The Story of the Apostles Baptizing in Jesus' Name

Baptism is the first step of Christian faith and an important ceremony signifying union with Jesus.¹ Many churches baptize "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," following the words of Matthew 28:19.³ This final command Jesus gave to His disciples includes the instructions to 'Go, make disciples, baptize, and teach'.⁶

However, there’s an interesting point. If you look at the Book of Acts, which records how Jesus' disciples actually performed baptisms, surprisingly, there is no record of them baptizing "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Instead, throughout Acts, they consistently baptize "in the name of Jesus Christ" or "in the name of the Lord Jesus".¹

Why is there this difference? Why does this discrepancy exist between Jesus' command and the actual actions of the apostles? This article seeks to find answers to these questions. By examining biblical records and early church history, we will explore the possibility that the baptism "in the name of Jesus," as practiced by the apostles, might have been the original method intended by Jesus and followed by them.

The Book of Acts is the most vivid record showing how the early church began and grew. The baptism scenes described here show a consistent pattern.

What does it mean to be baptized "in the name of Jesus"? It goes beyond simply saying the name; it’s a confession of entrusting my life to Jesus, coming under His authority, and becoming His people.¹³ It’s in the same vein as emphasizing the power of Jesus' name when healing the sick or casting out demons in Acts.

The fact that the apostles consistently baptized various people—Jews, Samaritans, Gentiles—"in the name of Jesus" throughout Acts strongly suggests this was the standard practice of the early church. Acts makes no mention of any other baptismal formula.

This table clearly shows how the apostles actually performed baptisms, based on the records in Acts. We can see that they consistently baptized "in the name of Jesus" in various situations.

The command we are familiar with from Matthew 28:19, to baptize "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," is recorded in most Bibles today.²¹ Notably, old Bible manuscripts from around the 4th century (like Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus) also include this verse.²¹

However, there is a significant counterargument involving the writings of Eusebius, a famous church historian from the early 4th century. According to research by scholar F. C. Conybeare, when Eusebius quoted Matthew 28:19 in several books written before the Council of Nicaea (325 AD), the starting point for the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity, he surprisingly recorded it about 18 times consistently in the form: "Go and make disciples of all nations in my name, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you."¹

Eusebius was someone who had access to very old Bible manuscripts at that time.²⁵ His consistent quotation of "in my name" before the Council of Nicaea serves as strong evidence that the original form of Matthew might have been different from what we have today. It suggests the possibility that the phrase "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" was added later.¹

Of course, there are counterarguments suggesting Eusebius might have simply quoted the relevant part briefly, or that he knew and used the Trinitarian formula after the Council of Nicaea.²⁵ However, the fact that he recorded "in my name" so many times before the Council of Nicaea is sufficient to raise the question of whether the Trinitarian formula was originally absent from Matthew.¹

*Table 2: Eusebius’s Citations of Matthew 28:19 (Based on Conybeare’s Research)

Note: This table exemplifies the trend identified by Conybeare across 18 citations. It shows the consistent appearance of the "in my name" form in pre-Nicene records.¹

This table shows that Eusebius’s records provide important clues about the original form of Matthew 28:19.

Another Early Record: The Didache

Meanwhile, a very old church manual called the 'Didache' (estimated to be written in the late 1st or early 2nd century) clearly contains the instruction to "baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit".³⁰ This is important evidence showing that the Trinitarian formula was already in use early in church history.²²

So, how should we understand this? Perhaps in the early church, the tradition of baptizing "in the name of Jesus" and the tradition of baptizing "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" coexisted. Or, perhaps the church’s ritual (baptismal method) recorded in the Didache later influenced the copying process of Matthew 28:19.²² That is, scribes familiar with the standard baptismal method of the church might have altered the biblical text to match that method.³⁵

In conclusion, there are historical points to consider regarding whether the Trinitarian formula in Matthew 28:19 is exactly as Jesus originally spoke it. The consistent records in Acts and the testimony of Eusebius suggest the possibility that baptizing "in the name of Jesus" was the older and more fundamental form.

The baptismal practices of the early church were not unified from the beginning. Various methods existed, gradually settling into the form common today over time.

Early Diversity (1st-3rd Centuries)

As seen earlier, Acts only shows baptism "in the name of Jesus," but the Didache from a similar period teaches to baptize "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."³⁰ The Didache also states that both immersion (fully submerging in water) and affusion (pouring water) are acceptable.³⁰ Writings from church fathers of the 2nd-3rd centuries (like Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Cyprian) also show varied views on baptismal methods.¹ This indicates there was no single, unified baptismal practice across all churches before the 4th century.¹ However, receiving instruction in the faith and confessing belief before baptism were considered important.³⁶

Controversies within the Church and Their Impact

Over time, deep theological debates arose within the church regarding the relationship between God the Father, the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit.

The Role of Church Councils and Creeds

These council decisions became a powerful force for standardizing the Trinitarian baptismal formula throughout the church. This formula became an important standard for expressing correct belief (orthodoxy) and distinguishing it from incorrect teachings (heresy).³⁸ As the church gained state recognition (after Emperor Constantine ⁵⁰), this unified confession of faith and baptismal practice spread even more widely.

While this process clarified doctrine and unified the church, it might have gradually overshadowed or diminished the importance of the early church’s simpler, Jesus-centered baptismal practice seen in Acts.

In whose name we are baptized is not merely a matter of form; it is deeply related to what we believe and confess.

Why Return to the Apostles' Way?

Possible Questions:

Returning today to the tradition of baptizing "in the name of Jesus" can be a powerful experience of encountering and confessing Jesus Christ more clearly in the first step of our faith. This aligns better with the fervent gospel proclamation of the early church shown in Acts. Perhaps this is the path back to the original practice of the apostles, beyond the various traditions added over time.

So far, we have looked at two aspects of the baptismal formula: the baptism "in the name of Jesus" found in Acts, and the baptism "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" from Matthew 28:19.

Acts shows that the early church consistently baptized "in the name of Jesus." On the other hand, while all extant manuscripts of Matthew 28:19 contain the Trinitarian formula, the form quoted by Eusebius suggests that the text he consulted may have differed from the extant manuscripts. Church history reveals that debates over Trinitarian doctrine and council decisions significantly influenced the standardization of the Trinitarian baptismal formula.

Based on these historical and biblical grounds, we propose that the apostles' baptismal practice recorded in Acts represents the most certain and essential baptismal tradition of the early church. We encourage the church to reconsider the historical roots of baptism and seriously consider following the footsteps of the apostles who baptized "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ." We hope to rediscover the deep meaning and power of clearly uniting with Jesus Christ through the first step of faith, baptism.⁶