The Holy Scriptures give us a complete information about the Biblical baptism. Baptism is administered in all Christianity. But also therein a grave deviation has taken place. Our aim is to present the teaching and the practice of baptism as was administered at the beginning of the New Testament church and is recorded in the Holy Scriptures. Perhaps it is shocking for the reader to come to know that so many who function as servants of God are being themselves in deception. Actually it is commonly known that churches do not always follow the Bible instructions, but various denominations have their own conviction and practice which is valid for them.

Our Lord says, “He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” (Mk. 16:16). The first condition the Lord Himself requires of the one to be baptised is to believe. As recorded in Rom. 10:17, faith comes by hearing the preaching of the Word of God. For this reason in the great commission, the preaching of the Gospel was placed first and then baptism for those who believed. This fact was confirmed in the first sermon Peter held on the Day of Pentecost and became the apostolic practice valid for the duration of the New Testament church. “Then they that gladly received his word were baptised …” (Acts 2:41). It is important that the proclamation of the Gospel led to the personal decision for Jesus Christ.

In the following example, we shall see that the personal faith is the precondition for Biblical baptism. The evangelist Philip was led by the Spirit of God to meet the Ethiopian eunuch who was on his return journey from Jerusalem reading the prophet Isaiah. While sitting on his waggon, the man of God acquainted him with the Gospel. Then he spontaneously said to him, “See, here is water. What doth hinder me to be baptised?” The man of God knew of the necessity that faith should come first and therefore he answered, “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest, And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still; and they both went down into the water, both Philip and eunuch; and he baptised him.” (Acts 8:36-38). At the time of John the Baptist and also in the days of our Lord and the apostles, baptism was administered in this Biblical way by immersion. Both, the one to be baptised and the one who did the baptising, went into the water. Thus it also was at the baptism of Jesus Christ. “And Jesus, when he was baptised, went up straightway out of the water …” (Mt. 3:16a). A baptism whereby the candidate does not enter the water and is not being immersed and does not come out of the water, is not the kind of baptism administered with Christ and the apostles and, therefore, is not the scriptural way to baptise.

The disciples understood their Lord and the commission He gave very well, “He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved …” In the Holy Scriptures and in the first centuries after Christ there is no trace of any infant baptism. The Holy Scripture does not state anything about god-parents nor the teaching that an infant is made free from the original sin. Such is not recorded in the Bible. Also, nothing is said that the new birth takes place through baptism. Whoever accepts God’s Word to be the truth will let himself be convicted by the Holy Scriptures which are the absolute in all questions of faith.

As can be seen, right from the first sermon of Peter and in all the other cases, repentance which leads to conversion to Christ, precedes baptism. An infant does not know at all what is going on, has no knowledge of sin and cannot be sorry and repent for the same. The sprinkling or the pouring on infants is actually no baptism at all. The creed “instead of circumcision, the sign of the first covenant, in the New Testament baptism is established” is not true. It is of no scriptural utterance.

There are theologians who seek to open backdoor’s to defend infant baptism. They refer to Acts 16:42 and claim that the jailer in the city of Philippi was baptised with his whole house. Hypothetically they assert that perhaps also children were there. The report of course does not confirm this at all. Before baptism was administered, we are told, “And they spoke unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.” (Acts 16:32). Apparently in this house were people able to hear the preaching of God’s Word, who then believed and were baptised.

Others who defend infant baptism use the special utterance of our Lord, “Permit the little children to come unto me …” (Mk. 10:14). Whoever continues to read on in the said Scripture would quickly notice that the Lord did not sprinkle water upon any infant, but rather “… he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them and blessed them.” (Mk. 10:16).

Then there are those who do not put any emphasis on baptism at all. They refer to the statement Paul made, “For Christ sent me not to baptise but to preach the gospel …” (1 Cor. 1:17). This statement does not annul the great commission to preach the Gospel and to baptise. It only shows that Paul’s ministry was primarily the preaching and teaching, and, therefore, he left the administration of baptism to the other brethren.

