Warning: session_start(): open(/var/lib/lsphp/session/lsphp80/sess_q5kkij12pa8tvq4852nkdjirev, O_RDWR) failed: No space left on device (28) in /home/kjv.site/public_html/Discussion-Thread/index.php on line 2
Warning: session_start(): Failed to read session data: files (path: /var/lib/lsphp/session/lsphp80) in /home/kjv.site/public_html/Discussion-Thread/index.php on line 2 BIBLE DISCUSSION THREAD 158147
All Christians should believe that Gods word is inspired. Which means there are no errors. And since that is true lets
examine Matt 28:19 and baptism. In the Christian community the most popular mode of baptism is Matthew 28:19. In the name of Father, Son and Holy Ghost.But there's a scriptural problem with mode of baptism. No one in the scriptures was ever baptized in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost. To be more specific the Apostles never used those words in baptism.The Apostles baptized in Jesus name because scripturally correct / necessary to be baptize in Jesus name.Now we can surmise and makes excuses as to why Christians should use Matthew 28:19. It doesn't change the scriptural facts. So, why don't Christians obey the scriptures--if they believe all scripture is inspired of God??
There is only one name we have repentance and remission of our sins, there is only one name we have salvation, there is only one name we have hope in eternal life, only in the name of Jesus we are sanctified, justified. Jesus is the resurrection and the life, Jesus is the true vine, Jesus is the light of the world, we should believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ.
Acts 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.
The reason Matthew 28:19 is used for baptism, in my opinion, is for support of the Creeds that many Christian denominations hold for Christian unity (ecumenism).
Why do you assume no one in the Bible was ever baptized in father, son, holy ghost? I bet most people were. Just because something isn't quoted in the Bible doesn't mean something didn't happen. For instance, the Bible never says Jesus took a bath or used the restroom, but it's not illogical to assume He did, in fact, it would be illogical to assume He didn't.
examine Matt 28:19 and baptism. In the Christian community the most popular mode of baptism is Matthew 28:19. In the name of Father, Son and Holy Ghost.But there's a scriptural problem with mode of baptism. No one in the scriptures was ever baptized in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost. To be more specific the Apostles never used those words in baptism.The Apostles baptized in Jesus name because scripturally correct / necessary to be baptize in Jesus name.Now we can surmise and makes excuses as to why Christians should use Matthew 28:19. It doesn't change the scriptural facts. So, why don't Christians obey the scriptures--if they believe all scripture is inspired of God??
There is only one name we have repentance and remission of our sins, there is only one name we have salvation, there is only one name we have hope in eternal life, only in the name of Jesus we are sanctified, justified. Jesus is the resurrection and the life, Jesus is the true vine, Jesus is the light of the world, we should believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ.
Acts 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.
The reason Matthew 28:19 is used for baptism, in my opinion, is for support of the Creeds that many Christian denominations hold for Christian unity (ecumenism).
God bless, Ron
This comment thread is locked. Please enter a new comment below to start a new comment thread.
Note: Comment threads older than 2 months are automatically locked.
Do you have a Bible comment or question?
Posting comments is currently unavailable due to high demand on the server.
Please check back in an hour or more. Thank you for your patience!
Report Comment
Which best represents the problem with the comment?