Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

Author	: Bill Kochman
Publish	: Mar. 13, 2025
Update	: May 18, 2025
Parts	: 02

Synopsis:



Continuing our discussion from part one, we now turn to our fifth and final source of information which again challenges the Roman Catholic Church's claim that Jesus actually said "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" in Matthew 28:19. Furthermore, this final source also demonstrates again that the Apostles never once baptized using the trinitarian phrase.

05. New Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge - Schaff-Herzog, 1951, Volume 1, page 1019:

On page 1019 of the New Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, under the title "Baptism", within Section I called "Biblical Doctrine", and under the subsection "Origin and Practice", we again see an argument regarding why Jesus could not have said "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

----- Begin Quote -----

"Conybeare has tried to prove that the original text of Matt. xxviii, 9 did not contain the baptismal command or the Trinitarian formula, which were interpolated, according to him, at the beginning of the third century. But since the investigations of Riggenbach, the ordinary reading may be considered the original. JESUS, HOWEVER, CAN NOT HAVE GIVEN HIS DISCIPLES THIS TRINITARIAN ORDER OF BAPTISM AFTER HIS RESURRECTION; FOR THE NEW TESTAMENT KNOWS ONLY BAPTISM IN THE NAME OF JESUS (Acts ii, 38; viii, 16; xix, 5; Gal. iii, 27; Rom. vi, 3; I Cor. i, 13-15), WHICH STILL OCCURS EVEN IN THE SECOND AND THIRD CENTURIES, WHILE THE TRINITARIAN FORMULA OCCURS ONLY IN MATT. XXVIII, 19 and then only again Didache vii, 1 and Justin, Apol., i, 61. It is unthinkable that the Apostolic Church thus disobeyed the express command of the Lord, which it otherwise considered the highest authority. Occurrences like those of Acts xix, 1-7 ought to have shown that THE PRESCRIBED FORMULA OF BAPTISM COULD NOT HAVE BEEN SHORTENED TO “THE NAME OF THE LORD JESUS,” if the character of baptism was to be retained as commanded. Judging from I Cor. i, 14-17, Paul did not know Matt. xxviii, 19; otherwise he could not have written that Christ had sent him not to baptize, but to preach the gospel. Moreover, had it been known at the Apostolic Council, the missionary spheres could not have been so separated that Peter was recognized as the apostle of the circumcision, Paul and Barnabas as apostles of the heathen (Gal. ii, 7-8); rather would the original apostles have claimed the universal apostolate for themselves. Finally, THE DISTINCTLY LITURGICAL CHARACTER OF THE FORMULA MATT. XXVIII, 19 IS STRANGE; IT WAS NOT THE WAY OF JESUS TO MAKE SUCH FORMULAS. Nevertheless this baptismal command contains the elements which constitute Christian baptism; for the activity of the Son in baptism implies the immediate cooperation of the Father; and from the beginning Christian baptism has been considered the mediating agency of the Holy Spirit. Therefore WHILE THE FORMAL AUTHENTICITY OF MATT. XXVIII, 19 MUST BE DISPUTED, it must still be assumed that the later congregations recognized as the will of their Lord that which they experienced as the effect of baptism and traced it back to a direct word of Jesus.

IF MATT. XXVIII, 19 CAN NOT BE CONSIDERED AS A BAPTISMAL COMMAND, WE HAVE NO DIRECT WORD OF JESUS WHICH INSTITUTES BAPTISM; for Mark xvi, 16 belongs to the spurious appendix of the Gospel and is dependent upon Matt. xxviii, 19. But from the very beginning the Christian Church has universally practised baptism (Acts ii, 38; viii, 36, 38; x, 48; I Cor. xii, 13; Gal. iii, 27; Eph. iv, 5; John iii, 5), and must therefore have been convinced that it was acting according to the will of the Lord."

