What is the name of the son per Matt 28:19?

Truther

Well-known member
Why are you dodging my question? Again, we both agree the name of the Father and the Son are the same in Matthew 28:19. But, the name of God the Father is YHWH per 38 out of 39 books in the OT. I am asking in particular why you think it is better to conclude that the Father's name is Jesus as opposed to thinking that Jesus inherited another name from his Father, the name that God was called 6500 times in the OT. Remember, the OT calls God YHWH more than the NT calls Jesus Jesus.

I do obey Acts 2:38 because the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is
YHWH, the name of Jesus.

Happy Easter.


God Bless
So, you baptize and/or have been baptized in the spoken name of Jesus or in the spoken name of YHWH?
 

DoctrinesofGraceBapt

Well-known member
So, you baptize and/or have been baptized in the spoken name of Jesus or in the spoken name of YHWH?

I don't baptize people. I am not an Elder in my Church. However, I have been baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, the name of Jesus, which is YHWH.

Acts 2:38 says nothing about "spoken name." Stop adding to Scripture as to bastardize its message.

Why are you dodging my question? Again, we both agree the name of the Father and the Son are the same in Matthew 28:19. But, the name of God the Father is
YHWH per 38 out of 39 books in the OT. I am asking in particular why you think it is better to conclude that the Father's name is Jesus as opposed to thinking that Jesus inherited another name from his Father, the name that God was called 6500 times in the OT. Remember, the OT calls God YHWH more than the NT calls Jesus Jesus.

God Bless
 

Beloved Daughter

Super Member
I asked "Why is it more rational to think the Father's name is Jesus as opposed to thinking the Son has two names: Jesus and YHWH?" Why do you pretend I think Jesus' only name is YHWH?



New fangled ideas? The Father's name being Jesus is an utterly unique concept created in the 20th century. We trinitarians have always recognized Jesus as
YHWH.



What on earth are you talking about? The Hebrew roots movement was created to deny Trinitarianism. They take some truths and twist them into error; like you do with Acts 2:38. Personally, I couldn't care less if someone was baptized with someone saying "in the name of Jesus." What I care about is you denying the fact that God's name is
YHWH as to pretend Matthew 28:19 doesn't teach Trinitarianism. What I care about is you thinking that saying certain words is the important part in Baptism, such is paganism. What I care about is you worshiping a false Jesus.

When are you going to answer my question: "Why is it more rational to think the Father's name is Jesus as opposed to thinking the Son has two names: Jesus and YHWH?"


God Bless
They insist on nonsense because they are a cult. Cultic thinking colors everything they do. In one sense, it's blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, but apparently they are not concerned with the consequences of that.
 

Beloved Daughter

Super Member
Yahweh or Lord?

Is Jesus Yahweh? Is Jesus Jehovah? | GotQuestions.org

The third chapter of Exodus describes the encounter between Moses and God about the Lord’s name: “God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM’; and He said, ‘Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, “I AM has sent me to you”’” (Exodus 3:13–14, NASB).

The phrase I am who I am in the Hebrew is YHWH, often translated as “LORD,” “Yahweh,” or “Jehovah,” and is referred to in theology as the tetragrammaton (“a word having four letters”). The literal translation of the term is “I be that I be,” a statement that makes reference to God’s self-existence—He is not dependent upon anything else for His existence.

One of the foundational Christian doctrines is that Jesus is God. He is the Jehovah/YHWH/Yahweh described in Exodus 3. This teaching can be difficult to grasp because the Bible also says there is only one God: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4).

The Bible’s claim that only a single God exists is called monotheism. The doctrine of Jesus being God does not mean that more than one God exists (polytheism) or that the Christian doctrine of the Trinity equates to there being three gods (tritheism) or that there is one God who represents Himself as one person in three different ways or modes (modalism).

Instead, Christianity teaches that there is one God who exists in triune fashion as three Persons within one God, i.e., one “what” but three “who’s”; a plurality of Persons who are one in essence. Referencing the depth of this doctrine, A. W. Tozer writes, “Our sincerest effort to grasp the incomprehensible mystery of the Trinity must remain forever futile, and only by deepest reverence can it be saved from actual presumption. We cover our deep ignorance with words, but we are ashamed to wonder, we are afraid to whisper ‘mystery’” (The Knowledge of the Holy, p. 18).

