Why The Apostles Repeatedly Disobeyed the Risen Lord

[CoreIssue]

Genesis 18 God appears to Abraham

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 18 - New International Version

 

[Wrangler]

Genesis 18 God appears to Abraham

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 18 - New International Version

What does this after to do with the price of tea in China?

 

[Waiting on him]

Because I know we all have our Bibles, I will not clutter this post with my preferred translation but only cite the relevant verses. Read carefully Acts 2:38; Acts 8:12; Acts 8:16; Acts 10:48; Acts 19:5; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:3; 1 Corinthians 1:13; Galatians 3:27. Then ask yourself the question of Why The Apostles Repeatedly Disobeyed the Risen Lord? See Matthew 28:19.

This verse always bothered me for 2 reasons: 1st, it seems so out of place, stuck at the end like that. It seems so off that the Messiah would wait until after he died to drop this bombshell on them. Trinitarians often use it to justify trinitarianism. But wait. Upon further reflection, Matthew 28:19 does not state the nature of God, at all. If he said to baptize people in the name of Moe, Larry and Curly or Earth, Wind & Fire, it does not mean this is the nature of God.

2nd, after reading this Gospel passage and read the rest of the Bible, you find the many times The Apostles Repeatedly Disobeyed the Risen Lord by baptizing people in other ways. This makes no sense. If I saw a man come back from the dead and he told me to do something, I would go ahead and do it.

The Apostles chose to die rather than abandon their risen Lord. It seems baptizing people in whatever name he said is a much lower standard of commitment. Yet the post-Gospel account indicates the opposite. Again, this makes no sense. Excerpts from this site offers an alternative and logical explanation:

Eusebius (c. 260—c. 340) was the Bishop of Caesarea and is known as “the Father of Church History.” He wrote prolifically and his most celebrated work is his Ecclesiastical History, a history of the Church from the Apostolic period until his own time. Eusebius quotes many verses in his writings including Matthew 28:19 several times. But he never quotes it as it appears in modern Bibles. He always finishes the verse with the words “in my name.”

The following example comes from an unaltered book of Matthew that could have been the original or the first copy of the original. Thus Eusebius informs us of the actual words Jesus spoke to his disciples in Matthew 28:19 which were, “With one word and voice He said to His disciples: “Go, and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you,” — (Proof of the Gospel by Eusebius, Book III, Ch. 6, 132 (a), p. 152)

Eusebius was present at the council of Nicea and was involved in the debates over the Godhead. If the manuscripts he had in front of him read “in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” he would never have quoted instead, “in my name.” So it appears that the earliest manuscripts read “in my name,” and the phrase was enlarged to reflect the orthodox position as Trinitarian influence spread.​

So, in conclusion:

1. The Apostles did NOT Repeatedly Disobey the Risen Lord but did as he commanded him to baptize people in his name only.
2. 4th century trinitarians changed Matthew 28:19 to fit their doctrine.

Ever heard of the seventy nations of Israel?

to the Jew first.

 

[Wrangler]

No. Nation different than Tribe?

 

[Waiting on him]

No. Nation different than Tribe?

Jesus was speaking to His disciples. Not me.

 

[marksman]

The main problem with quoting Matthew 28 as the authority on baptism is that you NEVER build a doctrine on one verse of scripture. NEVER. One has to weigh up all the scriptures regarding any topic to be authentic.

Any one with a modicum of scripture knowledge will ask themselves why Matthew 28 is different to every other verse on the subject of baptism. If you don't then you should not be commenting on it.

Likewise one needs to ask why every verse that describes the act of baptism in scripture is always in the name not the trinity except for Matthew 28. Until you have answered these questions satisfactorily, you do not have the right to teach on the subject as you are giving yourself an authority you do not have.

 

[Waiting on him]

1 Corinthians 1:13-14,17 KJV
[13] Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? [14] I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; [17] For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

 

[theefaith]

Because I know we all have our Bibles, I will not clutter this post with my preferred translation but only cite the relevant verses. Read carefully Acts 2:38; Acts 8:12; Acts 8:16; Acts 10:48; Acts 19:5; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:3; 1 Corinthians 1:13; Galatians 3:27. Then ask yourself the question of Why The Apostles Repeatedly Disobeyed the Risen Lord? See Matthew 28:19.

