Should one change his name at baptism?

Should one change his name at baptism?-free important bible question and answer download

Should one change his name at baptism?

 

When people are converted from non-Christian background, the question arises at water baptism whether their original names should be changed. In India, especially among Hindus, most names are associated with deities. Therefore some ministers of the Gospel insist a name change for the baptismal candidates. Is it a must?

 

Many Biblical names make statements about character (1 Sam 25:25; Acts 4:36). The name given was often determined by some circumstance at the time of birth (Gen 29:32-35); sometimes the name expressed a hope or a prophecy (Isa 8:1-4; Hos 1:4). Patriarchal times saw names as indicators of character, function, or destiny. Soon names began to be given more hopefully than discriminatingly, until finally we are not sure whether the name tells us anything about the nature (The New International Dictionary of the Bible).

 

We Indian Christians often think that all Indian names are Hindu, and all Western names are Christian. To us Western names appear superior to Indian. "Blackstone" in English sounds to us better than the same name in an Indian vernacular. "Murugan" is the Tamil name of a Hindu deity, but it just means "Beautiful!" We will not accept this name, whereas we will name our son as "Apollo" and our daughter as "Diana." Both these are actually names of Greek deities! (Acts 19:27,28). "Apollos" means a "destroyer" and it is the name of a youthful god of music. One of the apostles had this name and he didn’t change it!

 

Those who insist on changing names quote Exodus 23:13 and Joshua 23:7 where we are commanded not to make "mention" of the name of other gods. This simply means that we should steer clear of idolatry. If we take the above commandment literally, how can we read so many passages of the Bible where the names like Ashtaroth and Baal are repeatedly mentioned? And how can we call or address people with such names? You can’t even pronounce the names of the President and the Prime Minister of India! The Bible unhesitantly uses the Babylonian heathenic names given to the three Hebrew young men (Dan 1:7; 3:2&28). The apostles did not change the name of the first gentile convert (Cornelius) or that of the first European convert (Lydia).

 

We commonly say that Saul became Paul. This is strictly not true. He already had both these names given by his parents. "Saul" is a Hebrew name, common in Jewish background, meaning "asked of God." "Paul" is a Roman name of the Hellenistic background, meaning "small." A Roman citizen usually had three names (Acts 22:27,28). The apostle was continued to be called as Saul even after his baptism, Spirit-filling and call to ministry. But from Acts 13:9, he was called Paul, perhaps because he was then entering the Gentile phase of his ministry. This was not a name change.

 

It may be advisable to drop community names like Nadar, Pillai, Mudaliar and Achary. Otherwise change of names causes unnecessary problems in society and government records, especially in rural and tribal areas. Non-Christian parents feel that they are disrespected when the names lovingly given by them to their sons and daughters are changed when the latter believe on Christ. This may lead to unnecessary alienation and antagonism. The furtherance of the gospel is stopped.

 

If the candidates themselves strongly request a name change, we can comply with. Even here, we must help them choose names in the local vernacular and cultural style. What is promised under the New Covenant is only a new "heart" and a new "spirit" (Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 36:25-28). But if we wait, we all will be given a new "name" in New Jerusalem! (Rev 3:12).