Mark 16:16~"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

If you don’t mind, take a look at this short video and tell me where any of this is incorrect. Thank you.
Lesson 6- Pages 4-5
The first potential for error is in saying that 3120 were saved the first day of the Church. Acts 2:41 says "about 3000 souls". That is only one "significant digit". It could have been as few as 2501 or as many as 3499, and that would have included the 120 that were in the upper room. We are not given a specific number, just a number rounded to the nearest thousand, so making it more specific as he does is not appropriate.

Second error is his aim to find a "single" name for the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. It makes no sense to say "names" (as if there were several names of each of the three, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost). If I send you out to do something "in the name the counsel", and the counsel is made up of Bob, Bill, and Fred. I might say that I send you "in the name of Bob, Bill and Fred". These three are not one person, but they are one counsel, just as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one God.

Third, to do something "in the name of" someone does not mean that you even have to know the person's name. "In the name of the King" implies the authority of the king that you represent. You are doing what you are doing as if you were the king. The same applies to baptism. We do it on the authority of Jesus, who was God with all the authority of the Father (Matt 28:18). You do not have to say Jesus' name to baptize in His name.

There is only one FATHER! There is only one SON. There is only one COMFORTER (Holy Spirit). You are a father, but you are not THE Father. You are a son, but you are not THE Son.

The name Jesus comes from the Hebrew Yeshua, which means "Salvation". God's name is not "salvation". Another name of Jesus is "Immanuel", which means "God with us". While these are the name by which He went on Earth, they are no more the "Name of God" than is "Father" or "Son".

The Comforter (the Holy Spirit) is not Jesus. The Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are so in tune with each other, so united in power, authority, purpose, and in all other ways, that if you have one, you have the rest. If you hear the Son, you have heard the Father. If you see the Son, you have seen the Father. If you have the Spirit, you have the Son. Etc.
 
The first potential for error is in saying that 3120 were saved the first day of the Church. Acts 2:41 says "about 3000 souls". That is only one "significant digit". It could have been as few as 2501 or as many as 3499, and that would have included the 120 that were in the upper room. We are not given a specific number, just a number rounded to the nearest thousand, so making it more specific as he does is not appropriate.

Second error is his aim to find a "single" name for the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. It makes no sense to say "names" (as if there were several names of each of the three, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost). If I send you out to do something "in the name the counsel", and the counsel is made up of Bob, Bill, and Fred. I might say that I send you "in the name of Bob, Bill and Fred". These three are not one person, but they are one counsel, just as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one God.

Third, to do something "in the name of" someone does not mean that you even have to know the person's name. "In the name of the King" implies the authority of the king that you represent. You are doing what you are doing as if you were the king. The same applies to baptism. We do it on the authority of Jesus, who was God with all the authority of the Father (Matt 28:18). You do not have to say Jesus' name to baptize in His name.

There is only one FATHER! There is only one SON. There is only one COMFORTER (Holy Spirit). You are a father, but you are not THE Father. You are a son, but you are not THE Son.

The name Jesus comes from the Hebrew Yeshua, which means "Salvation". God's name is not "salvation". Another name of Jesus is "Immanuel", which means "God with us". While these are the name by which He went on Earth, they are no more the "Name of God" than is "Father" or "Son".

The Comforter (the Holy Spirit) is not Jesus. The Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are so in tune with each other, so united in power, authority, purpose, and in all other ways, that if you have one, you have the rest. If you hear the Son, you have heard the Father. If you see the Son, you have seen the Father. If you have the Spirit, you have the Son. Etc.
#1...41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. = about 3,120.

#2..."in the name" is singular.

#3...You must speak the name to do something in their name. Folks can't read minds.

Thanks for viewing it.
 
#1...41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. = about 3,120.
3120 has three "significant digits, 3000 has only one. "About" indicates rounding, here to the nearest thousand. It is intellectually dishonest to make a number more exact than Scripture give us. So approximately 3000 is the closest one can come and remain Biblically accurate.
#2..."in the name" is singular.
And as I pointed out, it does not require the name, nor does it indicate a single person, only a single authority (and the Father, and Jesus, and the Holy Spirit have and constitute a single authority).
#3...You must speak the name to do something in their name. Folks can't read minds.
No, you do not need to speak any specific name in order to do something in someone's name, all that is required is the authority to act on behalf of that person. As I said, if I confer the title of "Knight" on you "in the name of the King of England" I do not even have to know his name to do so. I appropriate his authority (presumably conferred on me in some capacity), and through his authority I give you this title. This is exactly what Jesus did. Upon Him had been all the authority of the Father conferred, and He then conferred that authority on the Apostles (and through them to all of us) to Go, Make, Baptize, and Teach in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
 
3120 has three "significant digits, 3000 has only one. "About" indicates rounding, here to the nearest thousand. It is intellectually dishonest to make a number more exact than Scripture give us. So approximately 3000 is the closest one can come and remain Biblically accurate.

And as I pointed out, it does not require the name, nor does it indicate a single person, only a single authority (and the Father, and Jesus, and the Holy Spirit have and constitute a single authority).

No, you do not need to speak any specific name in order to do something in someone's name, all that is required is the authority to act on behalf of that person. As I said, if I confer the title of "Knight" on you "in the name of the King of England" I do not even have to know his name to do so. I appropriate his authority (presumably conferred on me in some capacity), and through his authority I give you this title. This is exactly what Jesus did. Upon Him had been all the authority of the Father conferred, and He then conferred that authority on the Apostles (and through them to all of us) to Go, Make, Baptize, and Teach in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
Do you cast out devils without speaking words?
 