Church historians also found out that in early Christianity and during the first centuries the believers were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. The formula “In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost” was introduced with the commencing of the Roman church (Dr. J. J. Herzog, Abriß der gesamten Kirchengeschichte, Vol. 1, pg. 29; K. D. Schmidt, Grundriß der Kirchengeschichte, pg. 73, a. o.). The commission found in Mt. 28:19, “Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” was properly understood and correctly administered by the apostles and in the post apostolic times. Whoever reads the text reflecting about the same will quickly understand that the point therein is not to create a formula but rather to recognise the name used in baptism. “baptising them in the name …” Therefore, they baptised according to this condition in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

God manifested Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. This happened in the New Testament covenant name Yahshua — Jesus into which all the children of God in the New Testament are baptised. God is our Father, therefore we pray, “Our Father, who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name …” The concern is the name into which we are to be baptised.

The unique testimony from the days of the apostles is overwhelming and clear. After the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the apostle Peter preached and his sermon is recorded. To those who believed and were touched by his sermon, he said, “Repent, and be baptised, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins …” (Acts 2:38). At the inauguration day of the early church, those who came to believe were told what they must do and how they are to be baptised. Peter had the revelation of the name which was meant by the Lord Himself. Thereby the apostolic baptism practice from the beginning was documented.

Philip preached the Gospel in Samaria and baptised those who were saved. Therefore, we are told, “… only they were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 8:16). As every case must be established upon two or three witnesses, we shall see the way the apostle Paul was teaching baptism. “When they heard this, they were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus.” (Acts 19:5). Whether in Jerusalem, Samaria, or Ephesus, whether by Peter, Philip, or Paul, all who were baptised were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Holy Ghost can for ever only reveal the same.

Just to understand the matter more clearly a very simple but practical comparison is worth showing. Whenever a teacher would give the problem and ask, “How much is three times three?”, the pupil would not answer, “Three times three is three times three”, he would have to give the answer — the result of the problem. It is not comprehensive how the majority of theologians repeat Mt. 28:19 like a magic formula without knowing the result of the very commission we are to carry out. Peter, Paul and all the apostles and the men of God in the first centuries knew the solution — the name. They knew what that name was and used it.

The disciples carried out the commission one-hundred percent according to the expressed desire of their Master when they baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Whoever does not baptise that way has not recognised the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, in which we are to be baptised into. The assumption that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, are names as being taught and defended in a dogmatic way by the majority of theologians is wrong. They are major characteristics or attributes of the special manifestations of God in the New Testament. God is not called Father, He is Father; God is not called Son, God is not called Holy Spirit, He is Son; He is Holy Spirit. He not only manifested Himself, he revealed His New Testament covenant name.

As so often, the secret is hidden in the name; it has to be revealed. In no way is baptism unimportant, because the Lord requested it. It was administered even to Him by John and confirmed by God. But it has to be carried out properly. There is not one case recorded in the Holy Scriptures where someone was baptised in a threefold formula.

Why the traditional Catholic practice of baptism was adopted by the majority of the protestant churches will also remain a mystery. Those Christians who believe the Biblical truth must have before them the fact that all who are baptised into the formula “in the name of the Father, in the name of the Son, and in the name of the Holy Ghost” actually are baptised into the Roman Catholic Church. The Jesuit cardinal Augustine Bea expressed this thought of the long range which is set before us, “According to Bea the Pope is father of all believers, also of all the evangelical Christians who are validly baptised, and it only requires a pleasant returning of them to the mother church.” (O. Markmann, Irrtümer der katholischen Kirche, pg. 22). Whatever is meant by the statement “valid baptism” does not need any further explanation. The Biblical, apostolic baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ is being rejected by the Roman church as heresy.

Being spiritually ignorant, the protestant churches and practically all denominations, return to the mother church being represented through ecumenicism and the World Council of Churches. Some sprinkle, some pour, some immerse three times using the known formula. Of the apostle Paul, we read in connection with his conversion, “… and he received sight, and arose, and was baptised.” (Acts 9:18). In the epistle to the Romans he informs us how it was done, “Know ye not that, as many of us as were baptised into Jesus Christ were baptised into his death? Therefore, we are buried with him by baptism into death, that as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” (Rom. 6:3-4).

Those who observe matters a little closer will find out that things here are not just concerned with something shown as an action but rather that men are brought back into the proper relationship with God. This happens through repentance, conversion, the forgiveness of sins, believing in Jesus Christ as personal saviour, being baptised showing forth to have accepted Him, being crucified and buried with Him and raised with Him to walk in a new life. The renewing experience and the new birth does not happen through baptism. But as it is written, “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit.” (Tit.
3:5). The right baptism has its place and is being administered to the renewed and born again Christians.

To the Colossians, Paul writes, “Buried with him in baptism, in which also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.” (Col. 2:12). In the next chapter the apostle declares, “If ye, then, be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, … For ye are dead, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.”

