conduct and dress and sees that they are a permanent change, he will want to know more. Seek God consistently for help and strength, be kind and patient with your husband, and wait for him to ask you to share more.

A little secret: One of the easiest ways to pique someone's curiosity is to not say a word. If you wait till your husband asks you for more information, you will insure that it is the right moment for him. Wait for God to convict his heart and do the work. Quietly study and pray in the meantime, so when you are asked, you will be ready.There are some issues concerning winning your husband to the Lord that some of the women in this forum may be able to help you with. You may want to ask the same question in the Ladies' Forum (Let me know if I'm out of line here, moderators....)...I'm sure you will also receive some wise advice there.

[garyfroth]

Anyone seen this website: detailed Tetragrammation explanation. Traces back the name of God and how "Jesus" name originated.
Linked gladly removed by moderator.


Brother Gary






His NAME is Jesus!

You guys sure like to argue about nothing. Jesus is the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. So when I baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, I am baptizing in the name of Jesus.
So there!

Brother Villa

[Happy]

Anyone seen this website: detailed Tetragrammation explanation. Traces back the name of God and how "Jesus" name originated.
lind removed by moderator

Brother Gary
Bro Gary,

If you want more information on the subject in that website I would suggest you read a book by Daniel Segraves "The Messiah's Name: Jesus, not Yahshua". It is available from PPH.

[BrotherBallard]

garyfroth,
Welcome to GNC!!!

Also, could you and Happy post the below books in a Thread labeled, "Great Books to Read" it's on the second or third page under General Discussions.
I like to look through there and find books that I haven't read and I'm very interested in Jewish aspects of One God. It's easier to keep up with books located on one thread.

Thank you!

In His Name!!!

Anyone seen this website: detailed Tetragrammation explanation. Traces back the name of God and how "Jesus" name originated.
Link Removed by moderator

Brother Gary

[ddc101]

About the Website.....no thanks.lv sis.c

[BroRutledge]

That web site and it's false doctrine is not allowed here. Gary you were banned for the false doctrine you tried to introduce to the cafe. Don't bother to try to return.

God bless
BroRutledge

[BrotherBallard]

I want to state that I did not read the web site, I was just looking into the aspect of the books, and trying to keep them in one location in GNC. I was assuming it was a Jewish point of view, on the issue of the Oneness of the Godhead.

In His Name!!!


That web site and it's false doctrine is not allowed here. Gary you were banned for the false doctrine you tried to introduce to the cafe. Don't bother to try to return.

God bless
BroRutledge

[John Atkinson]

I want to state that I did not read the web site, I was just looking into the aspect of the books, and trying to keep them in one location in GNC. I was assuming it was a Jewish point of view, on the issue of the Oneness of the Godhead.

In His Name!!!
Not Actually, ti was the veiw that the word "Jesus" isn't good enough, we gotta use "yeshua" or we aren't using his name.

[Happy]

We have recently had a situation where a person has tried to introduce this false doctrine into our Church.

The book I mentioned by Bro Segraves shows how ludicrous this doctrine is. Unfortunately, some people are taken in by it. The person managed to woo away at least 2 people because of it.

The basis of it are Judaizers - trying to put us back under the law.

It is a false, poisonous doctrine.

[ApostolicDaught]

You surely hit the nail on the head drummerboy_dave. It's all about THE NAME & his name is Jesus. Father is not a name. I have a father whose name is Gerald. I have 4 sons & their names are Curtis, Tyrone, Darius & Lemuel. The Holy Ghost came in Jesus name & indeed came from Jesus.

Neither is there salvation in any other for there is none of NAME under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved. That name is Jesus (Jehovah is salvation). Healing is in his name. Deliverance is in his name.
When a person says, "...in the name of the father and the son and the holy ghost", they haven't said the name! Remember, Acts 4:10-12.

[ApostolicDaught]

Let me start by saying Praise the Lord Sister,

While I have not read all the posts on this thread as I only joined this morning I believe one of the best scriptures for your husband would be 1 Timothy 3:16

"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness
God was manifest in the flesh
Justified in the spirit
Seen of angels
Preached unto the Gentiles
Believed on in the world
Received up into glory."

Jesus alone fits the criteria in this scripture.

Hi,
I was freshly baptised in Jesus Name. I am going to a great Pentecostal Church. But my husband not only refuse to recognise the need of the baptism, he also doesn't beleive n Oneness. Filled with the Holy Ghost I of course know the Truth. But would it be too much to ask some of you to give me some scriptures supporting the Oneness? I am studying the Bible, but ifI could find some verses where the Oneness is so obvious, I could tell my husband about it.
Thank you so much!