Do you cast out devils without speaking words?
Indeed you can, as devils (evil spirits) came out of people just from the presence of handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched Paul. But speaking words, even the mighty name of Jesus, does not always mean that the devil will come out. Acts 19:11-16 - "God was performing extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, 12 so that handkerchiefs or aprons were even carried from his body to the sick, and the diseases left them and the evil spirits went out. 13 But also some of the Jewish exorcists, who went from place to place, attempted to use the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had the evil spirits, saying, “I order you in the name of Jesus whom Paul preaches!” 14 Now there were seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, doing this. 15 But the evil spirit responded and said to them, “I recognize Jesus, and I know of Paul, but who are you?” 16 And the man in whom was the evil spirit, pounced on them and subdued all of them and overpowered them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded."
 
Indeed you can, as devils (evil spirits) came out of people just from the presence of handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched Paul. But speaking words, even the mighty name of Jesus, does not always mean that the devil will come out. Acts 19:11-16 - "God was performing extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, 12 so that handkerchiefs or aprons were even carried from his body to the sick, and the diseases left them and the evil spirits went out. 13 But also some of the Jewish exorcists, who went from place to place, attempted to use the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had the evil spirits, saying, “I order you in the name of Jesus whom Paul preaches!” 14 Now there were seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, doing this. 15 But the evil spirit responded and said to them, “I recognize Jesus, and I know of Paul, but who are you?” 16 And the man in whom was the evil spirit, pounced on them and subdued all of them and overpowered them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded."
You have to speak the name and have faith in his name as the lame man that was healed in Acts chapter 3.
 
You have to speak the name and have faith in his name as the lame man that was healed in Acts chapter 3.
Do you really have to? Or do you just have to have faith? Is it you who is doing the healing? Or is it God who does the healing? Did they speak Jesus' name when they applied the handkerchiefs that had touched Paul? Scripture doesn't say that they did, and I don't have any reason to believe that they did. Yes, there is power in the name of Jesus, but there is no power in the name without the relationship with the bearer of the name to back it up, as demonstrated by the sons of Sceva.
 
Do you really have to? Or do you just have to have faith? Is it you who is doing the healing? Or is it God who does the healing? Did they speak Jesus' name when they applied the handkerchiefs that had touched Paul? Scripture doesn't say that they did, and I don't have any reason to believe that they did. Yes, there is power in the name of Jesus, but there is no power in the name without the relationship with the bearer of the name to back it up, as demonstrated by the sons of Sceva.
You have to say the name. Say the name of Jesus. You can’t think the name. Don’t even try it.
 
You have to say the name. Say the name of Jesus. You can’t think the name. Don’t even try it.
Evidently, you don't believe what Scripture says. Just saying His name is meaningless if you don't have a relationship with Him. And if you do have a relationship with Him, then you don't have to say His name at all. I am not saying that there is no power in saying His name, for His name is the only name by which we can and must be saved. But there is no power in His name if you don't know Him, and He doesn't know you.
 
Evidently, you don't believe what Scripture says. Just saying His name is meaningless if you don't have a relationship with Him. And if you do have a relationship with Him, then you don't have to say His name at all. I am not saying that there is no power in saying His name, for His name is the only name by which we can and must be saved. But there is no power in His name if you don't know Him, and He doesn't know you.
You need to re-educate yourself with Peter in the book of Acts. In chapter 3, and chapter 4, he said you must say his name and have faith in his name as you’re saying it. You gotta have both. You can’t think his name, but say the name.
 
You need to re-educate yourself with Peter in the book of Acts. In chapter 3, and chapter 4, he said you must say his name and have faith in his name as you’re saying it. You gotta have both. You can’t think his name, but say the name.
In his name does not mean what he calls himself but in who he is
 
you missed the point

In his name does not mean what he calls himself but in who he is
All I know is that God gave Jesus his name, and Jesus inherited the name of his God. You better think it is a little more sacred than you do.
 
You need to re-educate yourself with Peter in the book of Acts. In chapter 3, and chapter 4, he said you must say his name and have faith in his name as you’re saying it. You gotta have both. You can’t think his name, but say the name.
If you have to say His name to drive out a demon or devil, then how were they driven out by handkerchiefs that had touched Paul. Did the handkerchiefs receive the ability to talk as well? Nowhere in Acts 3 or 4 does it say that you MUST say His name. I do things in His name all the time that don't require me to say His name as I do them.
 
If you have to say His name to drive out a demon or devil, then how were they driven out by handkerchiefs that had touched Paul. Did the handkerchiefs receive the ability to talk as well? Nowhere in Acts 3 or 4 does it say that you MUST say His name. I do things in His name all the time that don't require me to say His name as I do them.
I’m sure the name of Jesus was spoken over the handkerchiefs. We still do that today. By your words, you will be justified or condemned. I thought you knew that?
 
I’m sure the name of Jesus was spoken over the handkerchiefs. We still do that today. By your words, you will be justified or condemned. I thought you knew that?
You are sure of it, but it does not say so in Scripture. Nor does it say they had to say His name over them for the Spirit to heal through them. We must only make definitive statements about things that Scripture states. Where Scripture does not speak, we must not either.
 
You are sure of it, but it does not say so in Scripture. Nor does it say they had to say His name over them for the Spirit to heal through them. We must only make definitive statements about things that Scripture states. Where Scripture does not speak, we must not either.
6 Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.


Did Peter think the name of Jesus or did he speak the name of Jesus?
 
Back
Top Bottom