The apostle Peter describes baptism as to be a covenant of a good conscience with God. He compares the water into which the candidate is immersed with the ark of Noah. “The like figure unto which even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), by the resurrection of Jesus Christ …” (1 Pet. 3:21).

When Peter preached in the house of Cornelius he said in reference to Jesus Christ, “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins …” After this the question was presented, “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptised, who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptised in the name of the Lord.” (Acts 10:43-48). The forgiveness of sins is received by believing in the accomplished work of redemption. Whoever has accepted Christ is being baptised in the name of the Lord. “For ye are all the sons of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptised into Christ have put on Christ.” (Gal. 3:26-27).

To the church at Ephesus the apostle Paul writes, “One Lord, one faith, one baptism …” (4:5). Today we have various kinds of baptisms, of faiths, and different teachings about the Lord. The harmonious teaching of the Scriptures in reference to Biblical baptism cannot be easily overlooked. The teachings laid down in the beginning are the valid pattern as long as the church of the living God is on the earth. The trinitarian baptism practice which came into existence with the creation of the state church and was introduced when all were forced into Christianity is indeed unscriptural. There is only one original. Everything else is a falsification. Even if Mt. 28:19 is being pulled into the argument, the apostles understood the commission correctly and carried out the same literally. The formula “in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” is being used all over Europe in a very suspicious way. For instance, spells are being put on man and cattle. For both the magic formula is being used and sickness of cattle and human beings vanishes. The entire practice of spiritism, even the entry into the free-mason lodge is practised in this trinitarian formula. Everyone dealing with soul consultations knows about the state people come into by all these occult practices. When asking the ones concerned they reply, “Well, it happened in the name of God” without comprehending that the whole thing is hocus-pocus under religious disguise. People come into Satan’s bondage without realising it. The ignorance in this regard cries high unto heaven. The result of the wrong comprehension of the Godhead — the trinity idea is connected with all thoughts of misunderstanding by the enemy.

The common baptism practice was also deeply rooted in the reformer Martin Luther. In his Bible translation, he used the wording of the actual formula avoiding the original text, “… and baptise them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”, whereas in the amplified version it says properly, “baptising them into the name …” For those who comprehend the matter it is a sky high difference. Someone can act in the name of a firm, in the name of a government etc., but in baptism we are as redeemed aware of the fact that we should be baptised into this name given for our redemption. We are children of the new covenant and acknowledge the covenant name Jesus. As the bride accepts the name of the bridegroom, so the Bride of Christ accepts the name of the Bridegroom and confirms thereby to be in the covenant relationship with Him.

The apostle Peter made the statement, “… for there is no other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12). The importance of the name of the Lord in this connection is shown by the fact that Peter refers to in his first sermon on the Day of Pentecost reciting the promise found in the prophet Joel, “… And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Acts 2:21; Joel 2:32). The prophet Joel meant Yahweh, everyone who would call upon Him, should be saved. Peter could have only meant the same Lord Yahweh Who then was manifested as Yahshua — Saviour. Baptism for all who truly believe is of greatest importance to be administered in the valid New Testament covenant name.

It does not say, “baptise them in the names” (plural) which would be grammatically right, if Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were different names. Thanks be to God that the text is clearly stated in the singular. “… and baptised them into the name …” which is according to the testimony of the apostles, “Lord Jesus Christ”. Regrettably the true Biblical knowledge in this regard was lost and almost the entire clergy is trapped into unscriptural tradition which they esteem highly and defend vigorously. One of the reasons could be that the original meaning of Yahshua which means Yahweh Saviour was lost by the using of the Greek version of Jesus. Later on tradition made its course using the so-called three “high” holy names without having the revelation of the one true name.

When people today are asking like on that notable Day of Pentecost, “What must we do to be saved”, then they have to receive the same answer, “Repent, and be baptised, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 2:38). No one has the right to change or argue away the original Gospel of Jesus Christ and the apostolic practice.

Great Bible teachers view the scriptural baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ as heresy. Here the question must be permitted, “What is heresy? The right or the wrong?” The matured readers will judge for themselves, whether they will believe the Lord and His apostles or follow a tradition not found in the Scriptures, and, therefore, does not coincide with the original teaching and practice. “Thus saith the Lord, Stand in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk in it, and ye shall find rest for your souls.” (Jer. 6:16).

