CONTENTION NO: 4 and 5:

CONTENTION NO.4: The Baptism in the New Testament corresponds to the "circumcision" of the Old Testament; and that a "Christian" who has not been baptizes with the formula has not therefore been "circumcised" spiritually.

Baptism is nowhere referred to as circumcision; it is very often spoken of as "a burial" (Rom 6:4; Col 2:12). Before the "burial" (or the baptism) the "old man" must be crucified and be made ready for the burial (Rom 6:6). Clearly. the crucifixion of the old man points to repentance and the putting away of sin, before the believer in Christ is "buried" in water baptism. The same idea is conveyed in Colossians 2:11, 12, where St.Paul speaks of "circumcision" as "putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ"; this constitutes repentance and confession of sins with a view to forsaking them once and for all. After this, one is "buried with Him in baptism". Therefore we may rightly conclude that "circumcision" has nothing to do with water baptism.

CONTENTION NO.5: All those who have been baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, should be rebaptized.

(i) There is not a single case in the New Testament where a rebaptism was administered because of a change of words in the formula of baptism. There was one rebaptism recorded in Acts 19:1-7, but this was because John's baptism was not valid after Pentecost, when the New Testament baptism came into being, with deeper truths added to it. "John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance" (Acts 19:4). But New Testament baptism apart from its being "a burial", was with a view to receiving the Holy Spirit. Before deciding to baptize them, he asked the "disciples" at Ephesus (a) "Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?" Seeing that they had not heard of the Holy Spirit, he asked them the second question; (b) "Unto what then were ye baptized?" From these questions it is evident that New Testament baptism is a step with a view to receiving the Holy Ghost. One can see that it was NOT the formula that Paul was concerned about, but the purpose and the significance of the baptism. Secondly, since the object of New Testament baptism is to receive the Holy Spirit, the formula of the New Testament baptism must include "the name of the Holy Ghost" as Jesus originally commanded.

(ii) The believer in Christ is expected to confess with his mouth the Lord Jesus Christ and believe in his heart that God has raised Him from the dead to be saved (Rom 10:9). When such a man is baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost he is conscious that "the name of the Son" in the formula according to Matthew 28:19, refers to Jesus. Why then should he be rebaptized? Is the validity of the baptism lost because the word "JESUS" is not mentioned in the formula of baptism? The family of Cornelius is said to have been baptized "in the name of the Lord" (Acts 10:48). If it is contended that "Son" is not a name, then the word "Lord" is not a name either. All believers in Christ know that the terms "Son" and "the Lord" refer to JESUS.

(iii) The apostles laid greater emphasis on the sound teachings which made the New Testament baptism a blessing to the believers, then to the formula of the baptism. This can clearly be seen in the Book of Acts. In the seven cases of baptism recorded no formula is mentioned, but in every case, Christ was preached clearly (See acts 8:35,36; 9:17,18; 10:36-47; 16:14,15,31-33; 18:8; 22:16). On two occasions "in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 8:16; 19:5); once in the name of the Lord" (Acts 10:48) and once "in the name of Jesus Christ" (Acts 2:38). It is interesting to note that there is no record in the New Testament of baptism administered in the name of "Jesus only".

[Next Topic: Chapter 5 - WHAT HAPPENS AT BAPTISM?]

CONTENTION NO: 3

CONTENTION NO.3: "JESUS" is the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, because the words "Father", "Son" and "Holy Ghost" are not names but TITLES. Thus they conclude that the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost" are not names but TITLES. Thus they conclude that the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are not three Persons, but One, Who is Jesus. (In other words they deny the TRINITY.)

(i) If we conclude that "JESUS" is the one name of the FATHER, the SON and the HOLY GHOST, it confirms the spurious teaching that the "Father", the "Son" and the "Holy Ghost" are one and the same Person. But are they? The separation of the words "the name of the Father" and "of the Son" and "of the Holy Ghost" by the conjunction "AND" proves that they are THREE SEPARATE PERSONS. Jesus Himself taught that the Father had His own name. "I am come in MY FATHER'S NAME" (Jn 5:43). "And now, O FATHER, I have manifested THY NAME unto the men which Thou gavest Me" (Jn 17:5,6). In these Scriptures we can see at the first glance that the Son and the Father are two different PERSONS; otherwise these words have no meaning. Secondly, Jesus states: "I have manifested Thy (the Father's) NAME" (Jn 17:6). This implies that the word "FATHER" is just not a title but is also a name, seeing that Christ revealed the FATHER as "FATHER" both in name and character. There are many earthy fathers; therefore each human father must have his own personal name; but we have only "ONE God and FATHER of all, who is above all" (Eph 4:6). The same principle applies to the Holy Ghost as well.

