A very dishonest quibble is being made by Mac Deaver and his followers. I have seen it also in material from Mike Hildreth. The Deaverites quibble that Philip failed to baptize the Samaritans in the name of the Father and the Holy Spirit and baptized them ONLY in the name of the Lord. That is how they interpret Acts 8:16. They are implicitly taking each of these phrases as verbal formulas said over the baptismal candidate. They will not admit that, but that is exactly what they are doing when they make this quibble. It is the old United Pentecostal (Oneness Pentecostal) quibble used to promote the idea of there being but one Person in the Godhead -- viz. Jesus is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. While the Deaverites do not hold to the Oneness doctrine, they nonetheless make use of their quibbles on certain txts as it suits them. This is one example of that. They ignore the fact that the expressions are merely different ways of saying the same thing. They quibble that in the name of...the Holy Spirit is indicative of Spirit baptism, but interestingly they do not contend that in the name of the Father and in the name of the Lord or in the name of the Son imply two additional baptisms in the essence of each of these Persons in the Godhead. The expression in Acts 8:16 involves also the use of the word only to modify the verb baptized. The construction does not mean that Philip had only said, I baptize you in the name of the Lord. It means contextually that they had only been baptized, but had not received the miraculous gift of the Spirit by the laying on of hands. Philip was not an apostle, and could not do that (cf. vs. 17ff.). Such gifts were given by the laying on of apostolic hands (2 Timothy 1:6). Hildreth and Deaver are misusing the phrase, the adverb translated only, and the expression found in Matthew 28:19 -- in thye name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. They know better, but they do it any way.
Posted on: Thu, 01 Jan 2015 15:33:41 +0000