All of my Pentecostal life I have heard how the issues of baptism and the Oneness of God are joined at the hip. It’s been taught over and over again that one will not “see” baptism in Jesus’ name until they “see” the Oneness of God. That idea never sat quite right with me. I saw the connection, but did not see any logical connection. While an understanding of the Oneness of God is sufficient to see that we are to be baptized in Jesus’ name, I do not think it is necessary to see that we are to be baptized in Jesus’ name.
One not need not believe in the Oneness of God to see the validity of Jesus’ name baptism (I have heard there are Trinitarian churches that baptize in Jesus’ name, although I cannot point to any specific church). Indeed, even if God were a Trinity, it would not change the fact that the intended baptismal formula is the Jesus’ name formula. Think of prayer. The Bible is clear that prayer is to be “in Jesus’ name.” No Trinitarian argues that since God is a Trinity, one should pray “in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” They accept the teaching of Scripture that prayer is to be said exclusively in Jesus’ name, and do not see that as detracting from the Trinity. Likewise, the Jesus’ name formula-if the intended formula-poses no challenge to Trinitarian theology.
The question of how many persons are in the Godhead and the question of the proper baptismal formula are two related, but separate issues. To determine the number of persons in the Godhead we examine those passages that teach us about God. To determine the proper baptismal formula we look to those passages that instruct us on that matter. When we do, it becomes apparent that the early church interpreted Jesus’ command in Matthew 28:19 to baptize in the singular name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as a command to baptize in Jesus’ own name, as evidenced by their exclusive use of the Jesus’ name formula in evangelism.
The Jesus’ name formula makes sense given the purpose of baptism: to identify us with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection (see Romans 6:1-4). In Trinitarian theology, the Father and Spirit did not die, were not buried, and were not resurrected. It was only Jesus. Therefore, even on a Trinitarian view it would be entirely reasonable to be baptized only in the name of Jesus.
I think all can agree that baptism in Jesus’ name makes more sense on a Oneness view of God, but the fact remains that both Trinitarians and Oneness believers alike can see (1) that the Jesus’ name formula is taught in Scripture, (2) that it is the authoritative apostolic interpretation of Jesus’ words in Matthew 28:19, (3) and that it makes theological sense to be baptized using the Jesus’ name formula given the purpose of baptism. We should continue to reach out to Trinitarians to help them understand the nature of God more perfectly, but we should not think their ability to see the validity of Jesus’ name baptism depends on their ability to see the Oneness of God.
Thinking to Believe 
October 9, 2007 at 7:33 am
This is an excellent post and I do agree.
First, it makes good historical sense of the Oneness Pentecostal movement. If I’m not mistaken the issue of baptism in Jesus name preceded any modification of the doctrine of God.
Second, it seems right to me in dialogue with Trinitarians to approach from the angle of the Biblical nature of baptism (in Jesus name). It makes good apologetic strategy because it doesn’t require a total shift all at once but merely following the solid biblical evidence on a single point.
Third, most Trinitarians (that I’ve heard) end their prayers in Jesus name. They accept it as Biblical (and it is) that the way to the Father is through Jesus. It’s not much of a leap from there to baptism in Jesus name. Furthermore, it’s not a leap, it’s merely following the evidence.
LikeLike
October 9, 2007 at 10:51 am
Chad,
I’m not sure about the historical order. I am not well-studied on the early days of Oneness Pentecostalism.
Your second point was right on. The purpose of this post was apologetic in nature–to show that we need not tackle the really big fist (getting someone to convert from Trinitarianism to Oneness) in order to get them to see the smaller fish (baptism in Jesus’ name). The two are related, but distinct. We can get them to see both THAT we are to be baptized in Jesus’ name, and WHY we are to be baptized only in Jesus’ name without them having to change their view on the Godhead. That takes the pressure off them and us. Of course, we can and should tackle the Godhead issue later.
Jason
LikeLike
October 9, 2007 at 11:30 am
Identification with Christ’sin baptism is one reason to be baptized in Jesus name, the other would be to have our sins washed away. This is the part a Trinitarian would balk at. Do you think it’s necessary that a newly repentant believer understand this second reason? And do you think a Trinitarian would get rebaptized if the sole purpose is to relate to Christ’s burial? IOW would they really see a need for rebaptism?
