Truth Magazine

By Ron Halbrook

From time to time, discussions have occurred over whether baptism is “in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” or is “in the name of Jesus Christ” (Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38). It is both! 

“In the Name of”: Authority, Power, the Right to Command

“In the name of” does not prescribe a ritualistic formula of words to be called out while baptizing a person, but explains by what right or authority baptism is commanded. The Jewish leaders asked Jesus concerning the things he taught and practiced, which included baptism, “By what authority doest thou these things? And who gave thee this authority?” Jesus said their question about authority would be answered if they answered an equivalent question: “The baptism of John, whence was it? From heaven, or of men?” They refused to answer the question (Matt. 21:23-27). In this debate over the issue of authority, the Jewish leaders and Jesus were not discussing what ritualistic formulas were in order but whether the things taught and practiced were divinely authorized. We do not know what John or Jesus or the Apostles said during the act of baptizing anyone, but we know they all had divine authority for what they preached and practiced regarding baptism. 

This same word translated “authority” in Matthew 21 is translated “power” in Matthew 28:18. In giving the Great Commission, Jesus said, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” That statement affirmed his deity, for only God can possess all power or authority. His divinity or Godhood had just been proven by his conquering death. Therefore, whatever he commands is the command of the Godhead — it is of God, not of mere man. 

There are three persons in the Godhead: the Father, the Word or the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Godhead works in perfect harmony because each person fully shares the same divine nature. All three members of the Godhead were active in the creation of the universe (Gen. 1:1-2, 26; John 1:1-3). The miracles of Jesus were the deeds of deity, proving, “I and my Father are one . . . I am the Son of God . . . the Father is in me, and I in him.” The Jews properly understood that Jesus was claiming to be God in the flesh (John 10:22-38). 

The perfect unity and absolute authority of the three persons in the Godhead are to be affirmed in the preaching of the gospel. “Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” (Matt. 28:19). The gospel, including the command of baptism, is to be preached and practiced in the name of God, deity, or the Godhead. “Name” is singular, representing the unity or oneness of the divine nature shared by three persons. It is exactly like our expression, “in the name of the law.” “Name” is singular, representing the united authority of the many arms and departments of civil government. The “name” of God — his being, nature, power, and authority — represents his right to command. Men are to be taught and baptized by the authority of the one true God: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. 

Baptism “In the Name of Jesus Christ”

On the day of Pentecost in Acts 2, Peter preached, “Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved,” or in other words, “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” (vv. 21, 38). If “name” here refers to a formula of words, it must be spoken by the one being baptized, not by the baptizer. The formula must be called out at least twice: once when the sinner repents and again when he is baptized. Also, the formula does not match in the two verses: “the name of the Lord” and “the name of Jesus Christ.” Furthermore, since we are to do “all things in the name of the Lord Jesus,” this ritual must be performed for everything we do for the rest of our lives — someone must walk beside us calling out the formula over our every deed seven days a week, 24 hours a day (Col. 3:17). 

Peter was not preaching a formula to be called out but was affirming that the message he preached is commanded by the Lord — that is, by Jesus Christ — that is, as Jesus himself put it, by the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. When King David sent someone on a mission “in the name of David,” did someone else stand and call the name of David over the messenger when he did David’s bidding (1 Sam. 25:5, 9)? If not, then one may do a thing “in the name of” another without repeating a formula of words. Further, David opposed Goliath “in the name of the Lord” (1 Sam. 17:45). David was by himself, so who orally called the Lord’s name over him? No one did! David came against Goliath in the name of, by the authority of, the Lord, and he did so without anyone reciting a formula of words over him. Therefore, one may act “in the name of the Lord” ­— “in the name of Jesus Christ” — “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” — without having to repeat a formula of words.

There is perfect harmony in the Godhead as to what men must believe and obey in order to be saved. To obey the gospel is to seek and to receive salvation from the Lord, from Jesus Christ, or, to say it another way, from the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. 

