In the Name: Did the Apostles Misunderstand Jesus?

Parte 1

Jesus or Peter? A False Choice

The question is not whether Jesus outranks Peter. He does. The question is whether Peter, on the day of Pentecost, departed from what Jesus told him. If he did, the problem is far larger than a baptismal formula. Jesus promised that the Spirit of truth would guide the apostles into all truth:

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.¹

Juan 16:13 (KJV)

Paul says the church is “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.”² Before He ascended, Jesus told these same men “that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” He added, “ye are witnesses of these things,” and told them to “tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.”³ If we say the apostles got the first gospel sermon wrong, we unsettle the foundation the church stands on.

Someone may answer that Matthew wrote his Gospel years after Pentecost. That is true of the written Gospel, whose date is debated, with proposals running from roughly the AD 50s to the 80s. But Jesus spoke the command before Pentecost, to the very men who stood up on that day. So the real question is not which text was written first. It is how the apostles understood the words they heard from His own lips.

Parte 2

What Jesus Said

18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.⁴

Mateo 28:18–20 (KJV)

Three details in this passage deserve a closer look.

“All power is given unto me”

The command is framed by Christ’s own authority. The word translated “power” is exousia, “authority.”⁵ Whatever “the name” means in verse 19, it is spoken by the One who has just claimed all authority in heaven and in earth.

“In the name”: singular

Jesus did not say “in the names.” The Greek is eis to onoma (εἰς τὸ ὄνομα), “into the name,” and onoma is singular.⁶ Apostolic and Oneness writers lean heavily on this point. Trinitarian writers answer that one singular “name” can govern three distinct persons, “the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Both observations are fair, and grammar alone does not settle the matter. What the grammar does establish is that Jesus spoke of one name. It is fair to ask what that name is.

“Into” the name

Eis to onoma is also a commercial and covenant idiom. In the papyri it is used of money credited “into the account” of someone, and it is close to the Hebrew and Aramaic leshem, “with reference to.”⁷ Most scholars agree that the phrase marks ownership and allegiance: the one baptized passes into the possession of the one named. The phrase does not, by itself, prescribe a spoken formula. To be baptized (baptizō, “to dip, plunge, immerse”)⁸ into the name is to belong to the name.

Luke records the same commission in other words: “repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations.”⁹ Matthew gives “the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Luke gives “his name.” Both Gospels describe a single name.

Parte 3

Whose Name? Let Jesus Define It

If “the name” is singular, Scripture should tell us what it is. Jesus does not leave His disciples guessing.

The Son’s given name

And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.¹⁰

Mateo 1:21 (KJV)

The Hebrew behind “Jesus” is Yehoshua or Yeshua, usually explained as “YHWH is salvation.”¹¹ Isaiah had said of the promised Child, “his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”¹² The Son who was born carries a name that already speaks of the Father.

The Father’s name

I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.¹³

Juan 5:43 (KJV)

Jesus came in His Father’s name. He said, “the works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me,”¹⁴ and “I and my Father are one.”¹⁵ In His prayer the night before the cross, He said, “I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world,” and, “I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it.”¹⁶

11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. 12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.¹⁷

Juan 17:11–12 (KJV)

The critical Greek text makes the point even sharper. Where the KJV reads “keep through thine own name,” it reads “your name which you have given me.” The Father’s name was given to the Son. When Philip asked to see the Father, Jesus answered:

Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?¹⁸

Juan 14:9 (KJV)

The Spirit sent in His name

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. 18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. 26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.¹⁹

Juan 14:16–18, 26 (KJV)

The Comforter is sent “in my name,” and Jesus links the Spirit’s coming with His own: “I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.” Paul speaks the same way. In one passage he calls the indwelling Spirit both “the Spirit of God” and “the Spirit of Christ.” He then says that “if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.”²⁰ Elsewhere he writes, “Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.”²¹ Jesus Himself said, “God is a Spirit.”²²

The name above every name

9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.²³

Filipenses 2:9–11 (KJV)

Paul is echoing Isaiah, where the LORD says, “I have sworn by myself… That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.”²⁴ What Isaiah says of the LORD, Paul says “at the name of Jesus.” So he can write, “in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him.”²⁵ And: “God was manifest in the flesh.”²⁶

Put Jesus’ own words together. The Son came in the Father’s name. The Son’s given name is Jesus. The Holy Ghost is sent in Jesus’ name, and in the Spirit Jesus Himself comes to His people. In the Apostolic reading, the one name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is Jesus.

