Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmy
To do something "in the name of" someone is to be an agent of that person. You are authorized to act on his behalf. If the Oneness tenet is correct that Jesus is the name of the Father and is the name of the Son and is the name of the Holy Ghost, then you guys are correct that baptizing in Jesus' name is the same (i.e., is obeying the command) as baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. But then, it would also be correct (i.e., it is also obeying the command) to say the words "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost". If one is right, they are both right.
Personally, I find it really hard to believe that God is confused about who the preacher means if he lists the "offices" instead of says the name "Jesus". I think He's smarter than that. 
|
Timmy,
You take your check to the bank and see if it's the same. Sign it father,
husband, and son. You may fill the offices of all three titles, but it want
get you the money. Why not just use your name! Why skirt around the
issue. The Apostles knew how to baptize because Jesus open their under=
standing that they might understand the scriptures.
Reminds me of a bunch of kids. Tell them to do something and some want to
do just the opposite of what you tell. "Can't we just do it this way" or "Why
can't we just ....whatever". Just obey what those/the one in authority says
to do and the way you were told to do it!!!Don't argue! Jesus was the ONE
who commanded to baptize in A NAME! AND WHOSE NAME!
Blessings,
Falla39