Quote:
Originally Posted by U376977
Then you should not have baptized them in the name of the Lord. Read the baptism accounts in Acts again. In every instance it was after one came to believe that Jesus was the Christ. Now put that in historical context---to believe that Jesus was the Christ at that time meant to believe that He was the Messiah, God come in the flesh. In the NT, the standard for baptism was the belief that Jesus was God in flesh. I really do not see how a Trinitarian can be baptized in the name....I would rather they stick to the titles until they come to see the whole purpose of batism.
Make sense?
|
actually it does. I have always been told that taking the name of the Lord in vain was being baptized in His name without full knowledge of who He is or the purpose of the baptism. So yes it does make sense to me.
Threaded Mode
