The Mystery of Matthew 28:19

[Mike R. Prevost]

Mat 28:18-20 KJV And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. {19} Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: {20} Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

 

I know that the words of this passage are somewhat in controversy -- this may not be exactly what Jesus said.  But when writing about baptism, it's almost impossible to not talk about this verse, and it's usually not very effective to argue that Jesus didn't say these words.  It seems like we usually want to talk about what Jesus DIDN'T mean or COULDN'T have meant.  E.g., "He COULDN'T have meant for us to say these exact words at baptism because the word "name" is singular!", etc.  It seems like we should have a good, convincing explanation of what He DID mean and WHY He chose to use these words -- an explanation that fits with our understanding of baptism.

 

Assuming that He did say to baptize "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost", what was He trying to convey by using these three titles in the context of baptism?

 

I've wondered about this for a long time.  Hopefully someone out there has a satisfying answer.  Any ideas?

 

[David Huston]

The following is a portion is from a tract I wrote which is being used a lot in Nigeria. It proably doesn't answer the question fully, but it may contain a few significant points.

 

What name did Jesus have in view? Did He tell His apostles that He possessed all authority in heaven and on earth, therefore, go baptize in my name plus two others?

As a companion passage, Mark 16:15-17 says, "And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues....’"

Moreover, Luke 24:46-47 says, "Then He said to them, ‘Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.’"

How did the apostles understand Jesus’ instruction about baptism? Speaking to a crowd immediately after the ascension of Christ, Peter told the people, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38).

Jesus was not giving His apostles a baptismal formula in Matthew 28:19; He was giving them a revelation. They knew that the name of the Son was Jesus. But Jesus wanted them to understand that Jesus was also the name of the Father, for Jesus said in John 5:43, "I have come in My Father’s name...." In John 17:6, He said to the Father, "I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given Me...." What is the only name Jesus manifested? Obviously it is the name Jesus!

The name of the Father is Jesus. Why? Because the Father and the Son are not two distinct divine persons. The Son IS the Father manifested in the flesh. In John 14:9, Jesus said, "He who has seen Me has seen the Father...." So how could the Father have a name different from the Son?

But what about the name of the Holy Spirit? John 14:26 says, "The Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things...." The Holy Spirit is not a third divine person distinct from the Father and the Son. The Holy Spirit is the Father’s Spirit.

John 4:24 says that "God is Spirit." 1 Peter 1:16 says that God is holy. Therefore, God is the Holy Spirit. In Philippians 1:19 He is called "the Spirit of Jesus Christ...." The spirit of a man doesn’t have a name different from the man. Therefore, the name of the Holy Spirit is Jesus. So when Jesus told His apostles to baptize in the name (singular) of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, He was telling them to baptize in the name of Jesus!

[Mike R. Prevost]

Very good writeup, Bro.  But do you have any ideas about why He would have used those words in the first place?  Why didn't He just say "in My name"?  Surely there is some intended meaning.

Or do you believe that this really was a later Trinitarian corruption?

Thanks.

[Mike R. Prevost]

I was just reading in Acts 1 and Jesus makes reference to the Father alone knowing the times and the seasons. This got me thinking about this idea of Jesus referencing the Father and it may have some bearing on Mat 28:19. See if my rambling makes any sense at all.

So Jesus talked about the Father and the Holy Ghost (e.g., Joh 14) and this was confusing to the disciples. Perhaps we can explain the titles in Mat 28:19 in terms of how Jesus referenced the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost elsewhere.

So Jesus, the Son, was God manifest in the flesh. But He was also a man. And, although He sometimes spoke as God (e.g., "Before Abraham was, I am"), He usually spoke as a man, and learned and grew as a man:

Luk 2:52 KJV And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.

Mat 24:36 KJV But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

Act 1:7 KJV And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

So Jesus, speaking as a man, made reference to God using the title “Father”. There were things that the Father knew, that the Son did not. There were things that the Father could do, that the Son could not. So the term “the Father” refers to the universal, unbounded, infinite, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent Creator of the universe. The term “the Son” refers to God manifest in the flesh as a man. The two roles are distinct. The Father is God in His unbounded, infinite “perspective” (for lack of a better word), but the Son is God in a limited, human perspective. That is, “the Son” is God experiencing human life in all its limitations, just like we do (thus being our “mediator”), but without surrendering His unbounded, infinite qualities. “The Son” is God looking at the world through the human eyes of the man Christ Jesus – as an “insider”. “The Father” is God looking at the world as the omnipotent Creator – as an “outsider”. Not two persons, but two perspectives that the One Person views and interacts with the world. The Holy Ghost, then, is God as a spiritual force that interacts with mankind in the spiritual dimension – God at work “inside” the world of men – and, in the case of Christians, inside men themselves.

Given that framework, let looks at what Jesus may have meant by His choice of words in Mat 28:19.