This verse always bothered me for 2 reasons: 1st, it seems so out of place, stuck at the end like that. It seems so off that the Messiah would wait until after he died to drop this bombshell on them. Trinitarians often use it to justify trinitarianism. But wait. Upon further reflection, Matthew 28:19 does not state the nature of God, at all. If he said to baptize people in the name of Moe, Larry and Curly or Earth, Wind & Fire, it does not mean this is the nature of God.

2nd, after reading this Gospel passage and read the rest of the Bible, you find the many times The Apostles Repeatedly Disobeyed the Risen Lord by baptizing people in other ways. This makes no sense. If I saw a man come back from the dead and he told me to do something, I would go ahead and do it.

The Apostles chose to die rather than abandon their risen Lord. It seems baptizing people in whatever name he said is a much lower standard of commitment. Yet the post-Gospel account indicates the opposite. Again, this makes no sense. Excerpts from this site offers an alternative and logical explanation:

Eusebius (c. 260—c. 340) was the Bishop of Caesarea and is known as “the Father of Church History.” He wrote prolifically and his most celebrated work is his Ecclesiastical History, a history of the Church from the Apostolic period until his own time. Eusebius quotes many verses in his writings including Matthew 28:19 several times. But he never quotes it as it appears in modern Bibles. He always finishes the verse with the words “in my name.”

The following example comes from an unaltered book of Matthew that could have been the original or the first copy of the original. Thus Eusebius informs us of the actual words Jesus spoke to his disciples in Matthew 28:19 which were, “With one word and voice He said to His disciples: “Go, and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you,” — (Proof of the Gospel by Eusebius, Book III, Ch. 6, 132 (a), p. 152)

Eusebius was present at the council of Nicea and was involved in the debates over the Godhead. If the manuscripts he had in front of him read “in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” he would never have quoted instead, “in my name.” So it appears that the earliest manuscripts read “in my name,” and the phrase was enlarged to reflect the orthodox position as Trinitarian influence spread.​

So, in conclusion:

1. The Apostles did NOT Repeatedly Disobey the Risen Lord but did as he commanded him to baptize people in his name only.
2. 4th century trinitarians changed Matthew 28:19 to fit their doctrine.

Is Jesus God?
Is He the second person of the blessed trinity?

 

[theefaith]

Acts 2:38 the command is to be baptized!
For Christian baptism to be valid it must include the matter: water, the form: words in the name of the father and of the son and of the Holy Spirit, the grace of God the spirit!

Acts 2:38 the command to be baptized (in the name of the father and the son and the HS ) is given in the name of Jesus not the baptism itself!

the church is always: trinitarian in form and christocentric

 

[Mungo]

1. 4th century trinitarians changed Matthew 28:19 to fit their doctrine.

I posted this in another thread on Mt 28:19 but I'll repeat it here
Methods of Baptism
This Rock, June 1993

The Didache
"After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water. If you have no living water, then baptize in other water, and if you are not able in cold, then in warm. If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Before baptism, let the one baptizing and the one to be baptized fast, as also any others who are able. Command the one who is to be baptized to fast beforehand for one or two days" (Didache 7:1 [ca. A.D. 70]).

Tertullian
For the law of baptising has been imposed, and the formula prescribed; "Go" says Christ "teach the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (On Baptism chap 13 [200-206])

Origen
"Why, when the Lord himself told his disciples that they should baptize all peoples in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, does this apostle employ the name of Christ alone in baptism, saying, 'We who have been baptized into Christ'; for indeed, legitimate baptism is had only in the name of the Trinity" (Commentary on Romans 5:8 [ca. A.D. 250]).

Cyprian
"He commanded them to baptize the Gentiles in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. How then do some say that though a Gentile be baptized . . . never mind how or of whom, so long as it be done in the name of Jesus Christ, the remission of sins can follow - when Christ himself commands the nations to be baptized in the full and united Trinity?" (Letter to Jubianus 73:18 [A.D. 255]).

