All Trinitarians are Lost!!!!!!!!!!!

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Originalist

The only reason there is power in the name is because of the cross...

More correctly, the resurrection that afforded him glorification when He ascended and was enthroned. But nevertheless, the invocation of the NAME OF THE KING demands results.

Because of his obedience unto the death of the cross, God counts the blood of Jesus as payment for our ransom, and gives Jesus alone the authority to forgive and justify. That is the significance of "the name".

Amen, but again that would be nothing if he was not resurrected and enthroned.

Furthermore, the "name" of Jesus is the same as the "person" of Jesus. As one writer explained....


This is why I think we as Apostolics are sometimes guilty of separating the name of Jesus from the person of Jesus.

Some are. Not me. It is HIS NAME through FAITH IN HIS NAME that made the cripple whole. And Peter said that salvation is in HIS NAME. The invocation is intrinsically united to His authority. And without actually saying the Name, the effect is not there as it should be.

Sins or demons, why do you think demons need to hear His name just because they're conscious beings?

Saying that there is "power in the name of Jesus" is the same as saying Jesus has all power. It's not the sound or vocalization that causes demons to tremble,

That is why I said said it's not sound waves.

but the remembrance of who it is that possesses that name and what he did to them at the cross and resurrection. If it was just vocalization of his name that has the power, or if using the name to cast out demons is the same as using it out "cast out sins", then we have a problem. The sons of Sceva bought into that myth when they used the vocalized name of Jesus to cast out a devils, and look where it got them. By your theory Mike a convert could be baptized in Jesus' name by a secretly backslid preacher and those sins would not leave because the preacher was not right, just like the demons would not leave though the sons of Sceva used the name of Jesus.

I already said it's not by sound waves of the name, bro. Let's not do the strawman thing, ok?

The point is, JESUS CHRIST forgives sinners who call upon his name, or call upon HIM, when they repent and are baptized. Jesus does not wait to see what the preacher says before he forgives them. I do not understand why some preachers stubbornly hold on to the Matthew 28 formula, or continue to teach that baptism is not essential to salvation. But God will not limit forgiveness of sins to the whims of a preacher.

We're getting offtrack here. You were talking about Jesus forgiving people in baptism without anyone having spoken the Name of Jesus.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by mfblume

We're getting offtrack here. You were talking about Jesus forgiving people in baptism without anyone having spoken the Name of Jesus.

Somebody has called on the name of Jesus for salvation. The sinner has.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Somebody has called on the name of Jesus for salvation. The sinner has.

You think that is all that is implied in invoking the name? Kind of redundant, wouldn't it be? When people did things in his name they uttered the name in a commanding form. Look at how Paul cast out the devil . That is what is implied here.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by mfblume

You think that is all that is implied in invoking the name? Kind of redundant, wouldn't it be? When people did things in his name they uttered the name in a commanding form. Look at how Paul cast out the devil . That is what is implied here.

But you and I cannot cast out SIN from somebody. It is an apples and oranges comparison. Sin is repented of and relinquished by the sinner. Baptism is indeed part of that. But God...hear me....God does NOT hang a persons salvation on what I say or don't say. If I refuse to honor the name of Jesus when I baptize them then God will judge ME, not the convert who IS calling on the name of the Lord for forgiveness. By your theory if one could never find a preacher who would invoke the name in baptism, they would go to hell.

But there is a greater issue that I think we all overlook.

Trinitarian evangelicals do not have a problem normatively with the name of Jesus being invoked in baptism. The real issue is that they , for the most part do not believe that baptism is linked any way to the new birth process. To them it is strictly a POST salvation experience. While thinking they are defending the doctrine of justification by faith by teaching this, evangelicals are actually robbing people a very meaningful repentance experience.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Originalist

But you and I cannot cast out SIN from somebody. It is an apples and oranges comparison.

