William Branham's Teachings on Water Baptism: Difference between revisions

Line 107: Line 107:
The question must be asked - '''Why did William Branham change his opinion based on who he was preaching to?'''
The question must be asked - '''Why did William Branham change his opinion based on who he was preaching to?'''


=What is the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?=
=Why does Jesus say to baptize one way but Luke tells us a different way?=
 
Why in the Book of Acts (Acts 10:48 and Acts  19:5) is baptism never performed as in Matthew 28:19, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost?
 
Various answers have been given.
 
#Baptism in the name of any one of the Persons of the Trinity involves baptism in the names of the other two.
#Luke, though employing the shorter, really meant the longer formula.
#The longer formula was designed for Gentiles who had never known the Father, the shorter for converts from Jewish people or Jewish proselytes.
 
The Didache, or Teaching of the Twelve, an ancient document that may date back as early as 70 A.D., seems to favour the second explanation by using as synonymous the two expressions, “baptism into the name of the Lord” and “baptism into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”.<ref>Thomas Whitelaw, Acts, The Preacher’s Complete Homiletic Commentary (New York; London; Toronto: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1892), 45.</ref>
 
What is clear is that the effects of baptism were attributed to the water and not to an exact formula of words.  The Didache, Justin Martyr (''c.'' 100–165), and Cyprian (''c.'' 200–58) describe a baptism with the trinitarian formula as a baptism “in the name of Jesus.” A compulsory liturgical form is far removed from early times.<ref>William Sailer et al., Religious and Theological Abstracts (Myerstown, PA: Religious and Theological Abstracts, 2012).</ref>
 
==What is the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?==


Matthew 28:19 states:
Matthew 28:19 states: