Christians why do the two verses of Matthew 28:19 and Acts 2:38 say two different things?

Question

Matthew 28:19 (New International Version)

19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in[a] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2028:19&version=31

Acts 2:38 (New International Version)

38Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts%202:38;&version=31;

So which one is valid and which one isn't valid? Or are they both valid procedures?

Answer 1

They are not both valid procedures and they ARE saying two different things.

Jesus Himself told us to Baptize in the name of the Trinity. He could not be more clear:

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"

Peter, in Acts chapter 2, was saying to "do what Jesus told us to do" - i.e., Baptize "in the name of (by the authority of) Jesus".

We are to do what Jesus commanded. Period.

The Jesus Only people claim that the words Father and Son do not constitute names. We maintain they do. We believe that Matthew 28:19 definitely confirms that "Father" is a name, that "Son" is a name, that "Holy Ghost" is a name, simply because we are not generalizing just any father or just any son. We are talking about God the Father, and God the Son; and most anyone in Christendom today would readily recognize and know Who is being spoken of.

There is not a single incident in the book of Acts where any particular baptismal method is given. There is no record of the dialogue of the baptizer while standing in the water with the convert. You can look in vain for any Scripture which would state, "I baptize thee in the name of Jesus Christ" (or any other variation of the precious name of our Lord). If one could produce such an explicit procedure, I would be thrilled to admit that we have a scriptural right to baptize thus, but it cannot be produced. It doesn't exist.

This immeasurably weakens the Jesus Only position. They have read into the record that which is not there. They have taken the words of Peter, assumed that they were the properly expressed formula, and placed them onto the lips of those who baptized in water--without a shred of evidence to support their action. The Jesus Only proponents claim that Acts 2:38 is the baptismal formula. And yet Acts 8:16 and Acts 19:5 simply state they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And if you will notice, in these two latter verses the word "Christ" was omitted altogther.

The Father and the Lamb are separate and worshipped before the throne!

In Revelation 5:1-9 we clearly read that God, who was seated on the throne held a scroll. But no one was worthy to open it! Finally, the Lamb of God [Jesus] takes the scroll and opens it. Only He can open it, because He was slain. The Father on the throne is not worthy to open the scroll, only the Lamb is! In this story, both the Father on the throne and the Lamb are worshipped.

This shatters modern-day Patripassionist Oneness Pentecostals, which states that the Father became flesh and was slain on the cross!!!

If you kew the errors (heresies) that were condemned by the Early Church (Patripassionism and Modalism, whic is just an older form of this "Oneness" nonsense, you would see it for what it is!

This passage also renders modal Oneness Pentecostalism invalid due to the two Persons being shown here.

Answer 2

Why are we so worried about these two verses lately? I've seen this several times. Don't worry - I do not think it is a contradiction if that's what is being implied.

Acts 2:38 doesn't necessarily mean that Peter did not baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit when he actually did it.

Peter was addressing Jews that had rejected Jesus as the messiah, so he specifically mentioned Jesus here.

Answer 3

at present there are merely over 2,3 hundred customary copies of the recent testomony books interior the unique language (Greek) that predate the Nicean Council and the interpretation of the recent testomony in Latin. yet another 5000 manuscripts in Greek exist from that factor to the discovery of the printing press. while placed next, those manuscripts trust one yet another approximately ninety 9% of the time. the recent testomony incorporate somewhat over 7000 strains. of those, scholars debate approximately fewer than 40 of the strains. lots of those are the two be conscious order (Christ Jesus or Jesus Christ), modifications in pronouns (ours or yours) or distinction spellings of a similar be conscious (like in English have been we've honor and honour). There are fewer than 10 strains the place there is any important distinction interior the interpreting. I John 5:7 is a sort of verses. lots of the early manuscripts have a shorter version of the verse (like interior the NIV). The longer version shows up interior the third century and could become familiar because of the fact the "common" interpreting around the 6th century, with the shorter interpreting disappearing at that factor. while the King James Bible grow to be translated interior the overdue sixteenth/early seventeenth century, it used manuscripts with the longer interpreting. maximum extra cutting-side variations circulate with the shorter interpreting as curiously to be the older of the two variations.

Answer 4

It was at the Feast of Pentecost, and it states rather openly that there were people from many nations there.

So no matter how much I try to see what you are seeing, I cannot!

/ :

Answer 5

Please review the link http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/name.htm