Formula
 

My friend has left his UPCI church to go a different route. He says its so his wife will go to church with him. The church he goes to know baptizes like this:


"I now baptize you in the name of the Father, son and H.G. in the name of Jesus."

Any thoughts?

I have heard that some baptize "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost WHICH IS Jesus Christ!

Either way, the magic word is spoken!

You know the answer's you'll get Kutless and from who you'll get them.

All the instances in the bible, what was recorded that was said varied from one verse to the other.

Do we really think God will disanul someones salvation over the words above being said in baptism?
I know some of us do. The work of the cross disqualified over a technicality.

I truly believe God is smart enough to know it is He, that is being refered to that "Formula"

:highfive GOOD ANSWER!

Well, in my opinion:
the heart condition of the one being baptized is more important than the amount of water used and the words that are spoken.

oneness folks don't even agree among themselves on what words to use.
Some insist on "Lord Jesus Christ," others say that if "Lord" is mentioned, it is wrong and needs to be done over. Some say the Father's name is Lord, the Son's name is Jesus' and the Holy Ghost's name is Christ so the three words become one full name.

Since the name of Jesus Christ is mentioned that formula techinally would work.
But to me it's better just to say in the name of Jesus Christ ,the way that is mentioned in this thread seems a way to try to please everybody.
I love my trini friends, but I'm not gonna do things to try to please them.

I have not been there so I can't verify that this is true, but i have read that a UPC church in Newark, Ohio insists on, "In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

That's the formula Kenneth Hagin recommended in a book that I read a while back.

Yes the heart condition is important ,but what is said over a baptismal candidate is important as well, I still believe in standing for One Lord, One Faith ,One Baptism.
I say this in Christian charity with no ill will towards anyone.

Why would a formula matter to people who view baptism as nothing more than an out-dated embarrasing inconvenience?

If you were going to do that ,why not say I baptize you in the name of The Father,Son and Holy Ghost which is Jesus Christ ?

To them it wouldn't..but we don't know that from the question.

I have never heard this before.

:blink

You're not serious! ... Are you?

Absolutely correct here, but let me clarify.

Bro H. assumed correctly that this was a way to not offend or hinder anyone from being baptized. The Pastor told me that baptism is what is important so in order to insure that step the have used the formula that was mentioned in the initial post.

So according to Him not only is baptism important but essential.

I'm not agreeing with the man BTW just wanted to hear some feed-back.

PP, were you referrring to someone that you know?

There are lots of folks on AFF that view baptism that way. It's nothing more to them than an embarrassing inconvenient tradition.

I hear ya....but this man does not view it that way, in fact just the opposite. And his point is to make sure everyone gets baptized.

Not that you care. :saycheese

Personally if someone was baptized and it was done by a formula that said I baptize you in the name of the Father ,Son,Holy Ghost and in the name of Jesus Christ ,so something along those lines I could live with that.
I would just baptize someone in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of sins myself.
If a person had truly repented and had the name of Jesus Christ called over them I would say ok.

There is no virtual in H20, but it's more than just a ritual.
It's a way that faith in Christ is expressed.
If a person is not repentant ,baptism in Jesus name won't do a person any good it's not a magic formual in itself.

I think it covers the biblical instructions regarding baptism. If for some reason I ever was to attend a trinny church I would have to find one that baptizes like this or "In the name of the Father, Song, and Holy Ghost which is Jesus Christ".

I love my trini friends but I could never regularly attend a trini church.
The oneness revelation is too deep inside me, I love them but there are some things deep in my heart of hearts.
CC1 , I trust your family is doing ok ?

IN other words....just a SONG and a DANCE!! :hypercoffee

any discussion about workable formulas places the application of faith in the spirit of the guy ABOVE the water and not the person in the water.

For that reason, I think any discussion of the formula is evidence of a ritual transaction (check the box) RATHER than an individual's following of what they have seen/heard from God's word (faith) that has been provided for them to escape the body of sin.

