Acts20.com

This is an off-shoot of the thread on the name of Jesus and the remission of sins.I believe the following about baptism. Number 3 sets me apart from many in the Oneness Pentecostal movement.....1) It is to be done by the authority (name) of Jesus Christ, 2) That repentance and baptism are

I'm a little unclear on the phrase although baptized in heresy. Were these baptisms more mystic in nature, much like the seven sons of Sceva using the name of Jesus, or like the sorcerer Bar-Jesus baptizing people in his name. Is the heresy being dealt with, from your perspective, that of accepting Jesus as Savior, but not being baptized by authority in the recognized church? I need a little more clarity on the situation before I can understand the solution. By the way, I use the Water Baptism formula, In accordance to the command of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and by the authority vested in me as a minister of the Gospel, I baptize you my brother/sister in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. In the baptism class I teach them that if any one ask if they have been baptized in the Name of Jesus I tell them to say yes.

While I do not think that Jesus intended on his words in Matthew 28:19to be recited as a baptismal formula, I agree with what you tell those in your baptism class. If they were baptized for Christ's sake, then they were indeed baptized in his name, regardless of what the baptizer may have invoked or omitted. This is my biggest area of contention with my associates in the Oneness ranks. But they cannot refute my reasoning.Concerning your questions concerning the reference to some being baptized in heresy, yes I think it is simply a reference to those who baptized by leaders of some of the heretical sects such as Arianism. But it could also refer to those baptized by anti-establishment fundamentalists who continued to meet in homes, practicing primitive Christianity against the will of Rome.It amuses me a bit to see the writer mentioning heresy, when he and most of the established church were obviously embracing the heretical idea that those administering baptism have the power to remit sin through invocation of the name of Jesus. But regardless of their error, this document provides strong proof that invoking the name of Jesus at baptism was the standard practice for at least the first three centuries of Christianity

Even more confused now that I look at the source - Translated by Robert Ernest Wallis. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 5. I not sure of the state of the Roman Church prior to the creed (and all that came out of the counsel), but I thought the centralization of authority to the Roman Church was not total even after 325 AD. Do you have any reference from the Apostolic Fathers that would agree with your position?

RS, do you believe that:1. A new convert must be baptized in water in the name of Jesus instead of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit?2. The name of the Father and Holy Spirit is Jesus?

RS, do you believe that:1. A new convert must be baptized in water in the name of Jesus instead of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit?I believe all Christian baptism of those who have truly repented is done in the name of Jesus (

The writings of the Ante-Nicene Fathers are a common historical source. We would have to do a little digging to see exactly when they were written. As for this being my position, I'm simply sharing what

Here is what Wikipedia says....The Ante-Nicene Fathers, subtitled The Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325, is a collection of books in 10 volumes (one volume is indexes) containing English translations of the majority of Early Christian writings. The period covers the beginning of Christianity until before the promulgation of the Nicene Creed at the First Council of Nicaea. The translations are very faithful, and provide valuable insights into the spirituality and theology of the early Church fathers.The series was originally published between 1867 and 1873 by the Presbyterian publishing house T. & T. Clark in Edinburgh under the title Ante-Nicene Christian Library (ANCL), as a response to the Oxford movement's Library of the Fathers which was perceived as too Roman Catholic. The volumes were edited by Rev. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. This series was available by subscription, but the editors were unable to interest enough subscribers to commission a translation of the homilies of Origen.In 1885 the Christian Literature Company, first of Buffalo, then New York, began to issue the volumes in a reorganized form, edited by the Episcopalian bishop of New York, A. Cleveland Coxe. Coxe gave his series the title The Ante-Nicene Fathers. By 1896, this American edition/revision was complete. In 1897, a volume 9, which contained new translations, was published by T. & T. Clark as an additional volume, to complete the original ANCL. Apart from volume 9, the contents entirely derived from the ANCL, but in a more chronological order. Coxe added his own introductions and notes, which were criticized by academic authorities and Roman Catholic reviewers.T. & T. Clark then associated with the Christian Literature Company and with other American publisher for the publication of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers

Here is what Wikipedia says....The Ante-Nicene Fathers, subtitled The Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325, is a collection of books in 10 volumes (one volume is indexes) containing English translations of the majority of Early Christian writings. The period covers the beginning of Christianity until before the promulgation of the Nicene Creed at the First Council of Nicaea. The translations are very faithful, and provide valuable insights into the spirituality and theology of the early Church fathers.The series was originally published between 1867 and 1873 by the Presbyterian publishing house T. & T. Clark in Edinburgh under the title Ante-Nicene Christian Library (ANCL), as a response to the Oxford movement's Library of the Fathers which was perceived as too Roman Catholic. The volumes were edited by Rev. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. This series was available by subscription, but the editors were unable to interest enough subscribers to commission a translation of the homilies of Origen.In 1885 the Christian Literature Company, first of Buffalo, then New York, began to issue the volumes in a reorganized form, edited by the Episcopalian bishop of New York, A. Cleveland Coxe. Coxe gave his series the title The Ante-Nicene Fathers. By 1896, this American edition/revision was complete. In 1897, a volume 9, which contained new translations, was published by T. & T. Clark as an additional volume, to complete the original ANCL. Apart from volume 9, the contents entirely derived from the ANCL, but in a more chronological order. Coxe added his own introductions and notes, which were criticized by academic authorities and Roman Catholic reviewers.T. & T. Clark then associated with the Christian Literature Company and with other American publisher for the publication of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. I know of the collect, though only having read bits and pieces, and by no means familiar with it. I have viewed A. J. Tomlinson's set of these books over at the COGOP archives. It is said that he focused on the writing of the Apostolic Fathers (which he quoted sometimes in his writings), who were the church leaders who directly followed and knew the Apostles and their ministry. Your reference strikes me as much closer to the time of the counsel and creed, and the institutionalization of the church that separates the priest from the laity. In other words it sounds to Catholic for my restorationalist (if that's a word) ears.

RS, do you believe that:1. A new convert must be baptized in water in the name of Jesus instead of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit?I believe all Christian baptism of those who have truly repented is done in the name of Jesus (