Not it isn't. Both are done in Jesus' name. INVOCATION is the Greek term used in Acts 22:16. And we actually see the name invoked with Paul casting out a devil. We do not have an invocation recorded during a baptism. Just commands to do it. So when we see how invocation is accomplished with the example of ANOTHER instance where invoking is involved, we see the command given by the minister saying "in the name of Jesus." This is invocation.

Another instance is the exorcists who invoked the name because they heard Paul do it. But it stands as ONE of the SEVERAL instances where invocation is done IN THE NAME showing us how baptism must have been done.

Another is Peter and John's healing of the cripple.

Act 3:6 KJV Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.

Act 16:18 KJV And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.

Sin is repented of and relinquished by the sinner. Baptism is indeed part of that. But God...hear me....God does NOT hang a persons salvation on what I say or don't say.

How do you know? And actually it is not a case of God hanging one's salvation, but rather God MOVING AND EFFECTING as response to invocation. If not, why heal the cripple that way, or why cast out a devil that way? Why did the casting out hang upon the invocation? Why the healing?

It is not God being petty, but rather responded to what He commanded people to do in order for Him to respond.

If I refuse to honor the name of Jesus when I baptize them then God will judge ME, not the convert who IS calling on the name of the Lord for forgiveness. By your theory if one could never find a preacher who would invoke the name in baptism, they would go to hell.

I never said that. I never once said someone is lost or whatever. Those things I leave to God to judge. But you on the other hand JUDGE in from the opposite perspective. You judged that they are saved while I won't judge that they're not. We cannot judge either way.

I leave that alone. Leave it up to God, like I do. JUST DO WHAT HE SAID DO, and let's stop trying to ascertain hypotheticals. What is it with these hypotheticals that we JUST HAVE TO ANSWER? Whatever God does with souls is up to Him. But if we stand on the WORD ALONE, we can only invoke the name as ministers in baptisms. What's the big deal? Why do you just HAVE TO KNOW if someone is saved otherwise or not? Just simply do what the book says and that's it. Phew. lol

But there is a greater issue that I think we all overlook.

Trinitarian evangelicals do not have a problem normatively with the name of Jesus being invoked in baptism. The real issue is that they , for the most part do not believe that baptism is linked any way to the new birth process. To them it is strictly a POST salvation experience. While thinking they are defending the doctrine of justification by faith by teaching this, evangelicals are actually robbing people a very meaningful repentance experience.

Whatever. Changes nothing. We can analyze for the purpose of allowance for others to be saved until the cows come home. If they're saved, great! But I'm not wasting my time on hypotheticals but just doing what the book said in the way it said to do it.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Not it isn't. Both are done in Jesus' name. INVOCATION is the Greek term used in Acts 22:16. And we actually see the name invoked with Paul casting out a devil. We do not have an invocation recorded during a baptism. Just commands to do it. So when we see how invocation is accomplished with the example of ANOTHER instance where invoking is involved, we see the command given by the minister saying "in the name of Jesus." This is invocation.

Another instance is the exorcists who invoked the name because they heard Paul do it. But it stands as ONE of the SEVERAL instances where invocation is done IN THE NAME showing us how baptism must have been done.

Another is Peter and John's healing of the cripple.

Act 3:6 KJV Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.

Act 16:18 KJV And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.



How do you know? And actually it is not a case of God hanging one's salvation, but rather God MOVING AND EFFECTING as response to invocation. If not, why heal the cripple that way, or why cast out a devil that way? Why did the casting out hang upon the invocation? Why the healing?

It is not God being petty, but rather responded to what He commanded people to do in order for Him to respond.



I never said that. I never once said someone is lost or whatever. Those things I leave to God to judge. But you on the other hand JUDGE in from the opposite perspective. You judged that they are saved while I won't judge that they're not. We cannot judge either way.