And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. [Act 2:21]

And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. [Acts 22:16]

The variations in water baptism among "Oneness" folks are almost endless. I've seen those who baptize in the name of the LJC, JC, J , LJ and L (the latter says Jesus Christ is too holy to speak, so they just say "Lord"). There are those who hold the candidate under water while the "ceremony" is spoken, and there are those who baptize face forward. Some baptize only in running water (a creek or river), and I have met some who believe one has to travel to Israel to be baptized in the River of Jordan. And then there are those who do not baptize at all.

I find it strange that over all of these centuries, water baptism is even questioned at all. Its funny that it was a question about water baptism that began the split in the church at Corinth and here we are still addressing the issue. Which, isn't an issue at all. To me, Peter settled the issue on the Day of Pentecost. I find no need to add anything to what Peter said. or take anything from it. It is Jesus who remits our sin. Its in Him that we live, move and have our being.

OneAccord,
by your understanding of the scriptures...
whose faith, in what, accomplishes the efficacy of water baptism to cut away the body of sin?

Well, if I understand your question correctly, it is the faith of the hearer in the Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ that "cuts away the body of sin". Throughout the Scriptures we find reference after reference to the role of faith in removing us from sin. Without faith baptism in the Name of Jesus Christ would be pointless.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:

Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

...and this is my understanding as well.

this is why I marvel at the endless "what if" conditions applied to the faciliator or the formula in the water baptism transformation (root word; 'bapto').

I am very sad for the countless number of 'obedient' saints who place their hope in the recitation of specific words spoken by a faciliator and make no real query of the Spirit concerning those who come to the waters of baptism.

Is there any deliverance from the body of sin by simply being an obedient widget on a production line because of following the instruction of the line operator? (rhetorical question only).

thanks for the reply.

PS: I think this disconnect involving whose faith is in operation, is what has left so many apostolics seeing water baptism as an outward sign of inward change; strictly an obedience to a command. Why? JUST BECAUSE.

I bet it's going to be really embarrassing to folks who realize they missed heaven because they weren't baptized in Jesus name. And all because they thought baptism was out-dated or weren't willing to be inconvenienced for two or three minutes.

Even Naaman had the "embarrassing inconvenience" of dipping seven times in a dirty River Jordan. Yet his simple obedience resulted in his complete wholeness. If he had refused, he would have left a leper.

It may not to them, but to people who believe the Bible way of salvation it matters a lot.

Now Lost, you know that all that typology makes them crazy (I quote):shockamoo

AMEN!!!

:thumbsup

Lu 24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

If having faith toward God at your baptism was all there was to it, why did the disciples of John HAVE to be re-baptized? I assure you that when they were baptized the first time they were wanting to please God. So if they had faith in God and wanted to please God they should have been ok.

The problem is this, it is NOT an outdated ritual or inconvience. It is a matter of salvation. How it is done is a matter of salvation. Acts 4:12 still says that neither is salvation in any other, for there is NO other name (or title) under heaven given among men where by we must be saved. Titles won't work because there is no power in calling his titles, it must be the name.

As far as the formula posted in the start of this thread, I am not comfortable with it. Mattew 28:19 is not a formula to be repeated it is a command to be obeyed. The only way to obey it is to be baptized in the name of Jesus. Jesus is the name of the Father. Jesus in the name of the Son. Jesus is the name of the Holy Ghost. Jesus is still the only saving name.

J.M.
if any of your post is in response to my posts, please know that I am in absolute agreement with the need for our faith to be in completed work of our Lord and saviour, Jesus.

My points (in the event your post involves any of them), was an attempt to redirect the principle discussion back to the faith of the person seeking the waters of baptism and not the faciliator.

Very well said.

Brother you do know that Matthew 28:20 says, "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen"

And in verse 18 it says, "And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given to unto me in heaven and in earth."

If Jesus admonishes the eleven to do something you can rest assure He means for them to do it. You are right it is a command to follow, but how is there any harm in saying the very words of Jesus?

It was in response to this entire thread that is what I didn't quote anyone.

Does any have anything to add to this thread?

Nope.

You pretty much nailed it.

Has anyone expressed it in those terms? I'm curious to see the justification for such a position.

Personally I've never seen anyone say anything like that before.