WHY?

Last week I read that there were 44,000 denominations. That in itself must make God cry. But that is not the subject of this post. What I want to ask is WHY most of them ignore the teaching of baptism and impose their own interpretation.

I will start with what happened at Pentecost where it says in Acts 2 v 38, Then Peter said to them "Repent and let everyone of you be baptized in the NAME OF JESUS CHRIST for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Jesus baptism Matthew 3 V 16. and when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water and behold, the heavens were open to him.

John 3 v 23. John was also baptizing at Aenon near Salim because water was plentiful there

Matthew 28 v 19. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 8 v 36 And as they were going along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said "See here is water! What prevents me from being baptized? And he commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went down INTO the water, Phillip and the eunuch, and he baptized him.

Acts 10 v 48. And he commanded them to be baptized in the NAME OF JESUS CHRIST.

Romans 6 V 3. Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized INTO CHRIST JESUS were baptized into his death?

Galatians 3 v 27. For as many as you were baptized INTO CHRIST have put on Christ.

Matthew 3 v 6. And they were baptized by him in the River Jordan, confessing their sins.

In the New Testament, baptism was in the name or into the name of Jesus, always by immersion, always when there was plenty of water available.

Only ONCE are we told to baptize in the name of the father, the son, and the holy spirit. and as we know we never make a doctrine out of one verse of scripture. Therefore the overwhelming evidence is that you baptize by immersion in the name of Jesus or Jesus Christ. One final point nowhere in scripture do you baptize a baby by sprinkling water over its head.

So the question is why do we ignore the scripture on this subject and replace it with our own version?

Point 1. YOU DO NOT make a doctrine out of one verse of scripture

Point 2. ALL scripture is given by God (not some).

1. Where does Scripture say that the person doing the baptism lowered someone down into the water? It doesn't show the method.
2. Your selective use of verses ignores the contexts (the verses around the verse you've chosen). For a clear example, in your use of Acts 2:38, the very next verse says, "For the promise [of the Holy Spirit] is for you and your children...." How is the promise for our children? Those who believe in infant baptism (other than Catholics) say that it is a sign of the Holy Spirit's presence, not to save the baby, but to bless the parents' commitment to raise the child in a Christian environment in the home and church (and, for some, in a Christian school).
3. We can make a doctrine out of that verse, since all three Persons of the Trinity are involved in creation, salvation, and sanctification. I refer you to the whole New Testament, especially the Gospel of John.

1. Where does Scripture say that the person doing the baptism lowered someone down into the water? It doesn't show the method.
2. Your selective use of verses ignores the contexts (the verses around the verse you've chosen). For a clear example, in your use of Acts 2:38, the very next verse says, "For the promise [of the Holy Spirit] is for you and your children...." How is the promise for our children? Those who believe in infant baptism (other than Catholics) say that it is a sign of the Holy Spirit's presence, not to save the baby, but to bless the parents' commitment to raise the child in a Christian environment in the home and church (and, for some, in a Christian school).
3. We can make a doctrine out of that verse, since all three Persons of the Trinity are involved in creation, salvation, and sanctification. I refer you to the whole New Testament, especially the Gospel of John.

Nobody but you used it, as opposed to you saying plenty of people have said that water baptism is irrelevant.

And that's the facts.

Matthew 28:19 is not a stand alone scripture contradicting other scriptures relevant to water baptism. Jesus' commanded water baptism "IN THE NAME OF..." The singular name referenced is revealed by the acts of the apostles. The Apostles understood Jesus' command in Matthew 28:19 to mean they were to baptize in His name as confirmed throughout scripture.

But Magenta, some people say that you need to be submerged a certain depth in the water. An exact 5.7 centimeters or 570 millimeters.
What do you think about this important detail?
I will also bring the coffee and food for the international conference of Christian denominations by the way.

This is true, unless you are 6 ft deep in the water it doesn't count.

Really? Is that what the apostles were doing? Looks like more and more bizarre stuff is being posted these days.

Since there are no contradictions in Scripture we must assume that "in the name of Jesus" is equivalent to "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (possibly an abbreviation). The historical record shows that it is the words of Christ which were used when early Christians were baptized.

At least you have some basis for your assertion, even though for me thats a hard sell.

I think it would be hard to say anyone baptized before they turned 20 that their baptism is invalid due to age accountability.