Mat 28:18-20 KJV And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. {19} Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: {20} Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Jesus starts out by saying “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” This may be key to understanding the passage. “Power” here is EXOUSIA which means “authority”. He is asserting that He has complete authority over the entire universe: heaven and earth – both the spiritual (“heaven”) and physical (“earth”) dimensions. On the basis of this power, He sends the apostles into the world (“Go ye therefore”). To do something “in the name” of someone is to do it in their authority (as in the “power of attorney”). The apostles were sent from Him to do His will. And they were to go and teach and baptize on His behalf, as His agents.

So why say “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”? Perhaps Jesus was emphasizing this idea of “all power […] in heaven and in earth”. That is, perhaps He was further emphasizing the fullness of all the ways God relates to them – they were sent out in the authority of the unbounded, omnipotent Creator (“the Father”), and of their friend/teacher/master (“the Son”), and of God's spiritual force in the earth which would lead them and empower them in the work they were to do (“the Holy Ghost”).  So maybe Jesus choice of words were intended to emphasize magnitude and pervasiveness -- the transcendence and the immanence -- of the One in whose authority they were sent.

Does that make any sense? Anyone have any better understanding of why Jesus may have used these words?

[Stan Hallett]

I have researched extensively trying to determine if Matthew 28:19 was a Trinitarian perversion of the Word of God as I did with 1 John 5:7 which is.  However, I could not make this determination and therefore have to accept it as His spoken Word.

Therefore there are three things we know:

1.) Jesus knew that Matthew 28:19 would be written as it was, and that it would be a point on contention in the future as he spoke those very words.

2.) The knowledge of who Jesus really was is a revelation (Matthew 16:17).

3.) God allowed the Gospel be hidden (2 Corinthians 4:3,4), and He hid these things form the wise and he prudent, and revealed it unto babes (Matthew 11:25).

I believe that Jesus spoke it just that way on purpose.  We know the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.  Thank you Jesus!

[Mike R. Prevost]

Bro Stan,

Are you saying that Jesus intentionally gave scriptural "ammunition" to the Trinitarians that would arise hundreds of years later so that the Gospel would be hid and they would be deceived and deceive billions and billions of other souls?

I often hear people say that you have to have some great spiritual revelation to understand that Jesus was the One God manifest in the flesh.  The idea does sound mystical and spiritual and it may preach well, but I have never believed this.  The Oneness of God is the most natural understanding of the scriptures.  The Bible screams it out.  You can't get Trinitarian theology from Jewish monotheism.  This only requires spiritual revelation for those who were raised under the bondage of deceptive false teaching.  However, since the deceptive false teaching is by far the mainstream, I can definitely understand why people think a miraculous spiritual revelation is required.  And, it may indeed be required some of the people who were brought up as Trinitarians.  Personally, I was raised a heathen, so I didn't have any of that baggage.  ;)

[Mike R. Prevost]

David Huston said:

John 4:24 says that "God is Spirit." 1 Peter 1:16 says that God is holy. Therefore, God is the Holy Spirit. In Philippians 1:19 He is called "the Spirit of Jesus Christ...." The spirit of a man doesn’t have a name different from the man. Therefore, the name of the Holy Spirit is Jesus. So when Jesus told His apostles to baptize in the name (singular) of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, He was telling them to baptize in the name of Jesus!

This just triggered a thought.  [A bit unrelated to this thread, but maybe worth sharing here because I thought of it when reading Bro Houston's writeup.]

The Trinitarians say:

• The Father is God.
• Jesus is God.
• The Holy Spirit is God.

The Oneness people say:

• God is the Father.
• God is Jesus.
• God is the Holy Spirit.

[Stan Hallett]

Mike,

I would not have used the term "scriptural ammunition" since I do not believe that was God's intent. I understand how one might perceive it as such.

Yes, I do believe that Jesus specifically stated it that way so that His disciples knew what name to baptize in, as well as anyone that God revealed Himself to. For they did know what the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost was.

Yes, I know that the truth is as plain as the nose on our collective faces. . . to you and I. However, I have shared this truth with many people in my 61 years, and find it amazing how many cannot see it when it's right in front of them, and presented clearly, scripture upon scripture.

Think about it, could not God reveal Himself, and the truth to everyone so that they would have no choice but to understand and believe?

I have an overwhelming arsenal of scriptures and facts that prove out the Oneness of God. If it were simply a matter of geting people to sit down and take it all in, our assemblies would be overflowing! They are blind to it, and their hearts are hardened. 

Romans 9:13-26

 13* As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

 14* ¶ What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

 15* For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

 16* So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

 17* For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

 18* Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

 19* Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

 20* Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

 21* Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

I praise God and am thankful that he showed mercy to me, and revealed this marvelous truth! I know most will never see the truth, for they are blind to it.

[Mike R. Prevost]

Can you imaging trying to explain Mat 28:19 to a Trinitarian in these terms?

"You know friend, Jesus used these words 'Father, Son, and Holy Ghost' to obscure the real truth of Jesus name baptism so that you would have to be a little more diligent and search out the rest of the scriptures.  He intended the Gospel to be a little bit hard to figure out.  You just haven't received the spiritual revelation of it yet." 