The Holy Scriptures give us a complete information about the Biblical baptism. Baptism is administered in all Christianity. But also therein a grave deviation has taken place. Our aim is to present the teaching and the practice of baptism as was administered at the beginning of the New Testament church and is recorded in the Holy Scriptures. Perhaps it is shocking for the reader to come to know that so many who function as servants of God are being themselves in deception. Actually it is commonly known that churches do not always follow the Bible instructions, but various denominations have their own conviction and practice which is valid for them.

Our Lord says, “He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” (Mk. 16:16). The first condition the Lord Himself requires of the one to be baptised is to believe. As recorded in Rom. 10:17, faith comes by hearing the preaching of the Word of God. For this reason in the great commission, the preaching of the Gospel was placed first and then baptism for those who believed. This fact was confirmed in the first sermon Peter held on the Day of Pentecost and became the apostolic practice valid for the duration of the New Testament church. “Then they that gladly received his word were baptised …” (Acts 2:41). It is important that the proclamation of the Gospel led to the personal decision for Jesus Christ.

In the following example, we shall see that the personal faith is the precondition for Biblical baptism. The evangelist Philip was led by the Spirit of God to meet the Ethiopian eunuch who was on his return journey from Jerusalem reading the prophet Isaiah. While sitting on his waggon, the man of God acquainted him with the Gospel. Then he spontaneously said to him, “See, here is water. What doth hinder me to be baptised?” The man of God knew of the necessity that faith should come first and therefore he answered, “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest, And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still; and they both went down into the water, both Philip and eunuch; and he baptised him.” (Acts 8:36-38). At the time of John the Baptist and also in the days of our Lord and the apostles, baptism was administered in this Biblical way by immersion. Both, the one to be baptised and the one who did the baptising, went into the water. Thus it also was at the baptism of Jesus Christ. “And Jesus, when he was baptised, went up straightway out of the water …” (Mt. 3:16a). A baptism whereby the candidate does not enter the water and is not being immersed and does not come out of the water, is not the kind of baptism administered with Christ and the apostles and, therefore, is not the scriptural way to baptise.

The disciples understood their Lord and the commission He gave very well, “He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved …” In the Holy Scriptures and in the first centuries after Christ there is no trace of any infant baptism. The Holy Scripture does not state anything about god-parents nor the teaching that an infant is made free from the original sin. Such is not recorded in the Bible. Also, nothing is said that the new birth takes place through baptism. Whoever accepts God’s Word to be the truth will let himself be convicted by the Holy Scriptures which are the absolute in all questions of faith.

As can be seen, right from the first sermon of Peter and in all the other cases, repentance which leads to conversion to Christ, precedes baptism. An infant does not know at all what is going on, has no knowledge of sin and cannot be sorry and repent for the same. The sprinkling or the pouring on infants is actually no baptism at all. The creed “instead of circumcision, the sign of the first covenant, in the New Testament baptism is established” is not true. It is of no scriptural utterance.

There are theologians who seek to open backdoor’s to defend infant baptism. They refer to Acts 16:42 and claim that the jailer in the city of Philippi was baptised with his whole house. Hypothetically they assert that perhaps also children were there. The report of course does not confirm this at all. Before baptism was administered, we are told, “And they spoke unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.” (Acts 16:32). Apparently in this house were people able to hear the preaching of God’s Word, who then believed and were baptised.

Others who defend infant baptism use the special utterance of our Lord, “Permit the little children to come unto me …” (Mk. 10:14). Whoever continues to read on in the said Scripture would quickly notice that the Lord did not sprinkle water upon any infant, but rather “… he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them and blessed them.” (Mk. 10:16).

Then there are those who do not put any emphasis on baptism at all. They refer to the statement Paul made, “For Christ sent me not to baptise but to preach the gospel …” (1 Cor. 1:17). This statement does not annul the great commission to preach the Gospel and to baptise. It only shows that Paul’s ministry was primarily the preaching and teaching, and, therefore, he left the administration of baptism to the other brethren.

