IF you deconverted in midlife, can you help?

[Angrboda]

Just a minor point, but if I were commanded to do something in the name of the acting attorney general, I would be safe in either doing so with reference to either "Matthew Whitaker" or "The Acting Attorney General".  "In the name of" is an idiomatic phrase meaning to invoke the authority of the person or office, so invoking either is the same thing.  It doesn't literally mean to say the name of the person.  It's figurative.  So this argument that the father, son, and the holy ghost are titles and not names simply doesn't wash.  Saying the name of Jesus alone doesn't do anything.

Considering there are 51 people who go by "Attorney General", you're bound to cause confusion...

Jesus gave Peter the Keys to the kingdom of Heaven...

Jesus told Peter what ever he bound on earth would be bound in Heaven, and what ever he looses on earth would be loosed in Heaven...

When asked how to get to heaven, Peter said to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ...

How one should baptize really isn't debatable, because even if you're Catholic (who also use the trinitarian formula), which claim that Peter was the first pope, and that the Pope is infallible, they should then be baptizing the same way their first "Pope" did...

You have the same problem Drich has in claiming that the Lord's prayer is exclusive. Simply because there is an example of something doesn't mean that the example is the only way to do things. Seeing that we have a counter-example from no less an authority than Christ himself, this seems to be just another logic fail.