Talk:Baptism in the name of Jesus

New section History
Added some History as the Article seemed a bit spare. One a side note I noticed someone refereeing to the Term itself as pejorative. However the term Jesus Name would require reams of disambiguation as Jesus Name Doctrine appear in nearly all Christian Churches including Trinitarian churches. (And Trinitarian seems pejorative to me...) But Jesus Only seems like the logical converse to Trinitarian in terms of identifying the fundamental beliefs involved. Probably a dead issue as the article is still up, but I felt the need to comment and I apologize for my anonymity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.172.48.224 (talk) 00:58, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

"(Unfortunately, his research caused no little stir among UPC theologians who ultimately forced Arnold to be excommunicated from the denomination.)" What dose UPC stand for here is it for United Pentecostal Church International (UPCI) then that statement dose not make since? Since the UPCI holds his idea of "groups baptizing in the name of Christ alone from AD90 onward to the 20th century" as near doctrine. If this is true it needs a ref bad. Jasoninkid (talk) 04:13, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to pull "(Unfortunately, his research caused no little stir among UPC theologians who ultimately forced Arnold to be excommunicated from the denomination.)[citation needed]" on grounds that this claim needs citation and that UPC is not defined. If citation is found and this is pout back I would ask that UPC is defined and the word "excommunicated" is changed. The word excommunicated has a specific meaning from the Roman Catholic Church perspective that is misleading when applied to this case. I would recommend disfellowshiped instead. Jasoninkid (talk) 13:22, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Criticisms
The article should also include valid criticisms of the doctrine. For instance, Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants do not recognize the validity of these baptisms, which they view as un-saving, un-sacramental, heretical or anathema. They also reject Arianism as a false doctrine based on similar non-Trinitarian premises. ADM (talk) 15:47, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Duplication
Most of this article seems to be a rehash of Oneness Theology. It's not clear what the differences are, except for the practice of baptizing in the name of Jesus.

Are there any groups that adhere to Jesus' Name but not to Oneness? Any what, apart from the baptism practice, is involved in Jesus' Name theology?

-- DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:31, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

"Any what, apart from the baptism practice, is involved in Jesus' Name theology?" A total rejection of the idea of the Trinity. Jasoninkid (talk) 03:54, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * If Jesus' Name Theology always involves rejection of the Trinity, then what is the difference between it and Oneness theology? DJ Clayworth (talk) 01:08, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Non you will note the redirect . Jasoninkid (talk) 01:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * To better answer the first question there are some churches (mostly independent) that hold a Jesus' Name doctrine but are not pentecostal therefor Jesus' Name doctrine is not just a part of Oneness Pentecostalism. The terms Jesus' Name, Oneness and Apostolic* (*when not associated with Catholicism) are mostly synonyms with Apostolic being the most popular where I live in the US Midwest.  Jasoninkid (talk) 04:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

See Move.Mustardseed1 (talk) 14:10, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

After the page move, I expanded the article and in doing so I moved the redirect of Oneness Doctrine to Modalistic Monarchianism since Oneness doctrine and Jesus name doctrine are different. I then realized that this was the issue I was attempting to solve with the move. This would have avoided the need for a move and also solves the problem of the apparent duplication. I would be happy with another move back to Jesus' name doctrine if others support it. Mustardseed1 (talk) 14:56, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

NPOV
"The latter form of baptism is the one performed on most Christians, according to the command of Jesus recorded in Matthew 28:19." Seems rather antagonistic. Jasoninkid (talk) 00:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC) I took out "While some Christians hold that" and "according to the command of Jesus recorded in Matthew 28:19" which make the paragraph sound like an argument against in stead of a statement of fact. Some rewording was needed for readability. Jasoninkid (talk) 00:51, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Error in doctrinal explanation
The "Jesus' Name" doctrine DOES NOT endorse nor contain the "Oneness heresy" nor the "Trinity heresy", but the correct recognition of the "GODHEAD" is the doctrine of The Real Jesus' Name Witnesses. THIS IS FACT. I AM Jesus' Name Witness, I KNOW what we teach and it's not oneness. I challenge anyone to produce it, before God you can have the keys, my titles and deeds and all my possessions and money if you can prove it. But you can't, it's not in there. :)

