Gospels of Matthew without Trinitarian ending

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Great, Jesus name baptism was used way before Azusa Street. Hooray! Tell us something we didn’t know. Anyhoo, FZ is no longer trying to prove the validity of his previous claim. That the traditional wording of Matthew 28:19 is spurious.

Edward Evanson, vicar of Tewkesbury in his letter to Richard Hurd, Bishop of Worcester, 2nd Ed. London (1792) disputed the authenticity of the Matthean text.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Edward Evanson, vicar of Tewkesbury in his letter to Richard Hurd, Bishop of Worcester, 2nd Ed. London (1792) disputed the authenticity of the Matthean text.

Edward Evanson (1731-1805)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Evanson
Evanson rejected most of the books of the New Testament as forgeries, and of the four gospels he accepted only the Gospel of Luke.

Here is the view of Evanson about the book of Matthew:

The Dissonance of the Four Generally Received Evangelists: And the Evidence of Their Respective Authenticity, Examined; with that of Some Other Scriptures Deemed Canonical (1805)
Edward Evanson
https://books.google.com/books?id=Um9AAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA248

1 am perfectly convinced, that this Gospel was not written earlier than near The middle of the second century ; and that it is the patched-work composition of some convert from the Pagan schools. p. 248

And then comparing to Luke, and having an anti-harmony approach Evanson, says, with the emphasis on Matthew being late and pagan:

I am confident, that whoever impartially considers, that, according to Lukes histories, the Christians of the apostolic age ... cannot rationally believe both these contradictory histories, and consequently he must be satisfied that one of them is grossly fabulous and false. p. 249

Edward Evanson is a good witness against the Bible, a poor witness on any specific issue where he wants to mangle the text.

[Scott Pitta]

Claims are easy to make. Where is the proof ? Does Evanson specifically mention Mt. 28:19 ??

[Steven Avery]

And I wrote about this back in 2010:

[TC-Alternate-list] Matthew 28:19 - Unitarian "Improved Version" and Edward Evanson
Steven Avery - Sept. 26, 2010
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/...ns/topics/3535

Hi Folks,

On one of the forums we were recently discussing the Frederick Cornwallis Conybeare "textual criticism" attack on the verse Matthew 28:19, which was followed by a number of later references.

Matthew 28:19
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

An argument for exclusion based on zero manuscripts, Greek, Latin or Syriac. Largely based on a mixed Eusebius usage, despite the simple fact that numerous earlier church writers (i.e. earlier than Eusebius) have the verse in today's manner. Interestingly, this rather absurd textual argument has become quite popular on the Internet.

For context, checking the history, the Unitarian "Improved Version" had mentioned such attacks a century earlier than Conybeare.

The New Testament: in an improved version, upon the basis of Archbishop Newcome's new translation (1808)
Thomas Belsham et al
http://books.google.com/books?id=y4pAAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA73
Some have called in question the genuineness of this verse, but perhaps without sufficient authority.

A number of writers (including Edward Nares, Thomas Rennell, Charles Daubeny, Richard Laurence, John Bevans) pointed out the unbelief in scripture of the Unitarians, with even leaders like Belsham doubting the authenticity of the first chapters of Luke and Matthew. This was beyond the normal textual criticism attempts on verses like 1 Timothy 3:16 and the heavenly witnesses and the Pericope Adultera and the resurrection account in the Gospel of Mark.

This is one of the books that exposed the faulty argumentation to try to (snip) the Bible..

Remarks on the version of the New Testament edited by the Unitarians, with the title of "An improved version upon the basis of Archbishop Newcome's new translation with a corrected text and notes critical and explanatory. London 1808": being a dispassionate appeal to Christians of various denominations on some of the first and most generally received doctrines of the Bible (1814)
Edward Nares
http://books.google.com/books?id=U_4UAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA261
the Editors (of the Improved Version) ....informs us that some have called in question its genuineness, (and I remember
that Mr Evanson has done so) but they add, without sufficient authority

This ebionite aspect is also quite nicely discussed in the review of Nares and in the next review in the magazine of the book by Thomas Rennell ("a student in divinity").

The Antijacobin review and true churchman's magazine, Issues 159-162 (1811)
Nares on the Version of the New Testament - (review, likely by William Hales)
http://books.google.com/books?id=8QLWAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA160

Returning to Matthew 28:19, outside the "Improved Version" we only have one early name mentioned, Edward Evanson, and not much detail. Evanson's Bible work was considered as almost an adjunct to the Unitarian Newcombe-Belsham attempts and he was also associated with Joseph Priestley (who declared his ebionite views directly).

Edward Evanson (21 April 1731 – 25 September 1805) was a controversial English clergyman.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Evanson
.... Evanson rejected most of the books of the New Testament as forgeries, and of the four gospels he accepted only the Gospel of Luke.