Healing “In the Name of Jesus Christ”

In Acts 3 Peter healed a man “in the name of Jesus Christ” and explained that through his name all men may be saved from their sins (vv. 6, 19, 26). This does not mean someone called out a formula of words over Peter as he healed the man. As the Apostles continued to preach “through Jesus the resurrection from the dead,” the Jewish leaders demanded to know “by what power, or by what name” they preached and performed miracles. To clarify “by what means” these things were done, Peter said it was “by the name of Jesus Christ . . . , even by him . . . Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name given among men, whereby we must be saved.” After the Apostles were threatened and released, they reported these things to the brethren, who noted that Christ himself had been similarly abused: “The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ” (Acts 4:1-12, 26). The “name” is equivalent to the “power” or “means” by which something is done. These things were done by “the Lord” and “his Christ,” and when men resisted the Son they resisted the Father. 

Harmony in the Godhead

Because of the harmony in the Godhead, what may be attributed to one may be attributed to the other, even though each member may perform some distinct part of the work spoken of. For instance, since each acted in the creation, we may properly recognize each as our Creator. Since each acted in providing our salvation, we may ascribe our salvation to each. Since each was involved in the origin and provision of the gospel, including the command of baptism, it may be properly said that we preach and practice baptism “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” To accept or reject baptism is to accept or reject “the counsel of God” because he commanded it (Luke 7:30). Also, Christ commanded it: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16). Also, the Holy Spirit revealed and commanded it, so that we are “born of the water and of the Spirit” (John 3:5). Truly, since baptism is in the name of Jesus Christ, it is in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. 

Before, during or after baptizing someone, we may use the words of Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:16, John 3:5, Acts 2:21, Acts 2:38, Colossians 2:12, Titus 3:5, or any other passage appropriate to the occasion. Insisting on the language of any such passage to the exclusion of another is “doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth.” We are to teach “wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ,” and that includes the words of Matthew 28:19 (1 Tim. 6:3-5).

3505 Horse Run Ct., Shepherdsville, Kentucky 40165

By James Hahn

We frequently hear some speaking of having “total commitment” in their lives. I think most of them expect us to believe that this “total commitment” is to Jesus Christ. There are several different groups who place much emphasis upon their members having this “total commitment.” As you examine these groups you will find that they have different teachings and practices. About the only thing they have in common is their criticism and ridicule of those they say are “traditionalists.” We sometimes find such attitudes among those who identify themselves as members of the body of Christ.

These individuals who place so much emphasis upon this “total commitment” make claims of sincerity, devotion and love for themselves while, at the same time, maintain that the “traditionalists” (which happens to be anyone who questions their activities) are insincere, not devoted and lacking in love. 

One sure way of being classed as a “traditionalist” by these individuals is to stress the need to respect the authority of God’s word in everything you teach and practice. I have never been able to understand why one who ignores the authority of Christ and simply teaches and practices what he pleases and is filled with sincerity, love and devotion, and on the other hand why one who stresses that a person should teach and practice only those things authorized by him is insincere, not devoted and lacking in love. Can you figure it out?

Maybe what we need to do is go back and look at this matter of “total commitment.” When you speak of someone having “commitment” this really doesn’t tell you much unless you also reveal that to which he is committed. In my talks with those who claim this “total commitment” for themselves, I have found that they truly are committed. Let’s note some things to which they are committed.

Many of them are committed to doing that which pleases them. If it makes them “feel good” about themselves or brings pleasure to them they are committed to it. Oh, I know they talk about Jesus and would have you believe that he is the center of their lives, however, Jesus, himself, said, “And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?” (Luke 6:46).

As we study through the pages of God’s word we realize that the  teaching of Jesus or the apostles did not make those who heard it feel good about themselves. It made them realize that they were guilty of sin and were separated from God in their present condition. The dishonest and insincere became angry and often resorted to violence against the one telling them the truth (see Acts 7:54-60). Those who were honest also felt badly upon learning of their condition, but they received and obeyed the truth and then rejoiced (see Acts 2:41; 8:39).