(ii) "JESUS" is only the earthly name of the Son of God. "JESUS" means "SAVIOUR", "for He shall save His people from their sins" (Matt 1:21). It is in that sense that it is written: "There is none other name UNDER HEAVEN GIVEN AMONG MEN,whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). These two scriptures alone are enough to prove that "JESUS" is an earthly name and that He is the only Saviour on earth or "under the sun". That is why He was called "JESUS" of Nazareth. Secondly, it is stated in the Word of God that He has received "A NEW NAME", "A MORE EXCELLENT NAME" and "A NAME WHICH IS ABOVE EVERY NAME" in heaven, because "JESUS", the earthly name was meant for the earthly ministry only (Rev 3:12; Heb 1:4 and Phil 2:9). Therefore the name "JESUS" cannot be applied to the Father or the Holy Ghost.

(iii)The word "JESUS" was never attributed to Christ before His physical birth. Before His incarnation, He was known as "THE WORD" or as "THE SON" (Jn 1:1); Psa 2:12) or by other names. How then could "JESUS" be the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost?

(iv)We do not find a single Scripture in the Holy Bible which says that "JESUS" was the all-inclusive name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. On the contrary, there is abundant evidence that the apostles spoke of them separately, and were careful to apply the name "JESUS" only to Christ, the second Person of the Trinity. "Grace be unto you, and peace from GOD OUR FATHER, and from "JESUS" ( I Cor 1:3). "Paul an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, Who raised Him from the dead)" (Gal 1:1). St.Peter says, "Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of the LORD JESUS our Lord" (II Pet 1:2).

[NEXT TOPIC: CONTENTION NO.4: THE BAPTISM IN THE NEW TESTAMENT CORRESPONDS TO THE "CIRCUMCISION" OF THE OLD TESTAMENT; AND THAT A "CHRISTIAN" WHO HAS NOT BEEN BAPTIZED WITH THE CORRECT FORMULA HAS NOT THEREFORE BEEN "CIRCUMCISED" SPIRITUALLY.

- TPM 'Water Baptism'

CONTENTION NO: 2

Contention No.2: The practice of the early Church, since Pentecost, was to baptize in the name of Jesus only.

In His final words to the apostles, Jesus Christ commanded them clearly that they should "go ... and teach ... baptizing them in the name of the FATHER, and of the SON and of the HOLY Ghost." He also added, "teach(ing) them to observe ALL THINGS whatsoever I have COMMANDED YOU." He never said that such a commission was to cease at Pentecost; instead we read that "they went forth and preached every where, THE LORD WORKING WITH THEM, and confirming the WORD with signs following. Amen" (Mk 16:20). If a change in the formula of baptism was to take place after a set time, He would have told the apostles of such a change, either through a revelation, or by a vision, or through a dream, or through the ministry of an angel. Do we find information of any such event in Scripture, authorising them to break away from the original commission of Jesus to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost? No, we do not. It is therefore absurd to imagine that His disciples have changed the formula of baptism after His ascension. On the contrary, the apostles had learnt, by experience, the importance of obeying the commandments of the Lord Jesus Christ to the very letter, because they had heard Him often speak as follows: "Therefore whosoever HEARETH these sayings of Mine, and DOETH them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock" (Matt 7:24); "My doctrine is not Mine, but His that sent Me. If any man will DO HIS WILL, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or, whether I speak of Myself" (Jn 7:16,17). We are, therefore, persuaded that the apostles carried out the commandments of Jesus Christ to the letter, baptizing their converts in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.

IN MY NAME:

We do not deny that Jesus clearly taught the disciples that they must pray in His name (Jn 14;13), preach repentance and remission of sins in His name (Lk 24:47), and heal and cast out devils in His name (Mk 16:17,18). However, when He gave them the commandment to baptize converts, He CLEARLY AND SPECIFICALLY told them to baptize new believers "in the name of the FATHER, and of the SON, and of the HOLY GHOST" (Matt 28:19). There must have been some divine reason for giving them so specific a formula such as this concerning baptism alone. Did the disciples disobey His commandment? Certainly not. The phrase "in the name of Jesus", when carefully studied, relates to the whole ministry which they performed in order to bring the converts to repentance before those converts became ready to be baptized in water in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Let us bear in mind that Jesus Himself said that "repentance and remission of sins should be PREACHED in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem" (Lk 24:47). The emphasis is NOT on BAPTIZING in His name, but on PREACHING remission of sins and repentance in His name.

