11,153
edits
The Baptismal Formula: Difference between revisions
→What does the scriptural witness tell us?
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 155: | Line 155: | ||
What is clear from the scriptural references is that there was no "magic formula" for water baptism. There are no exact words that are required to be spoken. As opposed to what William Branham taught, there is certainly no requirement that when a person is baptized, the words must be spoken over them... "I baptize you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ." | What is clear from the scriptural references is that there was no "magic formula" for water baptism. There are no exact words that are required to be spoken. As opposed to what William Branham taught, there is certainly no requirement that when a person is baptized, the words must be spoken over them... "I baptize you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ." | ||
It is also interesting to note that only in the book of Acts are there actual references to the baptismal formula. We can't really know what any of the other apostles said when they baptized converts | There are a couple of additional points of interest. | ||
When Jesus stated “...baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit...”, it is not “in the names of” but “in the name of.” The Greek is very clearly singular. There is only one name referenced. “The name” is used of Jesus and God in many places in the NT. This is the name of the one God, much as it says in Phil 2.9: “Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name” | |||
The second is that the text uses “eis” (usually “into”) rather than “en” (usually “in”). This fits with the point that there are no magic words. It is not as if a specific formula for baptism is in mind. That would have required “en”. While “eis” can have the meaning of “en”, it has more the flavor of an almost directional movement into fellowship with the entity referred by “the name.” | |||
I think there is good textual reason for the conclusion that Matt 28:19 is not an alternative to the baptismal statements elsewhere in Acts but rather is entirely consistent with them. Baptism is “into” the fellowship of “the name.” | |||
Finally, it is not very likely that Matt 28:19 contains the exact words of Jesus, of course, because he normally spoke in Aramaic not Greek, but we can assume that the translation was made as it is for good reason. | |||
It is also interesting to note that only in the book of Acts are there actual references to the baptismal formula. We can't really know what any of the other apostles said when they baptized converts. What did Matthew say? We don't know. | |||
==When did the baptismal formula change?== | ==When did the baptismal formula change?== | ||