----- End Quote -----

Thus, we have now seen five sources which dispute the claim of the Roman Catholic Church, and which clearly reveal that using the trinitarian phrase -- or baptismal formula -- was something that was forced upon Christians by the same church, which viewed itself, and continues to view itself, above the very Word of God.

Concerning Justin Martyr -- who is known as a saint to Roman Catholics -- he was born at Flavia Neapolis -- which was a city in the Roman province of Palestine -- in about the year 100 AD. He is believed to have converted to the Christian faith around the year 130 AD. As an apologist, he taught and defended the Christian faith in Asia Minor -- which is today a part of Turkey -- and at Rome, where he suffered martyrdom in about the year 165 AD. While Justin was a prolific writer, only three of his works have survived to this day in a single manuscript, of which there is also a copy of the same. These works include two of his treatises -- which are referred to as "Apologies" -- and his "Dialogue with the Jew Tryphon". In his dedication in the First Apology, Justin writes as follows:

----- Begin Quote -----

"To the Emperor Titus Ælius Adrianus Antoninus Pius Augustus Caesar, and to his son Verissimus the Philosopher, and to Lucius the Philosopher, the natural son of Caesar, and the adopted son of Pius, a lover of learning, and to the sacred Senate, with the whole People of the Romans, I, Justin, the son of Priscus and grandson of Bacchius, natives of Flavia Neapolis in Palestine, present this address and petition on behalf of those of all nations who are unjustly hated and wantonly abused, myself being one of them."

----- End Quote -----

Further down in "The First Apology" -- which is believed to have been written around 150 AD -- we arrive at Chapter 61 which is called "Christian Baptism". In it, Justin Martyr describes the practice of baptism, where he states that this practice involved naming the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, as we see by the following excerpt:

----- Begin Quote -----

"I will also relate the manner in which we dedicated ourselves to God when we had been made new through Christ; lest, if we omit this, we seem to be unfair in the explanation we are making. As many as are persuaded and believe that what we teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, are instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we praying and fasting with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, "Unless you be born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." John 3:5 Now, that it is impossible for those who have once been born to enter into their mothers' wombs, is manifest to all. And how those who have sinned and repent shall escape their sins, is declared by Esaias the prophet, as I wrote above; he thus speaks: "Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from your souls; learn to do well; judge the fatherless, and plead for the widow: and come and let us reason together, says the Lord. And though your sins be as scarlet, I will make them white like wool; and though they be as crimson, I will make them white as snow. But if you refuse and rebel, the sword shall devour you: for the mouth of the Lord has spoken it." Isaiah 1:16-20

And for this [rite] we have learned from the apostles this reason. Since at our birth we were born without our own knowledge or choice, by our parents coming together, and were brought up in bad habits and wicked training; in order that we may not remain the children of necessity and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe; he who leads to the laver the person that is to be washed calling him by this name alone. For no one can utter the name of the ineffable God; and if any one dare to say that there is a name, he raves with a hopeless madness. And this washing is called illumination, because they who learn these things are illuminated in their understandings. And in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and in the name of the Holy Ghost, who through the prophets foretold all things about Jesus, he who is illuminated is washed."

----- End Quote -----

In the online version of the Catholic Encyclopedia which can be found at https://www.newadvent.org, under the entry called "Baptism", under the section called "Matter and Form of the Sacrament" and under the subsection called "Form", it states in part the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

"In addition to the necessary word "baptize", or its equivalent, IT IS ALSO OBLIGATORY to mention the separate Persons of the Holy Trinity. This is the command of Christ to His Disciples, and as the sacrament has its efficacy from Him Who instituted it, we can not omit anything that He has prescribed. Nothing is more certain than that this has been the general understanding and practice of the Church. Tertullian tells us (On Baptism 13): "The law of baptism (tingendi) has been imposed and the form prescribed: Go, teach the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." St. Justin Martyr (First Apology 1) testifies to the practice in his time. St. Ambrose (On the Mysteries 4) declares: "Unless a person has been baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, he can not obtain the remission of his sins," St. Cyprian (Epistle 72), rejecting the validity of baptism given in the name of Christ only, affirms that the naming of all the Persons of the Trinity was commanded by the Lord (in plena et adunata Trinitate). The same is declared by many other primitive writers, as St. Jerome (IV, in Matt.), Origen (De Principiis I.2), St. Athanasius (Against the Arians, Oration 4), St. Augustine (On Baptism 6.25). It is not, of course, absolutely necessary that the common names Father, Son, and Holy Ghost be used, provided the Persons be expressed by words that are equivalent or synonymous. But a distinct naming of the Divine Persons is required and the form: "I baptize thee in the name of the Holy Trinity", would be of more than doubtful validity."