Parte 4

What the Apostles Did

Now turn from the command to the obedience. When the crowd at Pentecost asked what they should do, Peter answered:

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.²⁷

Hechos 2:38 (KJV)

Notice how closely Peter’s words follow the commission in Luke. Jesus said “that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name.” Peter preached repentance, baptism “in the name of Jesus Christ,” and “the remission of sins.” At the house of Cornelius he said it again: “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.”²⁸ Peter was not inventing a new formula. He was preaching what Jesus told him to preach.

The rest of Acts follows the same pattern. In Samaria:

12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. 16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)²⁹

Hechos 8:12, 16 (KJV)

At the house of Cornelius, with the first Gentile converts:

And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.³⁰

Hechos 10:48 (KJV)

At Ephesus, with disciples who had received only John’s baptism:

2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. 3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism. 4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.³¹

Hechos 19:2–6 (KJV)

Ephesus matters. These disciples had already been baptized once, with John’s baptism. Paul did not treat that as enough. He baptized them again “in the name of the Lord Jesus,” and the Holy Ghost came on them. This is the only rebaptism recorded in the New Testament, and the name in which it was done is the name of the Lord Jesus.

And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.³²

Hechos 22:16 (KJV)

Saul was told to be baptized “calling on the name of the Lord.” The Greek participle epikalesamenos comes from epikaleomai, “to call upon, invoke.”³³ In context, the Lord is Jesus, who had just appeared to Saul (Acts 22:8, 14). This points to a name actually called upon at baptism, not only an authority in the background. James writes of “that worthy name by the which ye are called”; the Greek reads, more literally, “the good name invoked upon you,” and many commentators link it to baptism.³⁴ Peter had already declared, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”³⁵

The epistles agree

The letters assume the same baptism. Paul writes, “so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death,”³⁶ and “as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”³⁷ When the Corinthians divided over leaders, he asked, “Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?”³⁸ He was glad he had baptized few of them, “Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.”³⁹ The argument works only if they had been baptized in the name of the One who was crucified for them. He reminds them, “ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.”⁴⁰ Believers are “Buried with him in baptism,”⁴¹ and are told, “whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.”⁴²

Different prepositions, one name

Luke is not mechanical. Acts uses three prepositions with “the name”: epi, “upon” (2:38); eis, “into” (8:16; 19:5); and en, “in” (10:48).⁴³ The variety suggests that a fixed liturgical phrase had not yet been standardized. Yet the name itself never varies: it is Jesus Christ, the Lord Jesus, or the Lord.

No debate

The New Testament records no dispute over the baptismal formula. No apostle corrected another for baptizing in the name of Jesus, and no writer of the first century is recorded arguing over the words to be spoken. If the apostles had set Jesus’ command aside, it is hard to explain why no one in the apostolic church noticed.

Parte 5

Obedience, Not Contradiction

Set Matthew 28:19 beside Acts 2:38 and there are two possibilities. Either Peter disobeyed Jesus, or Peter understood something about “the name” that a quick reading misses. The Apostolic, or Oneness, reading takes the second path. “Father,” “Son,” and “Holy Ghost” are titles, and the singular name they share is Jesus. The Son came in the Father’s name (John 5:43). The Father’s name was given to the Son (John 17:11–12). The Holy Ghost is sent in the Son’s name (John 14:26). When the apostles baptized “in the name of Jesus Christ,” they were not setting Matthew 28:19 aside. They were obeying it.⁴⁴

Honesty requires us to say that most Christians read these texts differently. The main alternatives are these:

• A Trinitarian formula, with Acts as shorthand. This is the consensus of Catholic, Orthodox, and most Protestant scholars. On this view, Matthew gives the words to be spoken, and Luke’s “in the name of Jesus” distinguishes Christian baptism from John’s without reporting the words spoken.
• Authority or allegiance. This view is widely held in critical scholarship. Neither text is a spoken formula; both state into whose ownership the convert passes. Many critical scholars add that the Acts form is likely the older practice and that the triadic form reflects later liturgical development.
• Invocation. A minority, but serious, reading drawn from Acts 22:16 and James 2:7: the name of Jesus was actually spoken over the one being baptized.