[Next Topic: CONTENTION NO.3: "JESUS" IS THE NAME OF THE FATHER, THE SON AND THE HOLY GHOST, BECAUSE THE WORDS "FATHER", "SON" AND "HOLY GHOST" ARE NOT NAMES BUT TITLES. THUS THEY CONCLUDE THAT THE FATHER, THE SON AND THE HOLY GHOST ARE NOT THREE PERSONS, BUT ONE, WHO IS JESUS. (IN OTHER WORDS THEY DENY THE TRINITY.]

- TPM 'Water Baptism'

CONTENTION NO: 1

Contention No.1: The formula of baptism in Matthew 28:19 (baptism in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost) is not confirmed by any other New Testament texts and should therefore be rejected.

Those who seek to establish this contention, quote Deuteronomy 19:15: "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin", and Matthew 18:16: "At the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established". They overlook the fact that the precept "at the mouth of two or three witnesses shall the matter of human disputes only. In God's eyes, "every Word of God is pure" (Prov 30:5); "God ... cannot lie" (Tit 1:2); "All scripture... is profitable for doctrine" (II Tim 3:16). So we should not conclude that the words of Jesus in Matthew 28:19 mean nothing, just because they were mentioned only once in the Scriptures. It is evident that all available ancient Greek texts, approved by scholars, contain Matthew 28:19, in its present familiar form.

There are many important incidents, parables and doctrines which are mentioned only once in the Bible, but we accept them all as the Word of God. Incidents such as the marriage in Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) and the conversion of the Samaritan woman (Jn 4:1-29); parables such as that of the tares and the wheat (Matt 13:24-30) and that of the "prodigal son" (Lk 15:11-32); teachings such as that concerning those perfected in Christ being caught up to meet the Lord in the air (I Thess 4:17) and that concerning the gifts of the Holy Spirit (I Cor Ch.12), and many other valuable passages, are mentioned only once in the Bible. Are we to reject them as spurious just because they are not confirmed in other books of the Bible?

[Next Topic: CONTENTION No. 2: THE PRACTICE OF THE EARLY CHURCH, SINCE PENTECOST, WAS TO BAPTIZE IN THE NAME OF JESUS ONLY.]

- TPM 'Water Baptism'

THE FORMULA OF BAPTISM

"And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto Me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen" (Matt 28:18-20).

Of late, certain Christian sects have changed the formula of baptism which Jesus had set forth in the Church as seen above, and have started rebaptizing ignorant believers "in the name of Jesus" only, contending that all baptisms recorded in the Book of Acts were in Jesus' name only.

The following are main points of their contention:

1). The formula of baptism in Matthew 28:19 (baptism in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost) is not confirmed by any other New Testament texts, and should therefore be rejected;

2). The practice of the early Church since Pentecost was to baptize in the Name of Jesus only;

3). "JESUS" is the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost because the words "Father," "Son" and "Holy Ghost" are not names but TITLES. They therefore conclude that the "Father", the "Son" and the "Holy Ghost" are not three Persons, but One, Who is JESUS (In other words they deny the TRINITY);

4). Baptism in the New Testament corresponds to the "circumcision" of the Old Testament, and therefore the Christian who has not been baptized with the correct formula has not been "circumcised" spiritually;

5). Under the above circumstances, all those who have been baptized "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" must be rebaptized.

We shall examine these contentions in the light of the Word of God.

[Next Topic: CONTENTION NO. 1]

- TPM Publication No: 2

WHY DO SOME INSIST ON BAPTIZING IN JESUS' NAME ONLY?

It is important to perceive the subtlety of the doctrine of JESUS only. By insisting on baptizing "in Jesus' name" only, they have little by little stepped into the territory of the heresy of denying the Trinity. Some of them have gone so far as to say that Jesus is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and that they are one and the same Person, and not three. John says, "He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath BOTH the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds" (II Jn 9-11). Again he says, "He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son" (I Jn 2:22).

WHY SHOULD WE BAPTIZE IN THE NAME OF THE TRINITY?

Why should we baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?

New Testament baptism, unlike John's baptism, was a step intended to prepare the hearts of believers to receive the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit through the experience called "the baptism in the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38). When Jesus spoke of the baptism in the Holy Spirit He also said that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit - all three - would come and abide within those who received this baptism. Let us read it in His words: "And I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter that He may abide with you forever... At that day, (when the Comforter comes to abide) ye shall know that I am in My Father, and ye in Me and I in you" (Jn 14:16,20). And He continued to say in verse 23, WE will come unto him and make OUR abode with him.

We see the presence of the Father and the Holy Spirit when Jesus took baptism. The Father witnessed the baptism of Jesus Christ, saying: "This is My beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased", whilst the Holy Spirit descended "like a dove, lighting upon Him" (Matt 3:16,17).

That is why the New Testament baptism must be administered in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

[Next Topic: WHY DO SOME INSIST ON BAPTIZING IN JESUS' NAME ONLY?]

