name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.[13]

No water is mentioned. He commanded them to baptize into the Divinity,
not in water.

This harmonizes all the evangelists with both Peter and Paul.

If we reject this view and assume that in Matthew[14] water baptism is
intended to be understood, then we are compelled to believe that this
interpretation of Matthew, with its formula for baptism, was conceived
after the apostles' time; was unknown to them, and is a human conception
and not a correct rendering of the teachings of Jesus. Because with
water introduced, it stands alone and is out of harmony with the whole
of Christ's teachings upon other occasions, and because it conflicts
with all our other six versions of the commission; and because (as we
read), the apostles and first Christians never did baptize with the
formula prescribed in Matthew, which is conclusive evidence that to
their understandings Christ never commanded them to do so. And again,
because the apostles and first Christians did continue to baptize with
water, sometimes without formula but mostly in the name of Jesus Lord or
Christ. This they would not have done in defiance of Christ's command to
baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Upon these and
many other grounds we claim that Christ never did command his disciples
to baptize with water in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,
nor in any way whatever.[15]

According to Peter's account of the commission, Christ commanded his
apostles to preach to the people. He mentions no command to baptize.[16]

Peter did preach to the people and the Holy Spirit fell upon them as it