Quote:
Originally Posted by BadgerBoysMom
So are you saying here that it is "in his name" simply because he was the one who baptized them? Or it because it is in his authority he exercised in the baptism? In my experience the emphasis has always been on the specific words used. "In Jesus Name". I mean what did Jesus say? In MY name? IF this is the case why did He not specifically state this in Matt 28:19? Surely He is not a God who would deliberately be ambiguous?
I have always been told when asking about the "formula" in Matt 28:19 that Jesus was not yet glorified so he would not give that specific answer?
It is my understanding that He was not yet glorified until AFTER the resurection. At this point (before the resurection) would it be considered valid?
|
Interesting thoughts.
The first disciples, baptized by Christ, would indeed be baptized unto or into Christ, identified with Him by the act of baptism.
We use the words, “In Jesus Name,” to indicate the object of our faith and the authority by which we baptize. I personally believe that the object of faith is more important than the words, but, since the Bible shows a consistent pattern of invoking Jesus name in baptism, we should do the same.
I do not find the
Matthew 28:19 problematic at all (I don’t even have a problem with the preacher quoting this verse of Scripture at baptism, or any other relevant verse of Scripture for that matter.), but at the same time, the Church is built on the foundation of the apostles teaching and practice, and it is clear that they invoked Jesus Name over the baptismal candidates. So, quote
Romans 10,
Matthew 28:19,
Ephesians 2, or
John 3:16, but baptize them into Jesus Christ and by His authority, in Jesus Name.
Think on, Mom, think on.
Threaded Mode