The second and third readings are not Oneness readings, yet each agrees with part of the case made here. And none of the readings above requires us to believe that the apostles misunderstood Jesus. The only view that requires that is the one that sets Jesus against Peter.

Parte 6

The Early Church, Honestly

It is sometimes said that only Jesus’ name baptism is recorded in the first hundred years of the church. That is not accurate, and our case does not need it. The accurate statement is this: in the New Testament record, every baptism described is in the name of Jesus or the Lord. Outside the canon, the earliest church manual, the Didache, already uses the triadic words. The triadic form, with threefold immersion and creedal questions, became the uniform practice during the second and third centuries. Here is the evidence, both for and against.

Witnesses that point toward the name

The Shepherd of Hermas (c. 100–150) speaks of those “who have heard the word, and wish to be baptized in the name of the Lord.”⁴⁵ In Hermas, “Lord” can mean God, so this phrase is ambiguous. Elsewhere he is more specific:

“For, he continued, before a man bears the name of the Son of God he is dead; but when he receives the seal he lays aside his deadness, and obtains life. The seal, then, is the water: they descend into the water dead, and they arise alive.”

— Hermas, Similitude 9.16⁴⁶

Hermas quotes no formula, but for him baptism is the moment a person comes to bear “the name of the Son of God.”

Ignatius of Antioch (c. 107–110) gives no formula either, but his view of Christ is striking: “For our God, Jesus Christ, was, according to the appointment of God, conceived in the womb by Mary, of the seed of David, but by the Holy Ghost. He was born and baptized, that by His passion He might purify the water.”⁴⁷

Irenaeus, in his Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching (c. 180–190), credits his teaching to “the Elders, the disciples of the Apostles,” and writes:

“First of all it bids us bear in mind that we have received baptism for the remission of sins, in the name of God the Father, and in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was incarnate and died and rose again, and in the Holy Spirit of God.”

— Irenaeus, Demonstration 3⁴⁸

His words are triadic, but “baptism for the remission of sins, in… the name of Jesus Christ” echoes Acts 2:38.

Tertullian (c. 211) describes the baptism of his own day, and makes an important admission:

“When we are going to enter the water, but a little before, in the presence of the congregation and under the hand of the president, we solemnly profess that we disown the devil, and his pomp, and his angels. Hereupon we are thrice immersed, making a somewhat ampler pledge than the Lord has appointed in the Gospel.”

— Tertullian, De Corona 3⁴⁹

By Tertullian’s own account, the triple immersion of his church was “ampler” than what the Lord appointed in the Gospel.

Witnesses that point the other way

The strongest tension is the Didache, a church manual whose date is debated (c. AD 50–120; many say c. 100):

“And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have not living water, baptize into other water; and if you can not in cold, in warm. But if you have not either, pour out water thrice upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit.”

— Didache 7⁵⁰

Justin Martyr (c. 150–155) describes the baptisms of his church in triadic words:

“For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water.”