LikeLike
October 9, 2007 at 3:25 pm
Anonymous,
Yes, a Trinitarian might balk at that second reason, but they would not do so because of their view of God. They would do so because of their view of salvation. So again, what Scripture teaches about the nature of baptism (salvific) is independent of one’s view of the Godhead.
No, I don’t think it is necessary for a newly repentant believer to understand that baptism washes away all their sins for their sins to be truly washed away. The Romans did not understand all of the spiritual realities conferred on them when they were baptized, but according to Paul they were conferred nonetheless. See Romans 6.
I don’t think the sole purpose of baptism is to relate to Christ’s burial. I think one of the purposes of baptism is to be united to Christ. In the process we identify with him in his death, burial, and resurrection (not just his burial; see Romans 6:1-4).
The need for rebaptism is not related to what one understood about the purpose or significance of baptism when they were baptized, but whether their baptism was done properly. If the proper formula for baptism is the Jesus’ name formula, and if that formula has theological significance, then a Trinitarian should, and should want to be rebaptized.
Jason
LikeLike
October 11, 2007 at 12:52 pm
Hi Jason,
What if the baptizer said, “In the name of Jesus I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”
Would you consider that to be baptized in Jesus name.
LikeLike
October 11, 2007 at 4:33 pm
Trent,
That’s a new one. I have heard of people saying, “I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, which is the name of Jesus,” but never the version you suggested.
I see no need for either version. The only formula used by the early church was the Jesus’ name formula. Even though both hybrid versions mention the name of Jesus, neither uses it as an actual baptismal formula. The “traditional” hybrid version uses it as an explanatory gloss after the F,S, HS formula. Your version uses the name of Jesus as the authority in which one uses the F,S, HS formula.
Personally, I am not comfortable with either version.
Jason
LikeLike
October 12, 2007 at 4:05 pm
Hi Jason,
So you do not agree that it is by Jesus authority which we can baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit? (Matthew 28:18)
If it is Jesus authority, then what is wrong with giving him credit (“in the name of Jesus” Acts 2:38), and using His words (“I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” Matthew 28:19)? And at the same time the person being baptized recognizes Jesus as Lord and Savior. It seems this would still be following Scripture. You do not agree?
Trent
LikeLike
September 21, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Greetings! in the name of the Lord Jesus who is God most High.
Brother Dulle! I do agree with your blog that it is not necessary for one to understand the oneness of God to understanding baptism in name of Jesus Christ. For in my hometown of Roxboro, North Carolina there exist churches whom affirm the tri-unity of God most High yet baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. (Before I was rebaptized in February 18, 2001 in the name of Jesus Christ I was baptized when I was younger in the name of Jesus Christ in a trinitarian believing church. Yet I did not repent of my sins nor was it explained to me what I was doing. But when I enrolled in college in 2000 and was invited to church at a UPCI affiliated church in Raleigh it was explained unto me about God and what I must do to be saved and I was able to do in accord to the holy scriptures.)
God bless you always! in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.
Marquest Burton
LikeLike
November 26, 2013 at 4:39 pm
Thought it was interesting that Sid Roth, a well known Messianic Jew, proclaims baptism in Yeshua’s (Jesus) name is the only way to be baptized, and encourages other trinitarians to do the same.
http://sidroth.org/articles/baptized-only-yeshuas-name
L.D.
LikeLike
June 23, 2014 at 11:24 am
Jason, you must be like 13 years of age when you make comments.
Your comment that Trinitarians see using Jesus name in prayer is near absurd, I guess you are not around Trinitarians when the most pray in the name of the F,S,HG! and this is seen more time than in Jeuss name, matter of fact, many tritheists use in the name of the Lord so as to not offend the pagans and heathens of Islam, Buddha, Jews.
Are you even Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal??
iT SEEMS YOU HAVE MORE OFF THE WALL COMMENTS AND DOCTRINES THAT JIM JONES.
LikeLike
June 23, 2014 at 2:25 pm
Aaron. I don’t appreciate your condescending tone, but I will not respond in kind. Instead, I’ll address the substance of your comment.
Surely some Trinitarians do pray that way. Clearly others pray in Jesus’ name, as should any Trinitarian who reads his Bible. An appeal to your limited experience is of limited value. I attended a Trinitarian seminary and heard a lot of people pray from all sorts of Trinitarian churches, and not a single one ever ended their prayers by saying “in the name of the F,S,HS.” Should I conclude from this that nobody prays that way? Of course not. That’s an informal fallacy. The sampling is too small. So unless you have a poll involving thousands of respondents, and the majority of them say they pray “in the name of the F,S,HS,” your personal experience is not of much value when it comes to what Trinitarians do or do not do.