The Bible affirms the Son of God’s place in the Godhead in both the Old and New Testaments. One passage affirming the Son’s deity in the Old Testament is Psalm 2: “The kings of the earth take their stand and the rulers take counsel together against the Lord and against His Anointed, saying, ‘Let us tear their fetters apart and cast away their cords from us!’ . . . Do homage to the Son, that He not become angry, and you perish in the way, for His wrath may soon be kindled. How blessed are all who take refuge in Him!” (Psalm 2:1–3, 12, NASB).

In the New Testament, Jesus affirms His deity in many places. In His general teachings, He refers to Himself in the same way God is described in the Old Testament and does the same in twenty of His parables. Examples include the following:

God in the Old Testament
I AM (Exodus 3:14–15; Isaiah 48:12)
The Shepherd (Psalm 23:1)
The Light (Psalm 27:1)
The Rock (Psalm 18:2)
Ruler of all (Isaiah 9:6)
Judge of all nations (Joel 3:12)
The Bridegroom (Isaiah 62:5; Hosea 2:16)
God’s Word never passes away (Isaiah 40:8)
The Sower (Jeremiah 31:27; Ezra 34:9)
First and the Last (Isaiah 48:12)

Jesus’ Reference to Himself
I AM (John 8:58)
The Shepherd (John 10:11)
The Light (John 8:12)
The Rock (Matthew 7:24)
Ruler of all (Matthew 28:18)
Judge of all (John 5:22)
The Bridegroom (Matthew 25:1)
Jesus’ words never pass away (Mark 13:31)
The Sower (Matthew 13:3–9)
First and the Last (Revelation 1:17–18)

Jesus said many things that equated Himself with Yahweh: “Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 14:9) and “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). He asked God, “Glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began” (John 17:5). He said, “My Father is always at His work to this very day, and I too am working” (John 5:17).

In addition, Jesus accepted worship nine times in the gospels, forgave sins, and commanded His disciples to pray in His name. Jesus never said—as other prophets did—“Thus says the Lord”; rather, Jesus said, “I say,” and commanded His disciples to baptize in His name.

The New Testament writers also refer to Jesus as God many times (e.g., Matthew 3:16–17; John 1:1–3,14; John 20:28; Romans 9:5; Philippians 2:5–8, 9–11; Colossians 1:16–19; 2:9–10; 1 Timothy 6:15; 2 Peter 1:1; Hebrews 1:8; 13:8; Revelation 1:8, 17; 2:8; 17:14; 19:16; 21:6; 22:13).

In conclusion, the teaching of Scripture is that Jesus is indeed Yahweh, the I AM, the God of the Old Testament.
 

Truther

Well-known member
I don't baptize people. I am not an Elder in my Church. However, I have been baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, the name of Jesus, which is YHWH.

Acts 2:38 says nothing about "spoken name." Stop adding to Scripture as to bastardize its message.

Why are you dodging my question? Again, we both agree the name of the Father and the Son are the same in Matthew 28:19. But, the name of God the Father is YHWH per 38 out of 39 books in the OT. I am asking in particular why you think it is better to conclude that the Father's name is Jesus as opposed to thinking that Jesus inherited another name from his Father, the name that God was called 6500 times in the OT. Remember, the OT calls God YHWH more than the NT calls Jesus Jesus.

God Bless
You were baptized in the name of the son?

What is the name of the son that they invoked when baptizing you?

Son?
 

DoctrinesofGraceBapt

Well-known member
You were baptized in the name of the son?

What is the name of the son that they invoked when baptizing you?

Son?

We are not pagans. We do not invoke names as to make sure our spells work.

Why are you still dodging my question? Again, we both agree the name of the Father and the Son are the same in Matthew 28:19. But, the name of God the Father is
YHWH per 38 out of 39 books in the OT. I am asking in particular why you think it is better to conclude that the Father's name is Jesus as opposed to thinking that Jesus inherited another name from his Father, the name that God was called 6500 times in the OT. Remember, the OT calls God YHWH more than the NT calls Jesus Jesus.

God Bless
 

Truther

Well-known member
We are not pagans. We do not invoke names as to make sure our spells work.