All before the 4th century

Also
Justin Martyr
They then are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we ourselves were regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing of water….. The reason for this we have received from the Apostles (First Apology, Chap 61 [AD 139])

 

[Enoch111]

4th century trinitarians changed Matthew 28:19 to fit their doctrine.

The Didache from the SECOND CENTURY proves that you are full of Anti-Trinitarian hot air.

Bengel's Commentary
"This formula of Baptism is most solemn and important; in fact it embraces the sum of all piety. After our Lord’s resurrection, the mystery of the Holy Trinity was most clearly revealed, together with the relations of the Divine Persons to each other and to us (see Gnomon on Romans 8:9); and since the confession of the Holy Trinity was so closely interwoven with Baptism, it is not to be wondered at, that it is not frequently put thus expressly in the Scriptures of the New Testament."

1. Nobody could (or did) boldly change Scripture other than heretics.

2. The Trinitarians had to constantly deal with the Anti-Trinitarian heretics.

3. If the MAJORITY as well as the MINORITY of Greek manuscripts support Matthew 28:19, and no modern critic has ever questioned its authenticity, that means you are one of the Anti-Trinitarian heretics.

4. Let's never forget how the Watchtower Society has tampered with Scripture to fit their false teachings.

 

[Wrangler]

The Didache from the SECOND CENTURY proves that you are full of Anti-Trinitarian hot air.

Your ‘standard’ of proof is not mine. You cannot rationalize the Apostles repeatedly disobeying the Risen Lord.

 

[Wrangler]

The Trinitarians had to constantly deal with the Anti-Trinitarian heretics.

And the unitarians/monotheists had to constantly deal with the Trinitarian heretics.

Just a reminder, the trinity is not in the Bible - not the word, not the doctrine. Odd for how important you claim it to be.

 

[Wrangler]

What say you about all the verses, like Acts 2:38; Acts 8:12; Acts 8:16; Acts 10:48; Acts 19:5; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:3; 1 Corinthians 1:13; Galatians 3:27 that say to baptize ONLY in Jesus' name? Kind of makes the one lone verse of Matthew 28:19 suspicious in the extreme.

 

[Stumpmaster]

What say you about all the verses, like Acts 2:38; Acts 8:12; Acts 8:16; Acts 10:48; Acts 19:5; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:3; 1 Corinthians 1:13; Galatians 3:27 that say to baptize ONLY in Jesus' name? Kind of makes the one lone verse of Matthew 28:19 suspicious in the extreme.

The matter is easily resolved by illumination from this passage:

1Jn 5:6-12 This is He who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth. (7) For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (8) And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one. (9) If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is the witness of God which He has testified of His Son. (10) He who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself; he who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed the testimony that God has given of His Son. (11) And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. (12) He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.

 

[Mungo]

Your ‘standard’ of proof is not mine. You cannot rationalize the Apostles repeatedly disobeying the Risen Lord.

You haven't proved they did disobey Jesus.

 

[Mungo]

What say you about all the verses, like Acts 2:38; Acts 8:12; Acts 8:16; Acts 10:48; Acts 19:5; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:3; 1 Corinthians 1:13; Galatians 3:27 that say to baptize ONLY in Jesus' name? Kind of makes the one lone verse of Matthew 28:19 suspicious in the extreme.

None of those verses say to baptise ONLY in Jesus name.

 

[Wrangler]

The matter is easily resolved by illumination from this passage:

1Jn 5:6-12

Lie on top of lie. This is one of the most known errors in KJV.

7 So there are three testifying witnesses: 8 the Spirit, the water, and the blood. All three are in total agreement.
1 John 5:7-8
The Voice

 

[Wrangler]

You haven't proved they did disobey Jesus.

Scripture proves it - repeatedly.

 

[Wrangler]

None of those verses say to baptise ONLY in Jesus name.

They don't have to say "only". You are inventing a standard in a desperate attempt to support your doctrine.

Whose name we baptize in is absolutely no proof of the trinity. No mention of co-equal, co-substantial or co-eternal. What's more, it doesn't say anything like if you do not believe this 3is1, you cannot be saved.