— Justin, First Apology 61⁵¹

He adds, “And for this [rite] we have learned from the apostles this reason.”⁵² Irenaeus, in Against Heresies (c. 180), quotes the commission itself: “giving to the disciples the power of regeneration into God, He said to them, Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”⁵³ Tertullian, On Baptism (c. 200), writes, “For the law of baptizing has been imposed, and the formula prescribed: Go, He says, teach the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”⁵⁴ He also speaks of “faith, sealed in (the name of) the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”⁵⁵

What the evidence shows

Taken together, the record shows a development, not an overnight change. The New Testament narratives use the name of Jesus or the Lord. The Didache uses the triadic words. Justin and Irenaeus are triadic. By Tertullian’s time, triple immersion with a renunciation and a pledge is standard, and he admits it is “ampler” than the Gospel. Historians describe a gradual development of the rite through the second and third centuries: questions put to the candidate about the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, threefold immersion, and an anointing. The Apostolic Tradition attributed to Hippolytus (c. 215; its date and authorship are disputed) is one example.⁵⁶

That matters for our question. The argument over the baptismal formula began after the apostles, not among them. In the apostolic generation, as Scripture records it, there is one practice and no debate.

Parte 7

Justin, Theophilus, and Tertullian

How did the church move from the language of Acts to the language of later creeds? Three second- and early third-century writers show the vocabulary growing.

Justin Martyr: the philosopher

Justin Martyr (c. 100–165) taught the faith as a philosopher and dressed like one. When Trypho met him, he greeted him, “Hail, O philosopher!” and said he had been taught to show kindness to “those who array themselves in this dress.”⁵⁷ Eusebius says, “In the guise of a philosopher he preached the divine word.”⁵⁸

Justin built a bridge between the gospel and Greek thought about the Logos, the Word. He wrote that “those who lived reasonably are Christians, even though they have been thought atheists; as, among the Greeks, Socrates and Heraclitus, and men like them.”⁵⁹ Of the philosophers he said, “each man spoke well in proportion to the share he had of the spermatic word.”⁶⁰ To be fair to Justin, he presents Greek philosophy as borrowed from Moses, not Christianity as borrowed from the Greeks: “It is not, then, that we hold the same opinions as others, but that all speak in imitation of ours.”⁶¹

Justin’s language about the Father, the Son, and the Spirit goes beyond the New Testament’s. He wrote that Christians worship “both Him, and the Son (who came forth from Him and taught us these things, and the host of the other good angels who follow and are made like to Him), and the prophetic Spirit.”⁶² He held the Son “in the second place, and the prophetic Spirit in the third.”⁶³ He called the Son “another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things,” distinct from Him “numerically, I mean, not [distinct] in will.”⁶⁴ And he wrote:

“God begot before all creatures a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power [proceeding] from Himself, who is called by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then Lord and Logos… since He was begotten of the Father by an act of will…”

— Justin, Dialogue with Trypho 61⁶⁵

Justin does not call the Son a creature; he says the Son was “begotten.” But he describes the Logos as a “second” divine power, begotten from the Father before creation and subordinate to Him. And Justin never uses the word “trinity.”

Theophilus: the first “Trinity”

The first surviving use of the Greek trias for God comes from Theophilus of Antioch (c. 180): “the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His wisdom.”⁶⁶ His triad is God, Word, and Wisdom, not Father, Son, and Spirit. The Latin trinitas first appears in Tertullian.

Tertullian and the “simple” majority

In Against Praxeas (c. 213), Tertullian defends his doctrine of the “dispensation” (oikonomia), which “distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Persons — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form.”⁶⁷ He calls the Spirit “the Third Name in the Godhead, and the Third Degree of the Divine Majesty.”⁶⁸ Then he makes a remarkable admission:

“The simple, indeed, (I will not call them unwise and unlearned,) who always constitute the majority of believers, are startled at the dispensation (of the Three in One), on the ground that their very rule of faith withdraws them from the world’s plurality of gods to the one only true God… They are constantly throwing out against us that we are preachers of two gods and three gods, while they take to themselves pre-eminently the credit of being worshippers of the One God… We, say they, maintain the Monarchy…”

— Tertullian, Against Praxeas 3⁶⁹

Tertullian is careful here. He will not call these believers “unwise and unlearned.” But he admits that they were “the majority of believers,” that they were “startled” by his teaching, and that they held to one God: “We, say they, maintain the Monarchy.” He likens their view to “the Jewish faith, of which this is the substance — so to believe in One God as to refuse to reckon the Son besides Him, and after the Son the Spirit.”⁷⁰ He charges that, on Praxeas’ teaching, “the Father forsooth was born, and the Father suffered, God Himself, the Lord Almighty, whom in their preaching they declare to be Jesus Christ.”⁷¹ And he says this teaching took root “while many were asleep in their simplicity of doctrine.”⁷²