Why are you still dodging my question? Again, we both agree the name of the Father and the Son are the same in Matthew 28:19. But, the name of God the Father is
YHWH per 38 out of 39 books in the OT. I am asking in particular why you think it is better to conclude that the Father's name is Jesus as opposed to thinking that Jesus inherited another name from his Father, the name that God was called 6500 times in the OT. Remember, the OT calls God YHWH more than the NT calls Jesus Jesus.

God Bless
So you agree that the name of the son is not "son"?

Then how exactly do you folks baptize in the name of the "son" without saying his name?

Are you now administering silent baptisms like the COC?

As far as the Father's name being Jesus, Jesus was named by his Father, 'Jesus" via the angel in Matt 1.

The angel did not make up that name, but his Father did.

Everyone called him "Jesus" from Matt to Rev.

Jesus even called himself, "Jesus"....(16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star).

Then, Heb 1:4 says Jesus specifically got his name via INHERITANCE.

So, it means to inherit something from someone infers prior ownership by the original owner.

You can reject this, but the end result is you still don't fit in with Peter and the 3000 at Pentecost's church, but the anti Acts 2:38, Baptist church.

I just don't know how you are going to pull it off in the end.
 

DoctrinesofGraceBapt

Well-known member
So you agree that the name of the son is not "son"?

Never even crossed my mind.

Then how exactly do you folks baptize in the name of the "son" without saying his name?

By not assuming "in the name of" means speaking a name. "In the name of" means "by the authority of". You baptize someone in the name of Jesus by baptizing them into Jesus, not saying the correct words. In other words, anyone who gets baptized as to be integrated into Christ's Church has been baptized in the name of Jesus, whether you spoken the word "Jesus" or not.

Are you now administering silent baptisms like the COC?
As far as the Father's name being Jesus, Jesus was named by his Father, 'Jesus" via the angel in Matt 1.
The angel did not make up that name, but his Father did.

Made up the name? Yahshua is an outrageously common name for a Jew in the first century. What are you smoking?

Everyone called him "Jesus" from Matt to Rev.
Jesus even called himself, "Jesus"....(16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star).
Then, Heb 1:4 says Jesus specifically got his name via INHERITANCE.

How about we actually look at the text itself to see what it says?

After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. Hebrews 1:3b-4.

Is there anything in this sentence designating the name inherited is Jesus as opposed to
YHWH? Nope. We are talking about the name he is recognized by while sitting at the right hand of God the Father. What follows this? A ten verse diatribe on how Great Jesus is ending in a recognition of Jesus being the Lord who literally "laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands". I wonder who that is? YHWH anyone. Sorry, anyone reading Hebrews 1 for what it says would come away realizing that Jesus inherited the name YHWH form his Father.

So, it means to inherit something from someone infers prior ownership by the original owner.
You can reject this,

You still haven't explained why you think the Father's name being Jesus is more likely than Jesus inheriting a second name from his Father, YHWH. You just asserted it while ignoring all evidence to contrary.

but the end result is you still don't fit in with Peter and the 3000 at Pentecost's church, but the anti Acts 2:38, Baptist church.
I just don't know how you are going to pull it off in the end.

Still doubling down on asserting, like a good Roman Catholic, that your interpreting is correct without ever considering what others are saying. Acts 2:38 does not teach one must speak certain words during Baptism in order to make it valid. Maybe, you shouldn't treat God as the pagans treat their gods, with superstition.

God Bless
 

Truther

Well-known member
Never even crossed my mind.



By not assuming
"in the name of" means speaking a name. "In the name of" means "by the authority of". You baptize someone in the name of Jesus by baptizing them into Jesus, not saying the correct words. In other words, anyone who gets baptized as to be integrated into Christ's Church has been baptized in the name of Jesus, whether you spoken the word "Jesus" or not.



Made up the name? Yahshua is an outrageously common name for a Jew in the first century. What are you smoking?



How about we actually look at the text itself to see what it says?

After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. Hebrews 1:3b-4.

Is there anything in this sentence designating the name inherited is Jesus as opposed to YHWH? Nope. We are talking about the name he is recognized by while sitting at the right hand of God the Father. What follows this? A ten verse diatribe on how Great Jesus is ending in a recognition of Jesus being the Lord who literally "laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands". I wonder who that is? YHWH anyone. Sorry, anyone reading Hebrews 1 for what it says would come away realizing that Jesus inherited the name YHWH form his Father.