But all of this is to miss the point. Even if I granted that the majority of Trinitarians pray “in the name of the F,S,HS,” the argument I made still applies to those who read their Bibles and pray like Jesus told them to pray. The point I was making is that a Trinitarian view of God in and of itself does not dictate their baptismal formula anymore than it dictates the way they end their prayers (for those who are reading their Bible and know that prayer is to be offered in Jesus’ name). If they are able to pray only in Jesus’ name despite believing there are two other divine persons in the Godhead, then their Trinitarian view of God in itself if not what causes them to reject Jesus’ name baptism. Do you care to point out the fault in my argument here?
Jason
LikeLike
June 24, 2014 at 3:49 pm
nonsense, I have more knowledge of Trinitarians and Oneness than you and your Dulleite followers from a trimmed finger nail.
You are at least have my age and knowledge of Bible and History as well.
I see your posts against Oneness truths, I see your bogus statements as shown above.
You and your guessing what I have heard while in Trinity church, in many Trinitarian churches before being saved is just hoping and wishing about things you don’t know.
QUIT pretending you are Oneness Apostolic.
You keep thinking that more than a handful of Trinitarians baptize in JESUS NAME!
LikeLike
June 24, 2014 at 4:06 pm
Aaron,
Apparently your condescension only grows with additional comments. This isn’t a knowledge contest. And I am Oneness, so your claim that I post against Oneness truths is absolutely ridiculous.
Are you saying that you think I am claiming that Trinitarians baptize in Jesus’ name? If so, you have completely misread the post. What I have said is that Trinitarian theology is not the primary reason Trinitarians baptize in “the titles” rather than in Jesus’ name, so while understanding the Oneness of God may be sufficient to help a Trinitarian see baptism in Jesus’ name, it is not necessary. A Trinitarian could see the truth of baptism in Jesus’ name just as they can see the truth of prayer in Jesus’ name, all the while believing God is a Trinity. After all, if the purpose of baptism is to identify with Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection, it makes sense to be baptized in Jesus’ name even if God was a Trinity.
Jason
LikeLike
April 15, 2017 at 9:50 am
I started to believe this way to in 2016. I expressed my views to a friend of mine who is a Oneness believer too. Unfortunately, the way we express the Oneness to Trinitarians can come off haughty by some and it probably led to labels such as calling us a “cult” and/or “legalistic”.
LikeLike
April 16, 2017 at 11:03 am
The divisiveness of religion clearly shows the absurdity of religion that continuously argues perception into the post mythology generation of Gods and their Messengers. No matter how you parse the splinters, the wood remains despite the variant beliefs of non-knowledge without which nothing goes forward, certainly not unity. If you think not, please describe the Oneness of Humanity on this planet and how that Oneness is playing out in everyday life; in the churches, in the countries, in nations, in international relations.
Diversity that leads to quibbling, quile, untoward words, bullying, insults, threats, barrel bombs, chemical death and ultimate war is hardly worth praising multicultural diversity at the expense of Oneness of Humanity. If Oneness cannot be made known by its existence, by its practice how would anybody conclude who and what is right and wrong in anything they ruminate?
LikeLike
April 16, 2017 at 11:07 am
John 3:11 Truly, truly, I tell you, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, and yet you people do not accept our testimony. 12 If I have told you about earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you about heavenly things?…
LikeLike
April 16, 2017 at 11:15 am
Today, I was traveling in Kenya and I met a refugee from Zimbabwe. He said he hadn’t eaten anything in over 3 days and looked extremely skinny and unhealthy. Then my friend offered him the rest of the sandwich he was eating. The first thing the man said was, “We can share it.
The best sermons are lived, not preached.
LikeLike
February 10, 2018 at 1:35 pm
Praise the Lord, I’m looking for a church that baptized in the name of Jesus only.
LikeLike
February 10, 2018 at 4:49 pm
Sheila:
You would be better off looking to the bible about baptism as Jesus talked about not some church notion. Forget the baptism that church talk about. Jesus said that baptism really, is the life you are baptized to lead and the life you are committed to pursue; that is your baptism, not a mere baptism of water sprinkling which means nothing.
LikeLike