Church historians also found out that in early Christianity and during the first centuries the believers were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. The formula “In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost” was introduced with the commencing of the Roman church (Dr. J. J. Herzog, Abriß der gesamten Kirchengeschichte, Vol. 1, pg. 29; K. D. Schmidt, Grundriß der Kirchengeschichte, pg. 73, a. o.). The commission found in Mt. 28:19, “Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” was properly understood and correctly administered by the apostles and in the post apostolic times. Whoever reads the text reflecting about the same will quickly understand that the point therein is not to create a formula but rather to recognise the name used in baptism. “baptising them in the name …” Therefore, they baptised according to this condition in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

God manifested Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. This happened in the New Testament covenant name Yahshua — Jesus into which all the children of God in the New Testament are baptised. God is our Father, therefore we pray, “Our Father, who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name …” The concern is the name into which we are to be baptised.

The unique testimony from the days of the apostles is overwhelming and clear. After the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the apostle Peter preached and his sermon is recorded. To those who believed and were touched by his sermon, he said, “Repent, and be baptised, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins …” (Acts 2:38). At the inauguration day of the early church, those who came to believe were told what they must do and how they are to be baptised. Peter had the revelation of the name which was meant by the Lord Himself. Thereby the apostolic baptism practice from the beginning was documented.

Philip preached the Gospel in Samaria and baptised those who were saved. Therefore, we are told, “… only they were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 8:16). As every case must be established upon two or three witnesses, we shall see the way the apostle Paul was teaching baptism. “When they heard this, they were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus.” (Acts 19:5). Whether in Jerusalem, Samaria, or Ephesus, whether by Peter, Philip, or Paul, all who were baptised were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Holy Ghost can for ever only reveal the same.

Just to understand the matter more clearly a very simple but practical comparison is worth showing. Whenever a teacher would give the problem and ask, “How much is three times three?”, the pupil would not answer, “Three times three is three times three”, he would have to give the answer — the result of the problem. It is not comprehensive how the majority of theologians repeat Mt. 28:19 like a magic formula without knowing the result of the very commission we are to carry out. Peter, Paul and all the apostles and the men of God in the first centuries knew the solution — the name. They knew what that name was and used it.

The disciples carried out the commission one-hundred percent according to the expressed desire of their Master when they baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Whoever does not baptise that way has not recognised the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, in which we are to be baptised into. The assumption that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, are names as being taught and defended in a dogmatic way by the majority of theologians is wrong. They are major characteristics or attributes of the special manifestations of God in the New Testament. God is not called Father, He is Father; God is not called Son, God is not called Holy Spirit, He is Son; He is Holy Spirit. He not only manifested Himself, he revealed His New Testament covenant name.

As so often, the secret is hidden in the name; it has to be revealed. In no way is baptism unimportant, because the Lord requested it. It was administered even to Him by John and confirmed by God. But it has to be carried out properly. There is not one case recorded in the Holy Scriptures where someone was baptised in a threefold formula.

Why the traditional Catholic practice of baptism was adopted by the majority of the protestant churches will also remain a mystery. Those Christians who believe the Biblical truth must have before them the fact that all who are baptised into the formula “in the name of the Father, in the name of the Son, and in the name of the Holy Ghost” actually are baptised into the Roman Catholic Church. The Jesuit cardinal Augustine Bea expressed this thought of the long range which is set before us, “According to Bea the Pope is father of all believers, also of all the evangelical Christians who are validly baptised, and it only requires a pleasant returning of them to the mother church.” (O. Markmann, Irrtümer der katholischen Kirche, pg. 22). Whatever is meant by the statement “valid baptism” does not need any further explanation. The Biblical, apostolic baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ is being rejected by the Roman church as heresy.

Being spiritually ignorant, the protestant churches and practically all denominations, return to the mother church being represented through ecumenicism and the World Council of Churches. Some sprinkle, some pour, some immerse three times using the known formula. Of the apostle Paul, we read in connection with his conversion, “… and he received sight, and arose, and was baptised.” (Acts 9:18). In the epistle to the Romans he informs us how it was done, “Know ye not that, as many of us as were baptised into Jesus Christ were baptised into his death? Therefore, we are buried with him by baptism into death, that as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” (Rom. 6:3-4).

Those who observe matters a little closer will find out that things here are not just concerned with something shown as an action but rather that men are brought back into the proper relationship with God. This happens through repentance, conversion, the forgiveness of sins, believing in Jesus Christ as personal saviour, being baptised showing forth to have accepted Him, being crucified and buried with Him and raised with Him to walk in a new life. The renewing experience and the new birth does not happen through baptism. But as it is written, “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit.” (Tit.
3:5). The right baptism has its place and is being administered to the renewed and born again Christians.

To the Colossians, Paul writes, “Buried with him in baptism, in which also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.” (Col. 2:12). In the next chapter the apostle declares, “If ye, then, be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, … For ye are dead, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.”