You still haven't explained why you think the Father's name being Jesus is more likely than Jesus inheriting a second name from his Father,
YHWH. You just asserted it while ignoring all evidence to contrary.



Still doubling down on asserting, like a good Roman Catholic, that your interpreting is correct without ever considering what others are saying. Acts 2:38 does not teach one must speak certain words during Baptism in order to make it valid. Maybe, you shouldn't treat God as the pagans treat their gods, with superstition.


God Bless
It never even crossed your mind that the name of the son is not "son"?

This is the RCC brainwashing result that dulls free thinking.

It is like a spirit of Xanax that makes a person not care.

The spirit of the RCC should patent it, because it has affected billions.
 

DoctrinesofGraceBapt

Well-known member
It never even crossed your mind that the name of the son is not "son"?

No, I find it silly that you thought I believed "son" is a name. It never even crossed my mind that I would be seen as thinking "son" is a name because we baptize "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." Your leap in logic is what's so unbelievable.

This is the RCC brainwashing result that dulls free thinking.

No, that's an ad hominem. You know the logical fallacy you throw out whenever you've been embarrassed by the Truth.

It is like a spirit of Xanax that makes a person not care.
The spirit of the RCC should patent it, because it has affected billions.

When in doubt, throw out baseless accusations to hide the fact that your perspective has been utterly destroyed by the Truth.

God Bless
 

Truther

Well-known member
No, I find it silly that you thought I believed "son" is a name. It never even crossed my mind that I would be seen as thinking "son" is a name because we baptize "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." Your leap in logic is what's so unbelievable.



No, that's an ad hominem. You know the logical fallacy you throw out whenever you've been embarrassed by the Truth.



When in doubt, throw out baseless accusations to hide the fact that your perspective has been utterly destroyed by the Truth.


God Bless
You do believe that "son" is a name, because Jesus explicitly told his disciples to baptize in the name of the son and you say "son" when you baptize folks in the name you were commanded to baptize in.

This means if you were Peter in Acts 2, you would have said "son" instead of "Jesus", like this....


38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of..... THE SON...... for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
 

DoctrinesofGraceBapt

Well-known member
You do believe that "son" is a name, because Jesus explicitly told his disciples to baptize in the name of the son and you say "son" when you baptize folks in the name you were commanded to baptize in.

Why are you asserting nonsense? I think you left your reason out on the clothesline to dry.

This means if you were Peter in Acts 2, you would have said "son" instead of "Jesus", like this....


38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of..... THE SON...... for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

More silliness. Why even reply if this is all you have to say?

God Bless
 

Truther

Well-known member
Why are you asserting nonsense? I think you left your reason out on the clothesline to dry.



More silliness. Why even reply if this is all you have to say?


God Bless
Simply, anyone that baptizes somebody "in the name of the son" without saying the actual name of the son is lying.
 

Kampioen

Well-known member
Obey Acts 2:38, like the 3000 had to.
I would say God didn't mean to exclude saying in the name of the Father and of Jesus and of the Ghost, simply because God said it. So if "in the name of Jesus" is understood as excluding the in the name of the Father and of the Holy Spirit then I would say it is an invalid baptism.
 

Truther

Well-known member
Says the man whose position has been refuted countless times. If you argument doesn't hold water, why would anyone give any weight to your exhortation?

God Bless
I guess if you call disobeying Acts 2:38 as a Christian, "refuting".

Only Peter get refuted here.

Of course we ultimately refute God, which in return, refutes us a chance at remission of sins.
 

Truther

Well-known member
I would say God didn't mean to exclude saying in the name of the Father and of Jesus and of the Ghost, simply because God said it. So if "in the name of Jesus" is understood as excluding the in the name of the Father and of the Holy Spirit then I would say it is an invalid baptism.
So, with that said, Acts 2:38, Acts 8, Acts 10 and Acts 19 are invalid by saying "baptized in the name of Jesus"?

Or, did these baptizers know that the name of the.... son .....is Jesus?

I bet on the latter.
 

DoctrinesofGraceBapt

Well-known member
I guess if you call disobeying Acts 2:38 as a Christian, "refuting".
Only Peter get refuted here
Of course we ultimately refute God, which in return, refutes us a chance at remission of sins.

Another meaningless response. Why respond if this is all you can muster? Peter did not say or mean "Say Jesus" while baptizing. Too bad that all you get from reading Scripture.

God Bless
 
Top