Authorized Signature
Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19 NASB
In the name – Do you know what “in the name of” means in Hebrew vernacular? Be careful. We are likely to think that “in the name of” is a spiritual formula that enlists God’s willingness to save us. Or perhaps we use the phrase as some kind of “power” word, like the scene from the movie Dune where words are used as weapons.
But in Hebrew, “in the name of” is more like shorthand for family resemblance. It expresses continuity—in this case, borrowed continuity. Notice Yeshua prefaced his declaration with the statement that all power and authority have been given to him. That is to say, the reason he can operate as the king is because YHVH has given him that rank. It is not self-referential. The power and authority resided in YHVH and has now been granted to the Messiah so that he may operate with the same character as the Father. “In the name of” is equal to saying, “as fully authorized representative of,” or “in like manner as.” This is not a state of being. It is a function, that is, a verbal dynamic expressed in action. What this means is that baptizing is not done in someone’s name as though speaking the name accomplishes some essential element of the act. “I baptize you in the name of Jesus” doesn’t make any sense in Hebrew. In Hebrew this phrase means that baptism occurs as an outward declaration of the participant’s similar character. “I baptize myself[1] because I am declaring that I desire to live in the same way as the one I follow. This is my public statement of commitment and continuity.”
Perhaps we are thrown off track by reading this verse according to our Western Christian experience. We imagine that someone is standing in the water waiting to dunk us under while repeating the phrase. We don’t think of ourselves as saying, “I am immersing myself.” Because of two thousand years of Christian tradition, we think of someone else saying, “I baptize you.” But that interpretation ignores the Hebraic context of this ritual. Yeshua is not instructing his disciples to open up baptismal pools and wade into the water to dip people into salvation. He is commenting on the long process of discipling that leads to commitment and continuity in a way of living. Our problem is reading “baptizing them” as if it were a verb and a direct object accomplished by another person as the subject. John the Baptist didn’t baptize anyone. He called people to immerse themselves as a statement of repentance and change in direction. That’s what baptism means in Hebrew—and Yeshua doesn’t provide a new definition. He instructs his followers to get on with the Messianic project—taking on his character as a way of life.
Topical Index: baptism, in the name of, Matthew 28:19
[1] Remember that Hebrew baptism is not a passive act whereby someone else immerses you. It is a self-initiated act whereby you immerse yourself. The attendant is only there to make sure you are fully submerged.
Like! We are to let no man get in between us and the Father. My responsibility to Him stays vertical the whole way.
I think as baptism represents the cleansing of the life (repentance) of all the ways I was getting myself killed (works of death), it also carries the idea of clearing the runway for sanctification (replacing it with the character of my Father). My part is getting myself back out of the throne room so that He can rule. Nobody else can forklift me me out, or go out for me, either, much less ‘allow’ me to stay in charge. The cleansing of my old character of sin anticipates the space needed for the new one, which is according to His will. Nobody can dunk me (make me lay down my will). I must do that myself, or it doesn’t get done. Thank you, Skip!
I’m glad there’s an attendant there, otherwise it would probably end up more like a foot, or maybe knee down baptism. He’s faithful.
Robert, That sounds hilarious!
I remembered witnessing a baptism where the person being baptised had his knees (bent) above the waters in a river, which wasn’t deep enough. And we wondered if his walk would be affected!
Shalom!
Skip this is one of those versus believed to be added to the original text during early translation works done by the scribes back around 360 CE.
Sorry no reference as was part of my earlier research. As this does not coincide with the prophetic reasons found in Ezekiel 36:24-25, Her 31, Ezek 18 and Prov 18:4.
As explained by Paul in Eph 5:25-27 and Titus 3:4-7. While 1 Peter 3:18-22 shows baptism may be saving through the arc of the covenant and prayer. While Heb 10:19-22 refers to two possibilities…
My understanding based on these scriptures also implies that the baptism is rather a process of teaching to adhere to what was taught by Yeshua and a symbolic immersion has no actual prerequisite to baptism.
Yeshua purified and prepared through the spoken word. YHVH purifies through showering us with His Spirit.
My act of immersion would rather signify me stepping up or growing into these life shaping or transforming teachings.
Do we need fellow humans to baptize us, agree no. But do we need them to gain more application insight… Yes.
Back to the so called great commission.
Was this part of the original teachings as it neither reflected in Acts 1.
The same would apply to “in Jesus’ name” at the end of prayers, that I don’t APPLY any more. Incidentally, I speak to my ABBA directly, not through another name.
Another step in paradigm.
Also, in “baptisms” we bring folks backwards, pushing their heads under the waters, whereas, as a form of worship in cleansing ourselves, we ought to bend forward. Neither then in the case of dunking ourselves it would be quite impossible to bent backwards!
Love the title.
hmm…just wondering: had the procedure of self-immersion changed by the time of Paul? 1 Cor 1:14 states that Paul hadn’t baptized anyone except Crispus & Gaius.