In HIS name the nations will put their hope Matthew 12:21

you will be hated by all nations because of MY name. Matthew 24:9

Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine, to bear MY name before the nations Acts 9:15

repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in HIS name to all the nations Luke 24:47

Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of JESUS CHRIST. Acts 2:38

they had only been baptized in the name of the LORD JESUS. Acts 8:16

everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through HIS name.... he ordered that they be baptized in the name of JESUS CHRIST. Acts 10:43,48

they were baptized in the name of the LORD JESUS. Acts 19:5

Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on HIS name. Acts 22:16

we received grace and apostleship to call all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith for the sake of HIS name. Romans 1:5

Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into CHRIST JESUS have been baptized into HIS death? Romans 6:3

Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
1 Corinthians 1:13

whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the LORD JESUS giving thanks to God the Father through HIM Colossians 3:17

Jesus' name means God saves. He is his God's salvation, the Savior his God raised up.

Eusebius does also quote the "Father, Son, Holy Spirit" version of Matthew 28:19. But even if we supposed the "in my name" quotations from Eusebius are either paraphrases of some sort, or a corruption by Eusebius due to a change in his beliefs, or the like, it does not resolve highly significant problems concerning the Scriptural evidence. If the "Father, Son, Holy Spirit" reading is what the eleven disciples of Jesus were commanded by him to do, why then is there no evidence whatsoever that they ever did what he commanded, and why does it appear that there is only evidence indicating that the disciples of Jesus did otherwise? Furthermore, why is there also contextual and internal evidence which strongly suggests Matthew never wrote these words? We must not be foolish and suppose that a very early corruption could not have occurred simply because all our much later manuscript evidence only has the "Father, Son, Holy Spirit" reading. Perhaps this reading is authentic but to arrogantly declare that it is certainly authentic in the face of the facts is the folly of fools. We must be cautious and wise and not reckless fools.