(Note: The whole article is to long to post so I have posted the beginning and the summary. Then when there are points of contention coming up I will post the sections of the article to refute your arguments with the truth.)
WATER BAPTISM Its Obsolescence
Obsolescence implies something being replaced by another thing that is better. A major difference between the Old and the New Covenant is that the new one is "a better covenant" (Heb. 8:6). In the Old Dispensation it was considered a manifest blessing of God to accumulate wealth (for example, Abraham, Job, Solomon, and others). But in the New it is more blessed to give away your money (Mk. 12:41-44; Lk. 12:33; 14:33; Acts 2:44-45; 4:31-37; 20:35; 2 Cor. 9:7; et al.). In the Old Testament there was the teaching of an eye for an eye, but in the New there is a better way. Under the Old Covenant God's males were to be physically circumcised. This was a type of a better circumcision under the New---a spiritual circumcision of the heart. Various baptisms of the Old Covenant (including the transitional ministry of John the Baptizer) were types of a better baptism in the New---a spiritual baptism into Christ.
We need to search the Scriptures to see the reason for the rite of water baptism and its significance---or rather, insignificance---for the saints since the hardening of Israel and Paul's ministry to the Gentiles.
SUMMARY
The concept of water baptism signifying spiritual cleansing was in the mind of the Jew throughout much of the Old Dispensation. The ritual of water baptism did not begin with the transitional ministry of John the Baptizer. Jesus' baptism by John was no more a precedent for the saints under the New Covenant than was His circumcision.
There is now only one baptism, the born-again experience of being spiritually baptized into Christ who is the fullness of the Godhead. The various washings (baptisms) and carnal ordinances were imposed on God's people only until the time of the Messianic reformation.
The handwriting of ordinances were taken out of the way and nailed to the cross. Those various baptisms and carnal ordinances were only a shadow of the things to come, the reality being found in Christ. We are complete in Christ without adding any ritual. We do not need to add water baptism or circumcision, they were only shadows.
Jesus, early on, did not send the Twelve to baptize with water; nor, later, did He commission the Eleven to baptize with water. When the Twelve were ordained by Jesus (Mk. 3:13-19), He did not ordain them to baptize with water, rather they were ordained that He "might send them forth to preach, and to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils." And when the Twelve were sent out by Jesus (Mt. 10:1-15) He did not send them out to baptize with water. He sent them to "preach...heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, [and] cast out devils." And when the Seventy were sent out by Jesus (Lk. 10:1-20) He did not send them out to baptize with water.
When the Gentile woman at the well was saved Jesus did not have her to get baptized; neither did He tell the Gentile demoniac of Gadara to get baptized after he was saved, nor Zacchaeus the Jew, nor any of numerous others whom He saved.
Jesus refused to water-baptize John the Baptizer. In fact, Jesus never water-baptized anyone, nor did He ever tell anyone, Jew or Gentile, to be water-baptized.
Baptizing into the Name of the Trinity was not a formula and was never mentioned throughout Scripture as being used as one. After the Book of Acts (which records the transition from Judaism to Christianity) water baptism is mentioned five times. In 1 Corinthians 1:13-17 Paul expressed his thanks to God that he water-baptized only a few, for Christ did not send him to baptize but to preach the Gospel. In 1 Corinthians 15:24 Paul mentioned the heretical baptisms on behalf of the dead. In the epistle to the Hebrews (Jews) the writer urged those Jewish Christians to leave the principle or elementary teaching concerning baptisms (baptismos) (6:1-2), that teaching being that divers washings (baptismos) (9:10) were imposed only until the time of (the Messianic) reformation. And Peter wrote that baptism [into Christ] now saves us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh) that is, not water baptism.
In the last book of the Scriptures water baptism is not mentioned; not during the three-and-a-half-year ministry of the Two Prophets during the Great Tibulation, nor in the ministry to the 144,000 Jews who are saved.
Physical circumcision and physical baptism of the Old Covenant were types of a better, spiritual circumcision of the heart and spiritual baptism into Christ. We must conform our doctrines to the Scriptures, and not (even longstanding) tradition.
The primarily second-generation churches, as revealed in Revelation, were already departing from important truths, and one was almost totally apostate.
When true spirituality declines there is always among professing Christians an increase in ritualism to try to compensate. From early on, the Roman Catholic church has been the epitome of this.
According to Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles who was inspired by the Spirit of Christ, there is now one baptism which is spiritual, not two or more. Water baptism has been replaced by a better, spiritual baptism into Christ.
" Baptizing into the Name of the Trinity was not a formula and was never mentioned throughout Scripture as being used as one " halo harry 👹👹
the proper form of baptism is in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as Jesus designated in Matt. 28:19, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” It is the Trinitarian formula
the Didache is a very old document that was written probably between the year of 65 and 80 A.D. It is also called the “Teaching of the 12 Apostles.” The Didache is not Scripture but it is clearly an ancient document and sheds light on what the early church was doing in the first century and what the baptismal formula was
“But concerning baptism, thus baptize ye: having first recited all these precepts, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in running water,” (Didache 7:1)
If the early church did what some modern-day groups cults do baptizing without the trinity then why does the Didache not teach the same thing?
the reason is that the early church baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, just as Jesus commanded them to do (Matthew 28:19)
@ the baptism of Jesus we witness one of the clearest pictures of the Trinity. Matthew 3:16–17 says, “When Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; and behold, a voice from heaven said, ‘This is my [Father] beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.’” All three persons of the Trinity are present
1 Corinthians 14:40
“ but everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way "
God is a God of order so it stands to reason that he'd want us to be baptized using the trinitarian formula
👹👹 halo harry strikes out again he is batting .000 -- dom_64 it's time to find another hitting instructor why don't you try the one that bats a .1000 the holy spirit 🙂😉
Matthew 28 vrses 18-20, has nothing to do with dunking a person underwater.
