1. Inferrences Made with relations to the Name

The first thing to note is that there is nowhere in the scriptures that Yahweh speaks of Himself as one in reference to the integer. The scriptures from the beginning to the end testifies to the truth that Yahweh is a unity. Hence the position taken from the scriptures that there are 3 different distinct personae in one substantia did not begin in the mind of a devilish man. Base on the division of the scripture you referred to it is pointed out that these personae are; Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Textual criticism is still divided as to the validity of this portion of scripture, but like most things in the followship of the Messiah I accept this by faith and lean on the evidence offered in the earliest MMS showing this longer ending.

Let us address the notion that you seek to posit that the only names that should be used to address the Creator and Supreme ruler are those of the Hebrew language. The first reality to note is that due to the demise brought about by those who inherited the Hebraic traditions as it relates to the tetragammaton and the obvious lost of definite pronunciation of YAHWEH. The tetragammaton used the letters yod, he, vav, and he which would be YHVH. Explain to me Scribe how did it evolve into YHWH.

As it relates to your strict adherence to the name Yashua. It appears that unlike those who say Jesus and refer only to the Historical Messiah, you are forced to reconcile every appearance of the name Yashua in the scriptures. It is no wonder that you try to find messianic truth in Joshua/Yashua as an OT christophany. This position makes Yahweh as guilty as those of us who have sinned. Read the history of Joshua and see if his life is consistent with that of the Word as recorded by the apostles.

The Holy Spirit or as you would say Yashua in flesh or in Spirit. Is this really true? This teaching goes in tandem with your belief that matter is just Spirit materialized. This is not scriptural as the scriptures say that matter was made from nothing. God is not nothing, hence the Messiah cannot be just a spiritual shape, he is a person. Yes it is true that the universe came out of what is not visible, but it didn’t say it came out of what is invisible. The fact that something or someone is not visible does not mean that the person or thing is invisible.

Scribe, I do not deny that the Hebrew names of the Father and the Son are Yahweh and Yashua, in English I say Jehovah/God and Jesus. Tell me where in scripture is says address by these names and not any linguistic derivative.

2. Inferences Made with relations to Baptism

To open this section I wish to make a quote from the Dean now deceased, God bless his soul, Dr Kinley. He has stated, “…and proven scripturally that all carnal ordinances (water baptism, Passover suppers, ceremonies, circumcision, Passover feasts, foot washing, etc.) practiced by Christendom today, have been erroneously carried over and misplaced in this Spiritual Dispensation and Age of Grace." The clergy has ignorantly called YAHSHUA THE MESSIAH a LIAR, in saying that He INSTITUTED rather than FULFILLED all carnal ordinances that were under the Mosaic Law (Matt. 3:13-15, Matt. 5:17-18, Luke 24:25-27, 44)."

Now the first thing to address is the age of grace. You would probably be better able to offer a more enlightened position, but base on scriptures. In I Petros, Petros formally known as Cephas makes reference to the Old Testament and illuminates the concept of grace. He speaks of the age of grace being ushered in by the resurrection of the Messiah. If Peter got it wrong then I shall not be held accountable since he has led me astray. But since I am convinced that if anyone would have gotten it right it would have been he who followed the Messiah.

The concept of baptism began with John as he baptized with water onto repentance. Yashua gave it new meaning and after His resurrection not before, but after, commanded the disciples to baptize ALL PEOPLE from ALL NATIONS. Base on the practices of the disciples post resurrection, we can see that they continued this practice of water baptism as it was renewed as an ordinance to be entered into based on the New Testament of Yashua’s blood written upon our hearts. This was not a practice to be done away with as it relates to the coming of the Holy Spirit since this continued after the manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Again, I must draw from Petros as recorded in the Acts of God division 10.47; "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have."

Not only was this a practice upheld after the resurrection, it was also practiced after the coming of the Holy Spirit.

Now as it relates to the meaning of Baptism which really is the least important aspect of your argument since it has more than one lexical meaning. It is important to know that baptize/baptism are anglicized versions of the Greek word baptizo which means “to dip,” “to immerse” or “to submerge”. The significance of baptism as seen in the living out of the New Testament that was written on the hearts of the apostles and other disciples is always indicative of an individuals faith in Yahweh, the Messiah and the message of the Messiah. It takes on another meaning based on the practices of the day by those who were in the business of dying clothes by dipping them in large tanks of scarlet dye. When the garments were removed from the dye it would be identical to the dye in which it was immersed.

As it relates to the prophecy of John the Baptizer, it is Christ who baptizes in fire and in the Spirit. This is not for any human to claim to do. The disciples facilitated instances where this happened, but they never claimed to baptize anyone in the Spirit or with fire.

These are the two major inferences I noticed in your questions. Let the readers be the judge of my attempt to posit an argument in answering your questions. If I have failed to answer any other important aspect of your 11 questions please let me know.