I leave that alone. Leave it up to God, like I do. JUST DO WHAT HE SAID DO, and let's stop trying to ascertain hypotheticals. What is it with these hypotheticals that we JUST HAVE TO ANSWER? Whatever God does with souls is up to Him. But if we stand on the WORD ALONE, we can only invoke the name as ministers in baptisms. What's the big deal? Why do you just HAVE TO KNOW if someone is saved otherwise or not? Just simply do what the book says and that's it. Phew. lol



Whatever. Changes nothing. We can analyze for the purpose of allowance for others to be saved until the cows come home. If they're saved, great! But I'm not wasting my time on hypotheticals but just doing what the book said in the way it said to do it.

This whole thread is a hypothetical in spite of the name pastor Epley gave it.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Not it isn't. Both are done in Jesus' name. INVOCATION is the Greek term used in Acts 22:16. And we actually see the name invoked with Paul casting out a devil. We do not have an invocation recorded during a baptism. Just commands to do it. So when we see how invocation is accomplished with the example of ANOTHER instance where invoking is involved, we see the command given by the minister saying "in the name of Jesus." This is invocation.

Another instance is the exorcists who invoked the name because they heard Paul do it. But it stands as ONE of the SEVERAL instances where invocation is done IN THE NAME showing us how baptism must have been done.

Another is Peter and John's healing of the cripple.

Act 3:6 KJV Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.

Act 16:18 KJV And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.



How do you know? And actually it is not a case of God hanging one's salvation, but rather God MOVING AND EFFECTING as response to invocation. If not, why heal the cripple that way, or why cast out a devil that way? Why did the casting out hang upon the invocation? Why the healing?

It is not God being petty, but rather responded to what He commanded people to do in order for Him to respond.



I never said that. I never once said someone is lost or whatever. Those things I leave to God to judge. But you on the other hand JUDGE in from the opposite perspective. You judged that they are saved while I won't judge that they're not. We cannot judge either way.

I leave that alone. Leave it up to God, like I do. JUST DO WHAT HE SAID DO, and let's stop trying to ascertain hypotheticals. What is it with these hypotheticals that we JUST HAVE TO ANSWER? Whatever God does with souls is up to Him. But if we stand on the WORD ALONE, we can only invoke the name as ministers in baptisms. What's the big deal? Why do you just HAVE TO KNOW if someone is saved otherwise or not? Just simply do what the book says and that's it. Phew. lol



Whatever. Changes nothing. We can analyze for the purpose of allowance for others to be saved until the cows come home. If they're saved, great! But I'm not wasting my time on hypotheticals but just doing what the book said in the way it said to do it.

Good points bro!

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by Originalist

But you and I cannot cast out SIN from somebody. It is an apples and oranges comparison. Sin is repented of and relinquished by the sinner. Baptism is indeed part of that. But God...hear me....God does NOT hang a persons salvation on what I say or don't say. If I refuse to honor the name of Jesus when I baptize them then God will judge ME, not the convert who IS calling on the name of the Lord for forgiveness. By your theory if one could never find a preacher who would invoke the name in baptism, they would go to hell.

But there is a greater issue that I think we all overlook.

Trinitarian evangelicals do not have a problem normatively with the name of Jesus being invoked in baptism. The real issue is that they , for the most part do not believe that baptism is linked any way to the new birth process. To them it is strictly a POST salvation experience. While thinking they are defending the doctrine of justification by faith by teaching this, evangelicals are actually robbing people a very meaningful repentance experience.

I would think most Trinitarian Evangelicals DO have a problem invoking the name of Jesus only at baptism. Most Trinitarian Evangelical pastors, especially those governed by presbyterian government systems, would be removed from their pastorate once their leadership found they invoked any other formula at baptism other than the trinitarian formula.

[Jabez]

Bet you all are going to be surprised at who you see in heaven!

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Jabez

Bet you all are going to be surprised at who you see in heaven!

I stand firm that only those who have obeyed Acts 2:38 will go to heaven. However, some here are going to be surprised at who God has given credit for having obeyed Acts 2:38.