[ApostolicDaught]

Praise the Lord Brother Blume,

Your name is familiar to me in Apostolic circles even though I come from the P.A.W. & if memory serves me correctly I believe I heard you are part of the U.P.C.

I wanted to add something concerning what you said about casting out a devil. My mind went on the story in the book of Acts where 7 Jewish brothers tried to apply the "formula" that had heard about or seen using the name of Jesus. There was one problem though. Although they said (paraphrasing) "We adjure you in the name of Jesus whom Paul preaches..." they did not have the power of the Holy Ghost & the bible tells us clearly what happened to them men. "Jesus I know & Paul I know but who are you?" It was NOT a pretty sight though. Yes, we can use the name of Jesus & rightly so but without the power of the Holy Ghost in us I firmly believe the same fate that befell them 7 men will also befall anybody who attempts the same thing.

Would we successfully cast out a devil if we used the invocation, "In the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost"? I think not.

[Brett Cannon]

Greetings in the Most precious Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, The Name above All Names,................Dear Board, Acts 2:38 is in simple understanding, it is the True understanding of Matt. 28:19,....Showing a ONENESS Revelation of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,.....and if it did not matter how one is baptized, then why did Paul ask in Acts 19:3 ?...."Unto what then, were ye baptized?"...And to our Trinitarian friends,....I ask this?...Is Acts 2:38 correct or Not?..........And if it is in The Bible, which it is, then why would you Pervert it?.............And when you disagree with Acts 2:38, You make Peter and Paul contradict The Lord Jesus,...............And you are telling us in a revelatory way, that you interpret Scripture better than these Apostles. What I am trying to stress here is "THE FACTS IN THE BOOK OF ACTS",........is this,........it reveals the Great Comission in Action,....People preached the Good News, People heard the Good news Preached, they believed, they came under conviction, they repented, then they got baptized in the Name of The Lord Jesus Christ, they recieved the HOLY GHOST, with the evidence of Speaking in other Tongues as the Spirit gave the utterance,...they endured unto the end seeking to Live a Life of Holiness and Seperation from the World,..........So why then would people want to Pervert this simple teaching that is laid out so plain in the Bible?.....(Gal.1:8),...But though we, or an Angel from Heaven Preach any other Gospel unto you, than that which we have preached unto you, Let him be accursed...............Brett Cannon, Aquila And Priscilla Acts 2:38 Truth Ministries, Banner Elk, NC www.freewebs.com/aquilandpriscillacts238/ (http://www.freewebs.com/aquilandpriscillacts238/)

[PastorS]

Ok, i might be too late on the subject of salvation by baptism, but let me post a question anyhow.

I had a close graduate who told me that at a particular UPC apostolic school of ministry a particular teacher tought them that trinitarians will be in heaven. Is that actually whats being tought?

For me is simple, my grandfather was a Baptist Missionary for over 80 years(he lived until he was 107). So when I came to the Lord in a different country, I had to make a desition. If I belived the truth in Mathew 28:19(dont freak out, let me finish the sentence) through the obedience of Acts that my grand father would not be saved. I accepted that view.

So now are there teachers in biblical apostolic colledges teaching differently? When did this train leave the station?

[Brett Cannon]

Ok, i might be too late on the subject of salvation by baptism, but let me post a question anyhow.

I had a close graduate who told me that at a particular UPC apostolic school of ministry a particular teacher tought them that trinitarians will be in heaven. Is that actually whats being tought?

For me is simple, my grandfather was a Baptist Missionary for over 80 years(he lived until he was 107). So when I came to the Lord in a different country, I had to make a desition. If I belived the truth in Mathew 28:19(dont freak out, let me finish the sentence) through the obedience of Acts that my grand father would not be saved. I accepted that view.

