Greek scholars explain that while the expression eis to onoma (“in the name”
did not appear in Greek classical literature, it was very common in everyday documents with the meaning of “to the account of” in banking and commercial sales.
In Jewish literature, including the Old Testament, an equivalent of the Greek expression is frequently met, namely lešēm (le = “to,” šēm = “name”
. The term has a very elastic sense. Basically it means “with respect to.”
Scholar P. Billerbeck gave an illustration of its use in his discussion of baptism in Matthew 28:19. An Israelite can circumcise a Samaritan, but not a Samaritan an Israelite, because the Samaritans circumcise “in the name of Mount Gerizim,” that is, with the obligation of worshiping the God of the Samaritans who is worshiped there (Str-B, 1054–55). In light of such evidence Billerbeck affirmed:
“Baptism grounds a relation between the triune God and the baptized, which the latter has to affirm and express through his confession to the God in whose name he is baptized.”
It is evident, therefore, that the Greek and Hebrew usages of “in the name” are remarkably similar in meaning, especially when applied to baptism, and they would be similarly interpreted in Greek-speaking and Hebrew-speaking circles, despite the greater elasticity of meaning in the Hebrew language.
Sometimes one finds in Paul a shorter expression, baptism eis Christon, which can be rendered either as “into Christ” or “to Christ,” and is possibly a conscious abbreviation of the full phrase “in the name of Christ” (see Rom 6:3–4; Gal 3:27).
Significantly, both the Greek preposition eis and the Hebrew prefix le can have the meaning “with respect to.”
Baptism in the name of Jesus was not regarded as inferior to baptism in the full three names of the Trinity. The priority of God’s action applies in the reconciliation of the world in Christ and in the reconciliation of each believer who accepts it (2 Cor 5:18–21). In baptism, therefore, the Lord appropriates the baptized for his own and the baptized owns Jesus as Lord and submits to his lordship... as your other verses show. It's obvious they do not; however, in any way prove that baptism to the account of Jesus Christ was in any way contradictory to His instructions to baptize "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit."
In Paul’s letters, as in the book of Acts, baptism is represented as baptism to the account of Jesus. This is reflected in a significant manner in Paul’s handling of the divisions in the Corinthian church. He cites its members as saying, “I belong to Paul,” “I belong to Apollos,” “I belong to Cephas (= Peter),” “I belong to Christ” (1 Cor 1:12). Paul, with some indignation, asks, “Has Christ been apportioned to any single group among you? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” This final question echoes the language of baptism in the name of Jesus; its use in the context suggests that its normal usage is to make a person a follower of Jesus, even to belong to him, and somehow to be involved in his crucifixion and enjoy a special relation to him.
The trinitarian formula that appears in Matthew 28:19, “baptize... in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” is absent in the verses you listed simply because none of our NT writers was concerned to construct a full-blown doctrine of the Trinity in the text for each baptismal reference.
Nevertheless, all the necessary ingredients to do so were present in our texts from the beginning, gathered up in the experience of Jewish Christians: “their inherited conception of God as ‘Father,’ their new faith in Christ as the ‘Son,’... and their experience of the Spirit which [had] been given as the earnest and guarantee of the coming New Age."
As time passed and Christian writers had more time to reflect, a gradual pulling together of these elements into a unified whole took shape.
The earlier expression “baptize... in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” reemerges in the Didache (7.1, 3), the earliest noncanonical writing to give the trinitarian form of baptism (Swete 1976, 19). Polycarp’s prayer at his martyrdom is the earliest instance of a doxology that glorifies the Spirit together with the Father and the Son: “I praise thee for all things, I bless thee, I glorify thee through the everlasting and heavenly high priest, Jesus Christ, thy beloved child, through whom be glory to thee with him and the Holy Spirit, both now and for the ages that are to come. Amen”
(Mart. Pol. 14.3; cf. also 22.1).
Baptism in the name of Jesus was not regarded as inferior to baptism in the full three names of the Trinity. Baptism was done to the account of Jesus Christ as He instructed "in the name of the father, the son, and the Holy Spirit." Baptism was to the account of Jesus Christ whose own baptism and instructions were Triune.
Truly scripture teaches One God in three persons. Praise God for revealing Himself to us completely.
Charisenexcelsius;
Thank you for your Christian words. This entire thread is beginning to Remind me of that famous movie line from "Cool Hand Luke" with Paul Newman.
The Warden tells the Prisoners..."What we have here, is a failure to Communicate".
I went from asking you good Christian Folks show me one verse in scripture, where the Apostles actually ever LITERALLY ever Baptized Anyone in the Triune formula mentioned in Matthew 28 v 19 spoken by Jesus...for the umteenth time where of where was this ever actually done, or shown.?
Peter obeyed Jesus when he Water Baptized the converts in JESUS' NAME. I have already submitted the evidence what Jesus was actually telling his Apostles to do in Matthew 28 v 19.
Jesus IS THE NAME of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost my friends. Want to read the proof once again That Jesus is the Name of The Father, Son, Holy Ghost?
1. I John 2 v 1 "My little children. These things I write unto you that you sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate WITH THE FATHER,(comma) JESUS CHRIST the righteous."
2. John 5 v 43 Jesus said; "I Am come in MY FATHER'S NAME, and you receive me not, if another shall come in his own name, him you will receive".
3. Son's Name is Jesus....Matthew 1 v 25.
4. Name of The Holy Ghost......John 14 v 26; Jesus says; "But comforter which Is THE HOLY GHOST whom The FATHER (Jesus) will send in MY NAME......."
Well, you ask how did The Father wind up with The same Name as The Son? In the OT he was called a lot of names by The Jews. Such ad Jehovah, Yahweh, and others. But if you will open your Bible to Zechariah 14 v 9 here is the future prophecy about the change coming; " In THAT DAY there shall be ONE LORD, and HIS NAME ONE."
So now you see why it is no mystery to us who know why The Apostles all Baptized Converts in The Singular Name of Jesus and not three Titles.
Don't take my word for it, just please, go read it. And let us finally communicate here. Comprende?