----- End Quote -----

Please notice that this section specifically states "it is also obligatory to mention the separate Persons of the Holy Trinity." In Volume 2 of the Catholic Encyclopedia, it says the very same thing, as we see by the following excerpt:

----- Begin Quote -----

"THE REQUISITE AND SOLE VALID FORM OF BAPTISM is: "I baptize thee (or This person is baptized) in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." This was the form given by Christ to His Disciples in the twenty-eighth chapter of St. Matthew's Gospel, as far, at least, as there is question of the invocation of the separate Persons of the Trinity and the expression of the nature of the action performed."

"The mind of the Church as to the necessity of serving the trinitarian formula in this sacrament has been clearly shown by her treatment of baptism conferred by heretics. ANY CEREMONY THAT DID NOT OBSERVE THIS FORM HAS BEEN DECLARED INVALID."

----- End Quote -----

So as you can plainly see, while the Apostles themselves are never shown a single time in the Scriptures to baptize using the trinitarian phrase, the Roman Catholic Church has taken it upon itself to enforce this rule, and to make it mandatory and obligatory. They in fact claim that any baptism which is not performed using the trinitarian phrase is invalid. Thus, by their own tradition, they have invalidated what we clearly see being done in the Book of Acts. As I said earlier, they have in effect put themselves above God's Word.

At this point, allow me to now address the hardcore KJV Bible extremists. My friends, I have just given you a clear example where the KJV Bible has been manipulated. Are you still going to deny it? In conclusion, as has been my longtime practice for many years now, I have provided you with the Scriptural evidence. Now it is up to you to determine what you want to believe. It is my hope that you will each choose Scriptural truth over the misguided traditions of men.

With these thoughts, I will bring this article to a close. It is my hope that you've found it informative and enlightening, and I pray that it has been a blessing in your life as well. If you have an account with Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr or with any other social network, I would really appreciate if you'd take the time to click or tap on the corresponding link that is found on this page. Thanks so much, and may God bless you abundantly!

For additional information and further study, you may want to refer to the list of reading resources below which were either mentioned in this article, or which contain topics which are related to this article. All of these articles are likewise located on the BBB Bible web server. To read these articles, simply click or tap on any link you see below.

Are You Flexible?
Are You Just a Baby Huey?
Cardinal Ratzinger's Rebellion
Churchianity or Christianity: Which Do You Practice?
Fifty Days Which Changed the World
Have You Read The New Scriptures Yet?
History Of The Authorized KJV Bible
Is the KJV Bible the Inerrant Word of God?
Lies and Deceptions of the Roman Catholic Church
Lying Wonders of Our Age
Mary Worship, Christianity and Roman Catholicism
Our Pagan World: The Easter Myth Exposed
Pontifex Maximus: Pagan High Priest to Roman Catholic Pope
Rise of the False Church
Roman Catholicism, Water Baptism and the Holy Trinity
Sol Invictus and the Birth of Christ
St. Malachy Prophecies and the Death of Pope Francis
Striving for Perfection: Are You a Sinless Saint?
To Pray or Not to Pray? That is the Question
Tradition or Truth? Old Wine or New Wine?
Understanding the Bible in Context

Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

---

---

Please avail yourself of other areas of the BBB Bible website. There are many treasures for you to discover.