;-)

[Stan Hallett]

No, He didn't use those words to obscure the truth but rather reveal the truth of who He was. However, He knew that there were many that would be hid from that truth.  

Telling that to a Trinitarian would not help, nor would anything that you could think of, until God revealed it to them.  Just my opinion.

[Mike R. Prevost]

So Jesus was using "insider language".  He knew that the apostles knew that He was the One God manifest in the flesh, and that the Holy Ghost was the One God working in the earth, and He used this "Father, Son, Holy Ghost" language to communicate something to the apostles regarding their commission to go, teach, and baptize.  So, He was saying something along the lines of:

"All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Omnipresent Creator ["the Father"], who robed Himself in flesh as our mediator and sacrifice ["the Son"], and is working in the earth on behalf of the Kingdom ["the Holy Ghost"]:  Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world."

This is the understanding I am coming to about the meaning Jesus was trying to convey through His choice of words.  Jesus was using insider language to tell them something about Himself, His authority, and/or the nature of their commission.

[David Huston]

Another way of thinking about this is that Jesus had been talking for quite a while to His disciples about the Father and the Spirit, so at this meeting, just before His ascension, He wanted to make sure they understand that everything He had been talking to them about was summed up in the one name, His name, the name Jesus. Some day I would like to write a book on John 13-17 called "The Things Jesus Didn't Want the Devil to Hear." As you know, Satan entered Judas, Judas left the Last Supper, then Jesus told His discipls all this rich esoteric stuff, some of which is tough even for us Oneness people. I'm sure a lot has been lost in the translation.

Just wanted to add also that, like Stan, I have come to the conclusion that the words of Matthew 28:19 were indeed spoken by Jesus and that the so-called Trintarian language is actually revelatory language of the Oneness of God. I also agree that true Oneness is only understood by divine revelation. I have sat down with intelligent people in a calm thoughtful atmosphere and explained the Oneness of God in the clearest terms I can come up with, yet they can't seem to see it. In fact, I know plenty of "Oneness people" that I'm not sure really see it. So, yes, God is not hiding anything--Jesus is the revelation of God. Yet the very words that reveal spiritual truth to one person seem to obscure it to another. I suppose it all has to do with the condition of a person's heart (see Luke 8:9-10).    

[Mike R. Prevost]

David Huston said:

Another way of thinking about this is that Jesus had been talking for quite a while to His disciples about the Father and the Spirit, so at this meeting, just before His ascension, He wanted to make sure they understand that everything He had been talking to them about was summed up in the one name, His name, the name Jesus. [...]

Just wanted to add also that, like Stan, I have come to the conclusion that the words of Matthew 28:19 were indeed spoken by Jesus and that the so-called Trintarian language is actually revelatory language of the Oneness of God. 

Yes, that's a good point.  All of Jon 13-17 was spoken in the context of the Last Supper.  And the disciples were a bit confused over it all.  Now, this isn't exactly the context of Mat 28:19 -- this conversation happened shortly after the women told the apostles about the resurrection, just before He rose to Heaven (see end of Mar 16, end of Luk 24).  Probably the same meeting with doubting Thomas in Joh 20.  [And then according to Acts 1, He also appears to them for 40 more days and rises to Heaven again (or there was an unmentioned 40 day gap in Mar 16 and Luk 24).]  But, anyway, I do think you're right, that the wording of Mat 28:19 was spoken on the heels of all the teaching he did at the Lord's Supper and also after the resurrection.  And I do think that it was intended to be understood in that context.  Very good point.

David Huston said:

I also agree that true Oneness is only understood by divine revelation. I have sat down with intelligent people in a calm thoughtful atmosphere and explained the Oneness of God in the clearest terms I can come up with, yet they can't seem to see it. In fact, I know plenty of "Oneness people" that I'm not sure really see it. So, yes, God is not hiding anything--Jesus is the revelation of God. Yet the very words that reveal spiritual truth to one person seem to obscure it to another. I suppose it all has to do with the condition of a person's heart (see Luke 8:9-10).    

I know that it seems nearly impossible to get through to Trinitarians.  But I still have to disagree that it takes a special spiritual revelation to understand the Oneness of God in the general case.  I strongly believe in the perspicuity of Scripture -- the plain words of the Bible declare Oneness in clear terms.  It doesn't take special revelation for Jewish children to understand Oneness and it doesn't take special revelation for Oneness children to understand it.  It also doesn't take special revelation for people (like me) who were not raised in any kind of religion.  I think that what you are seeing is that is DOES often take a special working of God to give revelation to those who were raised Trinitarian -- a deliverance from a kind of mental and spiritual bondage.  This is has been most of the people we come in contact with.  I think that is changing though.  I think we will see a lot more people who don't know anything about Christianity and it will be much easier for them to understand Oneness.

Good discussion.  Helped me a lot with understanding Mat 28:19.