The apostle Peter describes baptism as to be a covenant of a good conscience with God. He compares the water into which the candidate is immersed with the ark of Noah. “The like figure unto which even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), by the resurrection of Jesus Christ …” (1 Pet. 3:21).

When Peter preached in the house of Cornelius he said in reference to Jesus Christ, “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins …” After this the question was presented, “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptised, who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptised in the name of the Lord.” (Acts 10:43-48). The forgiveness of sins is received by believing in the accomplished work of redemption. Whoever has accepted Christ is being baptised in the name of the Lord. “For ye are all the sons of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptised into Christ have put on Christ.” (Gal. 3:26-27).

To the church at Ephesus the apostle Paul writes, “One Lord, one faith, one baptism …” (4:5). Today we have various kinds of baptisms, of faiths, and different teachings about the Lord. The harmonious teaching of the Scriptures in reference to Biblical baptism cannot be easily overlooked. The teachings laid down in the beginning are the valid pattern as long as the church of the living God is on the earth. The trinitarian baptism practice which came into existence with the creation of the state church and was introduced when all were forced into Christianity is indeed unscriptural. There is only one original. Everything else is a falsification. Even if Mt. 28:19 is being pulled into the argument, the apostles understood the commission correctly and carried out the same literally. The formula “in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” is being used all over Europe in a very suspicious way. For instance, spells are being put on man and cattle. For both the magic formula is being used and sickness of cattle and human beings vanishes. The entire practice of spiritism, even the entry into the free-mason lodge is practised in this trinitarian formula. Everyone dealing with soul consultations knows about the state people come into by all these occult practices. When asking the ones concerned they reply, “Well, it happened in the name of God” without comprehending that the whole thing is hocus-pocus under religious disguise. People come into Satan’s bondage without realising it. The ignorance in this regard cries high unto heaven. The result of the wrong comprehension of the Godhead — the trinity idea is connected with all thoughts of misunderstanding by the enemy.

The common baptism practice was also deeply rooted in the reformer Martin Luther. In his Bible translation, he used the wording of the actual formula avoiding the original text, “… and baptise them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”, whereas in the amplified version it says properly, “baptising them into the name …” For those who comprehend the matter it is a sky high difference. Someone can act in the name of a firm, in the name of a government etc., but in baptism we are as redeemed aware of the fact that we should be baptised into this name given for our redemption. We are children of the new covenant and acknowledge the covenant name Jesus. As the bride accepts the name of the bridegroom, so the Bride of Christ accepts the name of the Bridegroom and confirms thereby to be in the covenant relationship with Him.

The apostle Peter made the statement, “… for there is no other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12). The importance of the name of the Lord in this connection is shown by the fact that Peter refers to in his first sermon on the Day of Pentecost reciting the promise found in the prophet Joel, “… And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Acts 2:21; Joel 2:32). The prophet Joel meant Yahweh, everyone who would call upon Him, should be saved. Peter could have only meant the same Lord Yahweh Who then was manifested as Yahshua — Saviour. Baptism for all who truly believe is of greatest importance to be administered in the valid New Testament covenant name.

It does not say, “baptise them in the names” (plural) which would be grammatically right, if Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were different names. Thanks be to God that the text is clearly stated in the singular. “… and baptised them into the name …” which is according to the testimony of the apostles, “Lord Jesus Christ”. Regrettably the true Biblical knowledge in this regard was lost and almost the entire clergy is trapped into unscriptural tradition which they esteem highly and defend vigorously. One of the reasons could be that the original meaning of Yahshua which means Yahweh Saviour was lost by the using of the Greek version of Jesus. Later on tradition made its course using the so-called three “high” holy names without having the revelation of the one true name.

When people today are asking like on that notable Day of Pentecost, “What must we do to be saved”, then they have to receive the same answer, “Repent, and be baptised, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 2:38). No one has the right to change or argue away the original Gospel of Jesus Christ and the apostolic practice.

Great Bible teachers view the scriptural baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ as heresy. Here the question must be permitted, “What is heresy? The right or the wrong?” The matured readers will judge for themselves, whether they will believe the Lord and His apostles or follow a tradition not found in the Scriptures, and, therefore, does not coincide with the original teaching and practice. “Thus saith the Lord, Stand in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk in it, and ye shall find rest for your souls.” (Jer. 6:16).