Two cautions keep us honest. First, the majority Tertullian describes held to one God. He does not say they believed in a created Son and a later created Spirit. Second, Tertullian’s own scheme was not the later Nicene doctrine either. He wrote that God “could not have been the Father previous to the Son… There was, however, a time when neither sin existed with Him, nor the Son.”⁷³ In his view the Son “proceeded” from God and was not always Son, and the Spirit was the “Third Degree.” Tertullian conceded that most believers of his day were startled by his doctrine and insisted on the Monarchy of one God.

Parte 8

Conclusion: Complete in Him

Did the apostles misunderstand Jesus? Scripture gives no hint that they did. Jesus commanded baptism in one name. He told them that He came in His Father’s name, that the Father’s name was given to Him, and that the Spirit would be sent in His name. On the day the church was born, Peter commanded baptism “in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,” just as Jesus had told them to preach repentance and remission of sins in His name. Every baptism the New Testament describes follows that pattern, and no apostle disputed it. The triadic rite developed afterward, and by Tertullian’s own admission his church’s triple immersion was “ampler” than what the Lord appointed in the Gospel.

“God was manifest in the flesh.”⁷⁴ “For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him.”⁷⁵ You do not have to choose between Jesus and Peter. Peter was obeying Jesus. Obey Matthew 28:19 the way the apostles did:

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.⁷⁶

Hechos 2:38 (KJV)

Parte 9

For Further Reading

Ferguson, Everett. Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009.

Kelly, J. N. D. Early Christian Creeds. 3rd ed. Longman, 1972.

Kelly, J. N. D. Early Christian Doctrines. Rev. ed. Harper & Row, 1978.

Ante-Nicene Fathers and Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, online edition at New Advent, https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/. Patristic quotations in this study are from these translations, except Irenaeus’ Demonstration, which is quoted from J. Armitage Robinson’s translation (SPCK, 1920).

Notes

Notes

1. John 16:13, King James Version (1769 text).

2. Ephesians 2:20 (KJV).

3. Luke 24:47–49 (KJV).

4. Matthew 28:18–20, King James Version (1769 text). Some modern printings read “always” in v. 20; the 1769 text reads “alway.”

5. Greek exousia (ἐξουσία), “authority, power,” Matthew 28:18.

6. Greek onoma (ὄνομα): “name”; by extension, the person, the authority, and the revealed character of the one named. BDAG, s.v. ὄνομα, §§1–3.

7. On eis to onoma as “into the possession or account of,” and its closeness to Hebrew/Aramaic leshem, see the standard lexica (BDAG, s.v. ὄνομα). This is the majority view in scholarship.

8. Greek baptizō (βαπτίζω): to dip, plunge, or immerse; used of washing (Mark 7:4) and of being overwhelmed (Luke 12:50).

9. Luke 24:47 (KJV).

10. Matthew 1:21, King James Version (1769 text), which prints the name in capitals.

11. The name is usually glossed “YHWH is salvation.” The phrasing “Jehovah has become salvation” is a homiletic expansion of that meaning.

12. Isaiah 9:6 (KJV).

13. John 5:43, King James Version (1769 text).

14. John 10:25 (KJV).

15. John 10:30 (KJV). The Greek word for “one” is the neuter hen (ἕν).

16. John 17:6, 26 (KJV).

17. John 17:11–12, King James Version (1769 text). The critical Greek text reads “your name which you have given me.” The NKJV footnotes give this reading: v. 11, “keep them through Your name which You have given Me” (NU, M); v. 12, “Your name which You gave Me” (NU).

18. John 14:9, King James Version (1769 text). Some modern printings read “Show.”

19. John 14:16–18, 26, King James Version (1769 text).

20. Romans 8:9–11 (KJV).

21. 2 Corinthians 3:17 (KJV).

