Into The Name...

by Geoff Hydon, North York; Ontario, Canada | Category: General | Jul 1995

No doubt millions of people have heard the phrase, 'into the Name...' used as Christian disciples are baptized. However, the significance of this little phrase can easily be lost. Our familiarity with expressions such as this one often leads us to pass them over without thinking just why they are used. This is especially the case when the expression sounds simple. What is the meaning of this little phrase?

'In the Name' carries the thought of acting upon Christ's authority, as we saw in our earlier article, but what is the added significance of using 'into' instead of 'in'? If 'in' refers to the location of the authority used, then 'into' refers to moving from outside that sphere of authority to within it.

Significantly, most of the New Testament occurrences (e.g. Mat. 28:19; Acts 8.16, 19.5, 1 Cor. 1.13) of the use of the Greek expression literally translated 'into the Name' are in the context of baptism of a believer in water. This is done to testify to the disciple's obedience to Christ. The expression is also used in John 3:18 where it is clear that disbelief is equivalent to disobedience (see v.36); it is perhaps unnecessary to add that the gospel is presented to sinners for their obedience, not just their grudging acceptance (c.f. 2 Thes. 1:8; Heb. 5:9). The believer's baptism, therefore, is intended to show that whereas in the past the person was not in subjection to Christ, they have now taken a position under His lordship. A suitable analogy would be a soldier changing sides during a battle, leaving the command of one for the leadership of another. In that case, the change in direction would obviously be noticeable. Moreover, the absolute authority of the new commander would have to be acknowledged. Perhaps something of this thought is present in Paul's reference to Christ leading us in triumph: we are now subject to the leadership of Christ instead of our former unsaved condition, where we were subject to the working of the 'principalities and powers', evil forces to whom we effectively subjected ourselves.

Into the Name:

Where the definite article is present, the phrase helps to draw attention to the distinctive name in question: the name, not just any name. The significance of that is apparent from 1 Corinthians 1:13,15 where the whole issue rests upon into whose name the disciples were baptized; Peter and Paul should not be treated on the same plane as Christ. Paul is therefore saying the Name that matters is Christ's, and the superiority of that Name is emphasized by using the little word 'the'.

The authority of God the Father, the lordship of God the Son and the leadership of God the Holy Spirit are all combined in the Name, not Names, into which the believer is baptized. That is, the believer is evidencing submission to God the Three-in-One in baptism. The use of the singular, 'Name' (Mat. 28:19) emphasizes the essential equality of each of the Persons of the Godhead. This is most important. In early days, just as today, many were not ready to give Christ any higher estimation than that of a good man or a prophet. But the words used at a believer's baptism give Christ His true place as God the Son. If people were baptized simply into the Name of Jesus, then it might appear to be no more than some in Corinth seemed to view it: evidence of discipleship to a man, like Paul or Peter. Linking together in the one Name the three Persons of the Godhead establishes the right of the Lord Jesus Christ to rule in the believer's life, for in this respect there is no-one with greater authority than He. It is no surprise, therefore, that such authority was claimed by Christ before He gave His command to the apostles to make and baptize disciples (Matt. 28:19). In later commands to baptize, the title Lord is used, and we can immediately see that the deity of Christ is well expressed in that tide.

The Lord's command to baptize was both a continuity and a progression in His teaching. During the days of His ministry, He had taught His disciples to baptize converts. In this respect we can safely presume two features of such baptism:

(1)It was of the same character as the baptism of John; it was a sign of repentance and done as preparation for salvation (which Christ Himself was later to accomplish).

(2)It did not necessarily involve those baptized witnessing to a

belief in Jesus as Son of God. This seems apparent from the fact that such baptism pre-dated Peter's climactic declaration of the deity of Christ (John 4:1,2; Mat 16:13-21). Despite John the Baptist's words, it seems that many saw Messiah as from God, but not as God.

The Lord's commands to His apostles on the mountain in Galilee would therefore continue their previous practice of baptizing disciples, but add a marked progressive change. Henceforward, the deity of the resurrected Lord was to he explicit in the baptism of disciples. The little word 'into' is so necessary to evidence submission to that lordship, and the Name of the Trinity acknowledges the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Into the Name:

From what has been said, it is clear that the use of the term '...into the Name...' at the time of a believer's baptism is not intended to be mere ritual language; it is expressive of the essential condition, without which such a baptism would be inappropriate and pointless. Having left behind thoughts of self-determination, the believer in submitting to baptism is evidencing a distinctive change in leadership. The baptism is intended to be a clear statement of acknowledging Christ's lordship, and therefore of the believer's willingness to be submissive to His commands. Such submission was a necessary part of the act of faith which results in salvation.

Such a simple little phrase. How many times have we heard it said? Have we fully appreciated its meaning? Have we acted in accordance with its teaching?

Geoff Hydon, North York; Ontario, Canada | Jul 1995
General