Quote:
Originally Posted by SteppingStone
I've considered Hebrews 6 and it could possibly be that water baptism was only intended until the Holy Ghost came on Pentecost. I also noted in my original post that it appears that it took them a while to recall this because they were still doing both water and Spirit baptisms. It's almost as if the water baptism of John was still under the time period of, "The Law & The Prophets." Then grace came on Pentecost.. |
Here is another twist..I have been wanting to do a study on the term "in the name"..it is very possible Jesus simply meant to baptize people in water because of his authority.In the name can mean "by authority"...We know what Peter commanded in
Acts 2,we know they were baptized in the name of the Lord in
Acts 8,Peter commanded water baptism in
Acts 10..but do we have an account where the baptizer dunking the person and saying "in the name of Jesus"?
Maybe this is why we have no consitency
Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you
in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Act 8:16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only
they were baptized
in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
Act 10:48 And he commanded them to be baptized[B] in the name of the Lord.
ct 19:5 When they heard this,
they were baptized
in the name of the Lord Jesus.
We know it was done..but we have no actual verbatim recording of an actual incident..
For the record..I have been baptized in Jesus name and I love the name of Jesus,but perhaps there is not such a rigid view on water baptism when it comes to in the tittles or in the name,this can explain why non apostolic people receive the Holy Ghost too..maybe it is man who wants to place a strian on scripture?..these are just some thoughts I have had and wanted to share them.