It has everything to do with making LEARNERS of who Messiah is, and what He is like.
The word BAPTIZING,is in the present tense in the Greek text, even in the English the ending 'ing', places the word into the 'present' tense, meaning;something that happened in the past,yet continues into the present.
q 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 please stop getting your greek from chobani yogurt
STRONGS NT 907: βαπτίζω
βαπτίζω; (imperfect ἐβαπτιζον); future βαπτίσω; 1 aorist ἐβάπτισα; passive (present βαπτίζομαι); imperfect ἐβαπτιζομην; perfect participle βεβαπτισμενος; 1 aorist ἐβαπτίσθην; 1 future βαπτισθήσομαι; 1 aorist middle ἐβαπτισαμην; (frequent. (?) from βάπτω, like βαλλίζω from βάλλω); here and there in Plato, Polybius, Diodorus, Strabo, Josephus, Plutarch, others.
I.
1. properly, to dip repeatedly, to immerge, submerge (of vessels sunk, Polybius 1, 51, 6; 8, 8, 4; of animals, Diodorus 1, 36).
2. to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water; in the middle and the 1 aorist passive to wash oneself, bathe; so Mark 7:4 (where WH text ῥαντισωνται); Luke 11:38 (2 Kings 5:14 ἐβαπτίσατο ἐν τῷ Ιορδάνῃ, for טָבַל; Sir. 31:30 (Sir. 34:30; Judith 12:7).
the Jews asked, “by what power, or in what name, have you done this?” Peter answers and says that it was in the name of Jesus that they had healed. In other words, “in the name of Jesus” means that it is by the power and authority found in Christ. We can see this usage in many places in the New Testament.
Acts 3:6 “But Peter said, ‘I do not possess silver and gold, but what I do have I give to you: In the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene–walk!'”
Acts 16:18, “And she continued doing this for many days. But Paul was greatly annoyed, and turned and said to the spirit, ‘I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her!” And it came out at that very moment.'”
1 Cor. 5:4-5, “In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5 I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.”
1 Cor. 6:11, “And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God.”
Eph. 5:20, “always giving thanks for all things in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God, even the Father.”
2 Thess. 3:6, “Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep aloof from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us.”
As you can see, “in the name of the Lord Jesus” and “in the name of Jesus” speaks of “in the authority of Jesus.” Therefore, when someone is properly baptized, they are baptized in the name of Jesus; that is, by the authority of Jesus.
herefore, when they are properly baptized in the name of Jesus, they should say, “I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” 👉👉👉👉👉👉 just as Jesus commanded us to do💡💡💡💡💡💡
Rsvp, you show forth you ignorance about Matthew 28 verses 18-20, the text has to do with making LEARNERS of Messiah, not making them wet.
Immersing them into the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, TEACHING the names of GOD Almighty to the nations.
But of course the 'christians' do not understand this simple section of Scripture.
18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. 19 Therefore, go and make disciples in all nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit;
20 Teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you. And lo, I am with you always, even until the completion of the age." Amen
CULTISTrsvp the egyptian 'trinity' worshipper says - 'As you can see, “in the name of the 'lord jesus” and “in the name of 'jesus' speaks of “in the authority of 'jesus'.” Therefore, when someone is properly baptized, they are baptized in the name of 'jesus'; that is, by the authority of 'jesus'.'
BUT BUT BUT you ONLY list your PAGAN named 'jesus' here to be baptized in and that is CORRECT to be baptized in >>>Yah'shua<<< because that part of Father YHWH came to the stationary non moving earth to die for our sins, that is the EVERLASTING FATHER IN THE FLESH (Isaiah 9:6!), right?
Then you claim there is contradictions in the Bible when you say - therefore, when they are properly baptized in the name of 'jesus', they should say, “I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” just as 'jesus' commanded us to do.' that was inserted in the Bible by the cathoholics during translation times of (Matt 28:19)??? REALLY CULTISTrsvp??? Other places in the Bible it says they ONLY were baptized in the name of Yah'shua! So what's up with your claiming contradictions in the Bible dude??? You incompetent to understanding error placed in the Bible of Matt 28:19 dude???
Whiz Quiz, how many times have I told you not to do this posing stuff alone without your TeddyBug wannabe advisor‼️‼️😂😂😂😂😂😂
Whiz, if you’re gonna use the “continuous” baptism argument, which is good one btw, you just proved water baptism is to continue along with the realities it symbolizes.
- 'As you can see, “in the name of the 'lord jesus” and “in the name of 'jesus' speaks of “in the authority of 'jesus'.” Therefore, when someone is properly baptized, they are baptized in the name of 'jesus'; that is, by the authority of 'jesus'.' 
Other places in the Bible it says they ONLY were baptized in the name of Yah'shua! 
So what's up with your claiming contradictions in the Bible dude??? You incompetent to understanding error placed in the Bible of Matt 28:19 dude??? 