- TPM Publication No: 2

IS THE WORD "TRINITY" IN THE BIBLE?

If one hunts for the word "TRINITY" in the Bible, one will search in vain, for it is not to be found there any more than the word "RAPTURE" is to be found there; but numerous are the scriptures which clearly reveal that God is three distinct Persons, namely the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Given below are a few clear verses.

"Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened. And the Holy Ghost descended, in a bodily shape like a dove, upon Him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art My beloved Son; in Thee I am well pleased" (Lk 3:21,22). Here, one sees distinctly the presence of Christ on the earth, the presence of the Father in heaven testifying about His Son, and the presence of the Holy Spirit descending from heaven. They are seen as three Persons in three different places.

"And I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter" (Jn 14:16).

"Nevertheless I tell you the truth; it is expedient for you that I go away; for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart I will send Him unto you" (Jn 16:7).

The following points are crystal clear in the above two scripture portions:

1. Jesus prays to the Father.

2. The Father answers the prayer.

3. The Holy Ghost is called "another Comforter", which suggests that Jesus Christ is the first Comforter.

4. Christ and the Holy Spirit exchange places. Christ does to the Father in heaven to send down the Holy Spirit.

Does Jesus play with words? After saying "I tell you the truth", did He deceive the disciples by showing three Persons in the Godhead, when He Himself was all three persons all the time? Let us now consult Church History and see what historians have to say.

[Next Topic: WATER BAPTISM IN CHURCH HISTORY]

- TPM Publication No:2

WATER BAPTISM IN CHURCH HISTORY..:

The following are some extracts from Church History which show that the primitive Church baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.

JUSTIN MARTYR (2nd century) - "Those who are fully persuaded what we have taught them is in accordance with the truth, and who have devoted themselves to a Christian life, are invited to seek of God, with fasting and prayer, the pardon of the sins they have committed and we also fast and pray with them. We then lead them to a place wehre we find water, and they receive their regeneration as we received ours; for they are plunged into the water in the name fo God the Father and Sovereign of all things which exist, of Jesus Christ our Saviour, and of the Holy Ghost."

('Christian Life and Practice in the Early Church,') E.De Pressencse, page 23).

WADDINGTON - "The ceremony of immersion (the oldest form of baptism) was performed in the name of the three persons of the Trinity."

('Waddington's History of the Church,' page 27).

E.DE PRESSENSE - 'Immersion, and the benediction in the name of the Father, Son and Spirit seem to have been the sole rites of baptism at this period (the first two centuries). It still retained its primitive character.'

('Christian Life and Practice in the Early Church,') E.De Pressencse, page 25).

MATTHEW HENRY'S COMMENTARY - 'This baptism must be administered in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. That is,

1. By authority from heaven and not of man; for His ministers act by authority from the three persons in the Godhead.

2. Calling upon the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Everything is sanctified by prayer and particularly the waters of baptism. But

3. It is into the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost;

this was intended as the summary of the first principles of the Christian religion. By our being baptized, we solemnly profess,

1) Our assent to the scripture-revelation concerning God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost;

2) Our consent to a covenant-relation to God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

(Comment on Matthew 28:19)

- from tpm publication no: two

POWER IN BAPTISM

Sinners and people who are not baptized carry about with them a body called the body of sin (Rom 6:6). St.Paul calls this body also a "body of ... death" (Rom 7:24). He explains that in such a body the motions of sin are at work in its members as a law warring against the law of God, bringing man into captivity to the law of sin and death (Rom 7:5,22,23)

Such a man serves sin, yielding his body and its members for uncleanness and wicked works bringing forth fruit unto death. He also becomes an enemy to God in his mind through these wicked works (col 1:21). When such a sinner really repents and confesses his sins to God, his sins are forgiven and washed away and the old man who once fulfilled the desires of the flesh and mind in the body is crucified with Christ.

In baptism, by being buried into the death of Christ, we die to sin (the nature of sin) and we are thus freed from the power of it (Rom 6:2,3,7). Thereafter as long as we reckon ourselves dead to sin this nature stays condemned in the flesh. On the other hand, we are thus dead with Him and on the other, we are alive with Him unto righteousness with a new will and a new body.

In such a body we must not once again be conformed to the world yielding our members unto unrighteousness. Instead we must consecrate our body to God daily as those that are alive from the dead that He may renew our mind through the Word to know His perfect will. We must yield our members continually to the Holy Spirit as instruments of righteousness.

A person who striveth for masteries is not crowned except he strive lawfully (II Tim 2:5). Let us therefore continued in this exercise in godliness and go on to perfection being changed from glory to glory and going from victory to victory.

- tpm publication no:two (chapter no:seven)