LET TRUTH PREVAIL!!! 10:28, 17 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wkdemers (talk • contribs)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Jesus' Name doctrine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090227001121/http://www.upci.org:80/doctrine/baptism.asp to http://www.upci.org/doctrine/baptism.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090618075035/http://www.ctsfw.edu:80/etext/luther/babylonian/babylonian.htm to http://www.ctsfw.edu/etext/luther/babylonian/babylonian.htm#3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:19, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Jesus' Name doctrine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130117151910/http://www.pawinc.org/ to http://www.pawinc.org/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120823110306/http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/jwbaptism.htm to http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/jwbaptism.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.focus-search.com/matthew/matt28.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.focus-search.com/shc/matt2819.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:02, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jesus' Name doctrine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141024155913/http://christsforgiveness.com/index/?page_id=15 to http://christsforgiveness.com/index/?page_id=15
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050905022656/http://www.catholic.com/library/Trinitarian_Baptism.asp to http://www.catholic.com/library/trinitarian_baptism.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:15, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Move
This page is more about baptism in the name of Jesus than anything else. While it may form part of a Oneness Christology, baptism in the name of Jesus is becoming more popular in other Christian groups as well (including some Trinitarian). The rejection of the Trinity is a Christological issue whereas this is an issue of the practice of baptism in the name of Jesus which may or may not have Christological implications. I suggest that this page be renamed to "Baptism in the name of Jesus" to account for this. Mustardseed1 (talk) 14:10, 11 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Jasoninkid I am interested to see your thoughts on this move.


 * Other pages such as Oneness Pentecostal (referring to the Oneness Pentecostal movement as a whole) and Modalistic Monarchianism (referring to a Oneness Christology) cover specific topics whereas this page seems the most generalized and unhelpful which make it difficult to add to. To me it would be more useful if this page focused in on "Baptism in Jesus name." Of course, this could also fit in a subsection in Baptism if it would be given adequete coverage, but my concern is that it wouldn't be covered in great detail. Mustardseed1 (talk) 09:59, 13 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I could see it either way, the two ideas intertwined heavily in Oneness Pentecostalism and it would be good to flush out the topic with links to Trinitron groups. Jasoninkid (talk) 03:42, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 13 April 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved as requested after no objections in two weeks. Dekimasu よ! 00:35, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Jesus' Name doctrine → Baptism in the name of Jesus – This page is more about baptism in the name of Jesus than anything else. While it may fit closely with a Oneness Christology, baptism in the name of Jesus is becoming more popular in other Christian groups as well (including some Trinitarian). The rejection of the Trinity is a Christological issue whereas this is an issue of the practice of baptism in the name of Jesus which may or may not have Christological implications. I suggest that this page be renamed to "Baptism in the name of Jesus" to account for this. Other pages such as Oneness Pentecostal (referring to the Oneness Pentecostal movement as a whole) and Modalistic Monarchianism (referring to Oneness Christology) cover specific topics whereas this page seems the most generalized and unhelpful which makes it difficult to improve. To me it would be more useful if this page focused in on "Baptism in Jesus name." Of course, this could also fit in a subsection in Baptism if it would be given adequete coverage, but my concern is that it wouldn't be since it's focus is different to the general topic of Baptism. Mustardseed1 (talk) 09:59, 13 April 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Dekimasu よ! 10:12, 20 April 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

NPOV? Edits by User:Atlantanaomi83
The recent edits by User:Atlantanaomi83 seem massively NPOV, stating things as historical facts that are at least highly controversial, unless I'm quite mistaken. I'm not into this topic enough to correct the stuff and thus didn't want to do an outright reversion either. Anybody? -- 194.39.218.10 (talk) 10:47, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Agree. There is a lot of room for expansion of History but it has to be done well and from NPOV. User:Atlantanaomi83 has been blocked for similar reasons on other pages. Mustardseed1 (talk) 10:42, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Category
I thought someone might require fonts, but I didn't get reverted because of that, so why remove the category? We don't need to worry about the size because Wikipedia isn't made of paper! So we put the Category:Branhamism. Fox de Quintal (talk) 17:52, 22 March 2024 (UTC)


 * As I stated in my edit description, the teaching may be accepted by or associated with William M. Branham, but it is not exclusively his teaching and existed prior to his movement. According to WP:CATDEF, "The defining characteristics of an article's topic are central to categorizing the article. A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently refer to in describing the topic..." (Emphasis in original). Branham is not commonly or consistently mentioned in the sources of the article and Branhamism is not a defining characteristic of the theology described in the article. Even though the Baptism in the name of Jesus theology might be a defining characteristic of Branhamism, it certainly does not mean that Branhamism is a defining characteristic of the Baptism in the name of Jesus theology (it doesn't work both ways), and thus, it does not justify the categorization of this article under that specific category. It's not about the size, it's about the relevancy of the category.
 * JParksT2023 (talk) 17:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)