The Name

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

When Gabriel came down and spoke to Mary how to name her Son did he tell her an English name? Did the Apostles call him by an English name? Obviously not.

After I had been a Christian for a couple of years and it was pointed out to me that Jesus was not the original name of the Messiah I was frankly surprised. I had not considered such a thing. But I felt like I had gained more knowledge of him than I had before.

This does not answer my question ... do you believe that those of us who do not use the name of Yeshua have less truth?

[tbpew]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Second ... what say ye of those who believe that unless the baptizer does not recite the right phraseology ... the blood of Jesus is not applied in the waters of baptism and remission does not take place? I have heard this use? What say ye?

my understanding leaves the baptiser to only officiate in the manner that Phillip did for the enuch.

It is the one being baptised who calls upon the name of the one who died for him.

Paul did not die for him [the one being baptised in water].

My faith (enabled by hearing the word preached) is made alive when I follow that hearing with my works being in agreement with the hearing of God's command.

My now, living, faith imputes righteousness.

Dead faith does not impute righteousness.

So calling upon the titles of Father and son and Holy Ghost seems to deny the hearing of the scriptural witness pertaining to the name of the one who died as my propitiation; the one whose name has dominion to reconcile my debt is the one whose name I should be baptised.

[Michael The Disciple]

I welcome any of you to visit my web site. I am the same there as I am here except that I do use Yeshua more because there is usually no one attacking it. Of course in the last few years not much traffic there anyway.

I am New creation there. My board is not limited to those who agree with me so dont assume I agree with everything people post.

http://p209.ezboard.com/fthediscipleshipfrm1

[SDG]

Originally Posted by tbpew

my understanding leaves the baptiser to only officiate in the manner that Phillip did for the enuch.

It is the one being baptised who calls upon the name of the one who died for him.

Paul did not die for him [the one being baptised in water].

My faith (enabled by hearing the word preached) is made alive when I follow that hearing with my works being in agreement with the hearing of God's command.

My now, living, faith imputes righteousness.

Dead faith does not impute righteousness.

So calling upon the titles of Father and son and Holy Ghost seems to deny the hearing of the scriptural witness pertaining to the name of the one who died as my propitiation; the one whose name has dominion to reconcile my debt is the one whose name I should be baptised.

Not to be facecious ... TB ... but this is a serious question based on what you have stated:

So the person officiating the baptism recites ... in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ... while the person being baptized calls out 'in the name of Jesus' the baptism is now valid?

I do understand you point of obedience .... however ... many who are baptized in the titles have not heard our message and believe they are being obedient to direct command of Jesus.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

This does not answer my question ... do you believe that those of us who do not use the name of Yeshua have less truth?

I believe anyone not knowing the original name has less truth. Those who know it and dont use it do not have less truth. They know the original. I believe one day if not in this age the one to come all the servants of YAH will use the same name.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

What Steve and AB are promoting is that I or "we" only use the name Jesus. So should the Jews ONLY use Yeshua? Should they be reproved if they would like to at times call Yeshua Jesus?

I do not make threads to try to pressure anyone to use Yeshua. But to me it is a wonderful thing to know the original name that Gabriel brought down from Heaven and commanded Mary to name her Son.

To me this is part of the Spirit guiding us into all truth.

Why no comments on THIS?

[tbpew]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Not to be facecious ... TB ... but this is a serious question based on what you have stated:

So the person officiating the baptism recites ... in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ... while the person being baptized calls out 'in the name of Jesus' the baptism is now valid?
I do understand you point of obedience .... however ... but many wh are baptized in the titles have not heard our message and believe they are being obedient to direct command of Jesus.

The part I highlighted is what I am responding to, assuming that is the core aspect of my post you are responding to.

I would say 'YES'; a person who calls upon the name of the one who died for them (Jesus) from the waters of baptism has followed their faith into the works of obedience and identification with their savior.

Any one who attempts to imagine all the subtleties that can nullify the spiritual separation from sin's bondage that occurs in the waters of baptism, based on the circumstance of the one facilitating or administering in the act, has an infinite number of latent sources for doubt and unbelief.

Water baptism is a God thing not a priest thing. Priest's can officiate and be a blessing in the operation of their giftings but what transpires is between the one seeking to be baptized in water and the one who died for them.

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple View Post
What Steve and AB are promoting is that I or "we" only use the name Jesus. So should the Jews ONLY use Yeshua? Should they be reproved if they would like to at times call Yeshua Jesus?

I do not make threads to try to pressure anyone to use Yeshua. But to me it is a wonderful thing to know the original name that Gabriel brought down from Heaven and commanded Mary to name her Son.

To me this is part of the Spirit guiding us into all truth.

I assume my stance is known since this is the whole jest of the thread. (of course many took it differently but it was my purpose nonetheless)

I do not see why anyone shouldn't be free to express that name as Yeshua if that is what they would like to do so.

I am aware (contrary to what some apparently believe) that Jesus is the english expression of the name. I just don't understand why anyone would feel compelled to condemn others for using anything other than the english rendition.

As you said... you don't compel anyone else to do this... it is simply the way you have chosen to express it and I see no reason why anyone should want to condemn you for that.

[tbpew]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Are you suggesting that because they didn't use the right phraseology ... ie. in the "name of Jesus" ..... the demon did not submit ????

Was the demon unimpressed by the recitation or that they did not have the power and authority of Jesus?

sorry, I skipped over this one.

the latter.

I am not able to speculate about all the possible mechanisms the demon world has at its disposal to determine our "belonging to Christ", but maybe it extends from the one family name we have received when we were buried with him in the waters of baptism.

Our faith in the one name under heaven, given among men whereby we must be saved, needs to be alive, and to be alive it needs a work to be in agreement with what we have heard. Water baptism is that work.

Maybe Secva's son's were not baptised in the name of the one who died for them?

[SDG]

Originally Posted by tbpew

sorry, I skipped over this one.

the latter.

I am not able to speculate about all the possible mechanisms the demon world has at its disposal to determine our "belonging to Christ", but maybe it extends from the one family name we have received when we were buried with him in the waters of baptism.

Our faith in the one name under heaven, given among men whereby we must be saved, needs to be alive, and to be alive it needs a work to be in agreement with what we have heard. Water baptism is that work.

Maybe Secva's son's were not baptised in the name of the one who died for them?

Yet there a Spirit filled trinitarians baptized in the titles who have casted out demons in Jesus name ... any thoughts TB?