In the previous installment, we discussed the fact that Matthew 28:19 does not set forth a “formula,” which must be used when baptizing a person, and that the teaching that the baptizing minister must say the words, “I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit,” is erroneous and unbiblical.  At the same time, we pointed out that “the concept stated in Matthew 28:19, in referring during the entire baptism ceremony to the role and function of the Father and Jesus Christ, bestowing on the baptized person the gift of the Holy Spirit, is accurate and biblical.” We did not address the question in the previous installment whether the Scripture itself is genuine or not.

Before addressing this intriguing issue, let us point out that it would not be beyond possibility or comprehension that a “passage” was added by translators or copyists which was not in the original text—or, that a passage which was in the original text was subsequently deleted. God would allow this as He has given His people discerning minds, through His Holy Spirit, to note such rare occasions and to point them out to those who have willing and receptive hearts.

Many mistakenly believe that a proper baptism must include these words, as quoted in the Question above, or similar words such as, “I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” and they base that concept on the Scripture in Matthew 28:19, as rendered in the Authorized Version, using the words “Holy Ghost,” or in the New King James Bible, using the words “Holy Spirit.”

But as we will show in this series, the Bible really does not command us to use those words during the baptism ceremony, and there are many reasons for this.

It should be stated at the outset that Trinitarians see clear evidence for their belief in Matthew 28:19. The Ryrie Study Bible comments: “Here is evidence for the trinity: one God (the name) who subsists in three persons (Father, Son and Holy Spirit). Each of the three is distinguished from the other; each possesses all the divine attributes; yet the three are one.“

There are two time periods in the books of the former prophets, those books being Joshua to 2 Kings, where groups or sons of the prophets are mentioned. The first was under the prophet Samuel and the second was during the time of Elijah and Elisha.

Considering the time of Samuel, he was the son of Elkanah and Hannah and was conceived miraculously. In fact, the name Samuel means “God has heard,” since he was an answer to Hannah’s prayer. 1 Samuel 1:1 informs us that Elkanah was a resident of the mountains of Ephraim. 1 Chronicles 6, verses 27-28 and 33-34 mention Elkanah and Samuel, listing them as descendants of Kohath, a Levite, but not of the priestly line that descended from Aaron. From this we see that Samuel was a Levite living in the area of Ephraim. The phrase in 1 Samuel 1:1 that Elkanah was “an Ephraimite” is understood as saying that he lived there or that he was born there and belonged, according to his  “civil standing” to the tribe of Ephraim; not, that he was by origin a descendant of Ephraim. He was also a prophet and a judge.

Following on from the previous two instalments of this series, we continue to review and respond to the antinomianism arguments set forth by the adherents of this belief system, claiming that the law is dead; look at where some who don’t espouse this “understanding” can go wrong; and come to the biblical conclusion on the matter.

Edgar Andrews is another supporter of antinomianism. He wrote: “As regards sanctification, the law can be accorded no special place today in the life of the believer, that is, no place over and above [his emphasis] the rest of Scripture. To suggest that the ten commandments are in some special way the Christian’s rule of life does an injustice to the whole body of New Testament teaching on Christian conduct.” Commenting on Galatians 5:18, he writes: “Had Paul intended to teach that the law, or any part of it, should be the Christian’s rule of life, here was his opportunity to do so. What does he say? He tells us that those led by the Spirit are not beholden to the law with respect to righteous living. Indeed, he seems to go further; being led by the Spirit and being ruled by the law are mutually exclusive in the area of Christian conduct” (compare Welwyn Commentary on Galatians).

In the first part of this series, we discussed that antinomian is one who takes the principle of “salvation by faith and divine grace” to the point of asserting that the saved are not bound to follow the moral law contained in the Ten Commandments. As mentioned, the Bible refers to the Ten Commandments as the “spiritual law,” not the “moral law.” In this second part of this series, we will look at additional arguments put forward by those who fall into this category.

From the “Banner of Truth” website, the author gives further information about others who have their own say, in their own way.   He states: “In order to have as clear a view as we can of the present confusion, it is important to let some of the leading contributors to it be ‘heard’ in their own words.” Below are these together with our observations.

It is an unusual word in that it is not in common usage in everyday life.   However, the understanding of its meaning is vital to the true Christian.   It is pronounced as “an-tin-o-mi-an-ism”.

Wikipedia observes as follows:

“Antinomianism (Ancient Greek: ἀντί, ‘against’ and νόμος, ‘law’) is any view which rejects laws or legalism, and argues against moral, religious or social norms (Latin: mores), or is at least considered to do so. The term has both religious and secular meanings.

“In some Christian belief systems, an antinomian is one who takes the principle of salvation by faith and divine grace to the point of asserting that the saved are not bound to follow the moral law contained in The Commandments.

Until very recently, this would have seemed a really stupid thing to ask as we should all know the answer.   Throughout the history of mankind, for some 6,000 years, there is no record of this question needing to be answered because male and female genders were clearly understood.

On the website zfacts.com, we read: “The woke position currently amounts to this: women should not talk about themselves as an identity group. That group is apparently now politically incorrect and undeserving of a name, especially undeserving of its old and well-respected name.”  It goes on to say that “woke ideology (but not woke individuals) should be erased. Claiming to be woke — alert to injustice — is just a cover for authoritarian excess.”

While there are certainly times when God does not immediately answer our prayers because He chooses to respond in a more important way for us (compare 2 Corinthians 12:7-10), the Bible also clearly reveals that sin will affect our prayers.

It is important to understand that God has promised to respond to His people, and we find this very fundamental but absolutely vital condition set forth in the Book of Zechariah:

“‘The LORD has been very angry with your fathers. Therefore say to them, “Thus says the LORD of hosts: ‘Return to Me,’ says the LORD of hosts, ‘and I will return to you,’ says the LORD of hosts. ‘Do not be like your fathers, to whom the former prophets preached, saying, “Thus says the LORD of hosts: ‘Turn now from your evil ways and your evil deeds.’” But they did not hear nor heed Me,’ says the LORD’” (Zechariah 1:2-4).

The Wikipedia Encyclopedia says this about the covenants of the Bible:

 “The Hebrew Bible makes reference to a number of covenants (Hebrew: בְּרִיתוֹת) with God (YHWH). These include the Noahic Covenant (in Genesis), which is between God and all living creatures, as well as a number of more specific covenants with Abraham, the whole Israelite people, the Israelite priesthood, and the Davidic lineage of kings. In form and terminology, these covenants echo the kinds of treaty agreements in the surrounding ancient world.

“The Book of Jeremiah, 31:30-33, say that Yahweh will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah… Students of the Bible hold wildly differing opinions as to how many major covenants exist (or did exist) between God and humanity, with numbers ranging from one to at least twelve… Some scholars classify only two…”

After all of this breaking of the covenant between the people and God, God foretold of another covenant.

We read of it in Jeremiah 31:31-34: “Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the LORD. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”