So now are there teachers in biblical apostolic colledges teaching differently? When did this train leave the station?.......................................... ..................Greetings in The Most High Name, The Lord Jesus Christ,.................Friend, you make a good point,,............but when it boils down to makeing Judgement, on ones Salvation or Damnation, that is one thing that I try to stay away from...........whether they be Trinnies or Oneness,..........But in a paradoxical view there is Scripture that supports sort of knowing whether a person is Lost or not,............and I will quote some of these Scriptures,........but still , for me personally, I will not make a Judgement call on no ones Salvation or Damnation..........Matt.7:20, Wherefore by their fruits, Ye shall know them,.........2Cor.4:3, But if our Gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are LOST.........Ecc.11:3,.........in the place where the tree falleth, there it shall be.........Rev. 21:8,.........and there are other verses,.......but even Paul said I judge not mine own self,................so for me, even if a person Leaves this world yelling, get my feet out of the fire,..........and put that thought with Ecc.11:3, in which it would not Look good for that person, I still, believe it is not my place to say, well that person must have went to hell, I believe that we have one Judge, and his name is JESUS,............and it aint Brett Cannon,........but sticking to what the Gospel says about Salvation, I stand with it one hundred percent,............Then Peter said unto them "REPENT" and be Baptized every one of you (NOT some of ya), in the Name of Jesus Christ for the Remission of sins, and ye shall recieve the gift of The Holy Ghost........He that Believeth and is Baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth Not, shall be damned (Mark 16:16),........In Flaming Fire taking Vengeance, on them that know not God, and that obey not the Gospel, of our Lord Jesus Christ............Now who would dare Justify against these Scriptures,??.....Not I, No Sir,......................Brett C. Cannon, Aquila And Priscilla Acts 2:38 Truth Ministries, Banner Elk, NC, www.freewebs.com/aquilandpriscillacts238/ (http://www.freewebs.com/aquilandpriscillacts238/)

[PastorS]

Are you saying that we do not know who is saved and who isnt?

[mfblume]

Praise the Lord Brother Blume,

Your name is familiar to me in Apostolic circles even though I come from the P.A.W. & if memory serves me correctly I believe I heard you are part of the U.P.C.

Hi brother, when you heard my name I was UPC, but I dropped my license just recently without anything to do with doctrine, etc. A door simply opened for me outside the UPC for ministry the same truths I always have ministered.


I wanted to add something concerning what you said about casting out a devil. My mind went on the story in the book of Acts where 7 Jewish brothers tried to apply the "formula" that had heard about or seen using the name of Jesus. There was one problem though. Although they said (paraphrasing) "We adjure you in the name of Jesus whom Paul preaches..." they did not have the power of the Holy Ghost & the bible tells us clearly what happened to them men. "Jesus I know & Paul I know but who are you?" It was NOT a pretty sight though. Yes, we can use the name of Jesus & rightly so but without the power of the Holy Ghost in us I firmly believe the same fate that befell them 7 men will also befall anybody who attempts the same thing.
I agree. That does not negate the fact, though, that the name must still be invokved. The problem with the exorcists is that they did not have the OTHER necessary part -- FAITH and EXPERIENCE. You could say they were not even IN CHRIST, so were LYING when they commanded things in His name, as though they were his agents.

So one needs to be both in Christ, and must invoke that name. It's not an incantation or chant that produces sound waves with power in themselves. It's FAITH IN HIS NAME when we speak it.

[witness4jesus]

I agree, Brother Blume.

I have not read all the posts, but I believe that baptism in the name of Jesus shouldn't just be a "formula" to us either. In being baptized, we should become
aware that the name is that of Father, Son, Holy Ghost, and it is also our name
in Him. The whole family in heaven and earth. Not that the knowledge is a
prerequisite to the baptism. I did not have any "conviction", revelation at all
about being baptized in the name. I just knew it was the right thing to do
after I had received the Holy Ghost.

Pam

[PastorS]

We live in such a secular society that christianity has also grown to be secular. We have our hands full teaching doctrine in and out of time so that people understand and know why they are being baptized.

The book of Mark says, He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, and he who believes not shall be dammed. In another word, faith cometh by hearing and hearing of the word of God. It should be required for people to know why they are being baptised in Jesus name. Other wise the exudus to trinitarian churches will continue. Its hard to keep people when they were never tought...

[witness4jesus]

Pastor S:

I am sure that my pastor explained about baptism in the name of Jesus.
But that doesn't mean as a child in God that I understood completely
about it.

Nor does the book of acts say that.

Ananias just told Paul, be baptized and wash away your sins, calling
on the name of the Lord.

But the name is necessary.

sis pam

[PastorS]

Pastor S:

I am sure that my pastor explained about baptism in the name of Jesus.
But that doesn't mean as a child in God that I understood completely
about it.

Nor does the book of acts say that.

Ananias just told Paul, be baptized and wash away your sins, calling
on the name of the Lord.

But the name is necessary.

sis pam

Your right, thats why the dicipleship process begings with baptism not before. Mat. 28:19

[Holy_Roller04]

You must baptize in Jesus Name.

You have to have a name.

If you dont use a name, then what father are you speaking of?

Because, satan is the father of all lies


John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.