22. John 4:24 (KJV).

23. Philippians 2:9–11, King James Version (1769 text).

24. Isaiah 45:23 (KJV).

25. Colossians 2:9–10 (KJV).

26. 1 Timothy 3:16 (KJV). The KJV and NKJV follow the majority of later manuscripts, which read theos (“God”). Most critical texts (NA28, followed by the ESV and NASB) read hos, “He who was manifested.” The NKJV footnote gives the NU reading as “Who” instead of “God.” This study does not rest on this verse alone.

27. Acts 2:38, King James Version (1769 text). Greek epi tō onomati Iēsou Christou, “upon the name of Jesus Christ.”

28. Acts 10:43 (KJV); compare Luke 24:47.

29. Acts 8:12, 16, King James Version (1769 text).

30. Acts 10:48, King James Version (1769 text). The KJV and NKJV read “in the name of the Lord.” Many modern critical texts read “Jesus Christ”; the ESV reads, “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.”

31. Acts 19:2–6, King James Version (1769 text).

32. Acts 22:16, King James Version (1769 text).

33. Greek epikaleomai (ἐπικαλέομαι): to call upon, invoke (Acts 22:16; Romans 10:13).

34. James 2:7 (KJV).

35. Acts 4:12 (KJV).

36. Romans 6:3 (KJV).

37. Galatians 3:27 (KJV).

38. 1 Corinthians 1:13 (KJV).

39. 1 Corinthians 1:15 (KJV).

40. 1 Corinthians 6:11 (KJV). Most commentators read this verse as a reference to baptism.

41. Colossians 2:11–12 (KJV).

42. Colossians 3:17 (KJV).

43. Acts 2:38, epi; Acts 8:16 and 19:5, eis; Acts 10:48, en.

44. This “one name fulfills the command” reading is held by the UPCI and other Apostolic bodies. It is a minority reading among Christians as a whole.

45. Hermas, The Shepherd, Vision 3.7, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02011.htm.

46. Hermas, The Shepherd, Similitude 9.16, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02013.htm.

47. Ignatius, Epistle to the Ephesians 18, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0104.htm.

48. Irenaeus, Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching 3, trans. J. Armitage Robinson (SPCK, 1920); https://www.tertullian.org/fathers/irenaeus_02_proof.htm.

49. Tertullian, De Corona 3, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0304.htm.

50. The Didache 7, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 7; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm.

51. Justin Martyr, First Apology 61, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm.

52. Justin Martyr, First Apology 61, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm.

53. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.17.1, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103317.htm.

54. Tertullian, On Baptism 13, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0321.htm.

55. Tertullian, On Baptism 6, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0321.htm.

56. See Everett Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009); and J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Creeds, 3rd ed. (Longman, 1972), on the baptismal interrogations.

57. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 1, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01281.htm.

58. Eusebius, Church History 4.11.8, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2nd series, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250104.htm.

59. Justin Martyr, First Apology 46, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm.

60. Justin Martyr, Second Apology 13, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0127.htm.

61. Justin Martyr, First Apology 60, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm.

62. Justin Martyr, First Apology 6, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm.

63. Justin Martyr, First Apology 13, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm.

64. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 56, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01285.htm.

65. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 61, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01285.htm.

66. Theophilus of Antioch, To Autolycus 2.15, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02042.htm.

67. Tertullian, Against Praxeas 2, trans. Peter Holmes, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0317.htm.

68. Tertullian, Against Praxeas 30, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0317.htm.

69. Tertullian, Against Praxeas 3, trans. Peter Holmes, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0317.htm.

70. Tertullian, Against Praxeas 31, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0317.htm.

71. Tertullian, Against Praxeas 2, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0317.htm.

72. Tertullian, Against Praxeas 1, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0317.htm.

73. Tertullian, Against Hermogenes 3, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3; https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0313.htm.

74. 1 Timothy 3:16 (KJV); see the textual note above.

75. Colossians 2:9–10 (KJV).

76. Acts 2:38, King James Version (1769 text).