(per Encyclopaedia Britannica:, (1888 and later editions)
http://books.google.com/books?id=YKIMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA727

This popular branch of Unitarianism (Priestley, Belsham, Evanson) seems to have been particularly Bible correctors and (snippers) and unbelievers .. we should be cautious in necessarily painting too broad a brush.

In terms of Bible-snipping .. later the ideas became more respectable in scholastic circles (with the majority of scholars being unbelievers) if given the heading of "textual criticism" and "higher criticism".

Steven Avery

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

Claims are easy to make. Where is the proof ? Does Evanson specifically mention Mt. 28:19 ??

Proof that Evanson considered Matthew a pagan writing of the 2nd century?

In that context Evanson contrasted Matthew with Luke in the pages above, and called the superb Gospel, the "pretended Matthew" and one of the elements was the baptism verse.

according to Luke's histories, the Christians of the apostolic age did not baptize in the terms of the form here prescribed, but simply in the name of the Lord Jesus; that his disciples were so far from knowing a watch was set round the sepulchre, that the women came early on Sun- day morning to embalm the body; and were perplexed at finding the stone rolled away, and that the body was not in the sepulchre; that a vision of two angels, in human shape, informed them he was risen, and reminded them, that it was only what he had foretold them must come to pass, long before they came to Jerusalem; that they gave them no orders to send the .Apostles into Galilee to see him ; on the contrary, that, though he did not; appear to two of the women, as the pre-tended Matthew asserts, yet he appeared that same day to Peter, at Jerusalem.; to two other disciples, as they went to Emmaus; and, the succeeding night, to the whole congregation of the disciples, not in Galilee, but at Jerusalem; and that, by his express command, the Apostles did not go into Galilee, but remained at Jerusalem till the feast of Pentecost;

As to what Evanson wrote in the letter to Richard Hurd, we do not know, but I think this Dissonance book gives a clear picture of his approach. For the Hurd book, for which the title varies (e.g. Dr. Hurd) the 2006 edition has good library access, looks like it is probably the 2nd edition.

Worldcat
A letter to the Right Reverend Richard Hurd : ... wherein the importance of the prophecies of the New Testament, and the nature of the grand apostacy predicted in them, are ... considered. By Edward Evanson, A.M.
https://www.worldcat.org/title/lette...=brief_results

Purchase
https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/a-lett...&idiq=21303843

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Edward Evanson, vicar of Tewkesbury in his letter to Richard Hurd, Bishop of Worcester, 2nd Ed. London (1792) disputed the authenticity of the Matthean text.

FZ, do you understand that is his opinion.
Do you realize that it is different opinions from “theologians” that shred the pages of the Bible. NOT TANGIBLE EVIDENCE. See the difference.

[FlamingZword]

In 1824 the Unitarians which strongly opposed the trinity also suspected that Matthew 28:19 was an interpolation and wrote "The context reads just as smoothly, if not more so, without it than with it. The extrinsic evidence most strong against it. If such a command have been delivered by our Lord, being one of his last, it would have been regarded as a most solemn law, of the greatest importance, binding to a strict performance; yet seven out of eight of the New Testament writers have not only utterly neglected to make the least mention of it, but in all the instances of baptism they have recorded, have entirely disobeyed it themselves, or related its disobedience by others without any disapprobation; which is incredible, except on the supposition of this text being a subsequent interpolation." Letters to a Protestant Divine in defence of Unitarianism

[Steven Avery]

The more interesting section is in the body of the book:

Letters to a Protestant Divine in defence of Unitarianism (1824)
Reader Waineright
https://books.google.com/books?id=iehiAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA243
p. 243-263

He barely mentions remission of sins, but he does reference many of the verses that we study in harmony with Matthew 28:19. If you put aside his confusion and uncertainty about what is the scripture, it is an interesting read. I have not found any information about this barrister, Reader Wainewright (Wainwright).

Here is a mention:

The Gentleman's Magazine, Volume 155 (1834)
https://books.google.com/books?id=50JDAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA543
Reader Waimvright, esq. of Lincoln’s Inn, barrister-at-law, was elected Fellow of the Society.

[Esaias]

Brother Avery, are you familiar with the following?

"They thought they had found a very old manuscript of the four gospels, and indeed they had. But what they could not grasp was that they had in their hands an original, First Century set of the gospels, marked with round seals by the four evangelists (or their scribe) and actually dated to the exact year by clever pictorial and alphanumeric dating system.

This parchment is known by several names: Codex Washingtonensis or Washingtonianus, Washington Codex, Freer Gospels, and Codex (sometimes spelled Kodex) W."

http://www.washington-codex.org/index.htm

[Scott Pitta]

I have never seen that quote before. Who said it ??