By what standard do these individuals determine that if one emphasizes strict obedience to and respect for the authority of Jesus he is insincere and not serving from the heart? How can they judge the hearts of others? It just may be that those who teach and practice only that which is authorized in the word of God are doing so because they are “totally committed” to pleasing and glorifying the Lord rather than themselves. In fact, this is the kind of “total commitment” we need to have. Don’t be deceived by those who say they are “totally committed” to Christ but show otherwise by their actions. The person who is committed to Christ will demonstrate that love by keeping his commandments (see John 14:15, 21; 1 John 5:3). To what are you committed?

1212 Melaine Ct., Lawrenceburg, Kentucky 40342-1724

By Joe R. Price

This is the title of an article in Awake! (Dec. 8, 1998, 8-11), a publication of the Watchtower Society. I received it last week from a Jehovah’s Witness who has frequented my doorstep of late. Jehovah’s Witnesses do believe in the Jesus we read about in the Bible. Of course, they would say that they do, but the “proof is in the pudding” as we test whether these teachers are from God (1 John 4:1; 1 Thess. 5:21-22). Here are some of the things this article says about Jesus, followed by Bible answers:

Jehovah’s Witnesses: “Jesus was the first and only direct creation of God in heaven countless ages ago, before the angels and the physical universe. This is why he is called God’s ‘only-begotten Son.’ All other creations were made through this Son, God’s ‘master worker,’ in his pre-human existence” (8).

Bible Answer: Jesus is eternal God — not a created being. He is “God with us” (Matt. 1:23) — the I AM (John 8:58), and one with the Father (Matt. 1:23; John 8:58; 10:30-33). “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God . . . and the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth” (John 1:1, 14). The Watchtower Society had to rewrite John 1:1-3 in their “New World Translation” of the Bible to avoid and evade the force of its truth! Their Bible says the Word was “a god.”Jesus described himself as “the first and the last” in Revelation 1:17. Isaiah 44:6 gives the very same designation to Jehovah: “Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel, And his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: I am the First and I am the Last; Besides me there is no God.” Now, either Jesus is the God who was Israel’s Redeemer in Isaiah 44:6, or he is a blasphemer in Revelation 1:17! The Jesus of the Bible is wholly, eternally God. The Jesus of the Watchtower was created in their false interpretations and twisting of the Scriptures.

Jehovah’s Witnesses: “About 2,000 years ago, God transferred the life of Jesus to the womb of a Jewish virgin, to be born as a human. Even now, by the process of artificial insemination, humans can do something that is in some ways comparable” (8).

Bible Answer: Incredible! Jehovah’s Witnesses say the virgin birth of Jesus is comparable to artificial insemination! The Bible says that Mary was told that “the Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35). His birth was a miracle of God — artificial insemination is not. Colossians 2:9 says that “in Him (Jesus, jrp) dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” Jesus’ divinity was not lessened by his humanity. Miraculously, deity inhabited flesh (John 1:14). Jesus is called the “Son of God” not because his existence was due to a creative act of God. He is the “Son of God” because this appellation describes his nature — his fullness of deity. The people of Jesus’ day understood that to call God your Father was to “make yourself God” (John 10:30, 33, 35). Jesus concurred with their assessment by calling himself “the Son of God” in John 10:35-36). 

Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe Jesus is fully God. The Jesus of the Watchtower is not the Jesus of the Bible!

6204 Parkland Way, Ferndale, Washington 98248

By Norman E. Fultz

Some folks would look at small churches scattered here and there and say they ought to just fold up, shut the doors of their meeting houses, and go join themselves to a larger group that can offer a good variety of programs that appeal to all different age levels. Mergers would possibly be feasible in some situations, even advisable. In fact I’ve known of a few circumstances where that would probably be a real boon to the cause of truth. The problem is that often the brethren in the areas where the mergers ought to take place “for the good of the cause of Christ” can’t get along with each other. And that is, likely as not, unrelated to whether they are standing in the truth. It is more likely to be a situation in which a clash of personalities has created an atmosphere that results in stagnation of the spirit. In other instances, brethren will not allow themselves to get well enough acquainted with each other to know if they could work together. But there are many small congregations where disbanding and mergers are untenable options for many reasons. But here let me tell you about one such small church.

They are all farmers and ranchers, scattered in a wide radius from the building where they gather weekly in worship, study, and mutual encouragement in godliness. Not much remains of what was once their small town. There are a couple of small church buildings, a community building, formerly one of several buildings belonging to the school system, and a few all-but-fallen-down frame store-type buildings along what must have been the Main Street business district in the town’s heyday. Those former houses of commerce now stand amidst small trees and saplings that have grown up randomly around them, a ghostly remnant of a community’s commercial heartbeat. Approaching from the west one is greeted by a now defunct cotton gin, not an uncommon site in this part of southwest Oklahoma, several miles north of Hollis. Not only are there but a few houses in the immediate area, the houses over the countryside are often several miles apart. One’s next door neighbor may be the rancher several sections of land away.

The brethren’s house of worship is a simple, white frame building consisting of one room. There are no classrooms, though a couple could be formed by a sliding partition at the pulpit end of the building if needed.  There are no inside rest rooms, just a path to an outhouse. Surrounded on three sides by cotton fields, the building is back off the highway by a distance of about one half of a city block, there being some other structure in front along the roadway.

In that congregation of perhaps twenty-five folk, there is a wide range of ages spanning the years from preschool to upper 70s or better. A few saints who are older still and in poor health are not able to gather with their brothers and sisters in Christ. Like many churches in rural America whose communities have shriveled as an agrarian society could no longer provide an adequate livelihood, this church has reflected that loss. Church membership has also declined due to death, and that not always of the very old. In the last few years the group experienced the death of two men yet in their prime — in their 40s and 50s, one of them having done much of the teaching of the Word. Not only is the number small, the countryside has been so depleted of populace in the last generation that any prospects for evangelism within a reasonable distance are almost nil.

Should they fold up and quit? They don’t think so. They still gather as per instructions of the Lord, “upon the first day of the week to break bread” (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 11:18-34). They continue in the apostles’ teaching (Acts 2:42). They still “consider one another so as to stir up love and good works . . . exhorting one another . . .” (Heb. 10:24, 25). While one can be sure they’d be delighted if their number were larger, the few who are there can encourage each other to “be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord . . .” knowing that their “labor is not in vain in the Lord” (1 Cor. 15:58).

They can help one another to “seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God” having a mind that is “set on things above, not on things on the earth” (Col. 3:1-2). They can still help each other remember that one’s soul is of more value than if he gained the whole world and lost his soul (Matt. 16:26).

I’ve thought several times about this small group at Vinson, Oklahoma since being with them in late October in a meeting. And it has occurred to me that there may well be many among heaven’s population who were part of just such a very small band of believers on earth. They just kept on keeping on in the face of what could be discouraging and disheartening. But they knew they didn’t have to be big to be faithful. They knew that their obligation was to the Lord and to one another as his children to be what they could be under the given circumstances. They were committed to being “faithful until death” having their focus on “the crown of life” (Rev. 2:10).

Darkness had enshrouded Oklahoma as the plane lifted off from Will Rogers World Airport, but the memories of the past few days of pleasant association with a small band of God’s people lingered like glowing coals in my mind. What a contrast was their small community contrasted with Oklahoma City which lay below like a sprawling sea of lights, her major thoroughfares easily distinguishable as they stretched out like serpentine paths. An area of very dense light left no uncertainty as to where the heart of the city lay. Then, almost before one could realize it, the countryside lay black and seemingly quiet below, the blackness being broken randomly here and there by a security light marking a farm or ranch, probably not greatly different from those I had visited in the days just past, two hundred miles to the southwest.

The accounts of many small bands of believers in various parts of this great land who just keep on plodding along in the work of the Lord with no thought of quitting, of yielding to the Devil, could be multiplied. May their faithfulness spur us onward as well.

Let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart (Gal. 6:9).

13018 N. Oakland Ave., Kansas City, Missouri 64167 nfultz@juno.com