Gospels of Matthew without Trinitarian ending

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Of course you refuse to accept the Shem Tob as a valid manuscript, which is kind of self-serving on your part, but of course there are some who disagree with your assessment.

Even putting aside the question of Shem Tov producing the ms, and the huge amount of textual corruption, the ending section does not get close to your claims. There is nothing at the ending of Matthew about baptism at all, and nothing about "in my name".

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

An interesting point that FZ tries to keep in the background is that this is NOT in the Shem Tov Hebrew Matthew.

This is direct from the 1995 2nd edition. p. 151

Hebrew Gospel of MATTHEW by George Howard - Part One.pdf https://www.academia.edu/32013676/He...-_Part_One.pdf

18 Jesus drew near to them and said to them:
To me has been given all power in heaven and earth
19 Go
20 and (teach) them to carry out all the things
which I have commanded you forever.

So there is no Bible ms. support for his rendering in any language at all.

Compare the horrid Reader's Digest style mangling of the Shem Tov version with the beautiful pure Bible text:

Matthew 28:18-20
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying,
All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:
and, lo, I am with you alway,
even unto the end of the world.
Amen.

And Conybeare proposed a text with no mention of the water baptism, and then gave us this absurd and ignorant prediction:

"It may confidently be predicted that when the Greek and Latin fathers who wrote before 400 have been more carefully edited than hitherto from the best codices, scores of old readings will be restored in the text of the N.T. of which no trace remains in any Greek MS."

Trying to be a Bible corrector, when we have God's pure word, is a haughty and proud endeavor.

[FlamingZword]

Encyclopedia Biblica (1903), Vol. IV, Art. “Son of God” section 4698, #15 by Professor of Semitic Languages and Literatures Nathanael Schmidt, “That the Trinitarian formula does not go back to Jesus himself is evident and recognized by all independent critics”

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Exactly. Case closed.

Case Closed?

Who are you to decide when a case is closed or not.

Are you the decider on when a case is closed.

So you have set up yourself as judge?

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Encyclopedia Biblica (1903), Vol. IV, Art. “Son of God” section 4698, #15 by Professor of Semitic Languages and Literatures Nathanael Schmidt, “That the Trinitarian formula does not go back to Jesus himself is evident and recognized by all independent critics”

Previously given in #67. And discussed in my post 251.

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Yay! An accurate quote, just add baptismal before formula and give the recognised spelling ...

One of the more accurate quotes. However, the word baptismal is still omitted, showing that FZ's interest is polemic, not scholarship.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Case Closed?

Who are you to decide when a case is closed or not.

Are you the decider on when a case is closed.

So you have set up yourself as judge?

If a guy tries to sell me on something, then yes, I become judge as to whether or not the sale is worthwhile.

Thanks for giving brother Avery opportunity to bring up a lot of interesting information.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

P.S. Please keep the name of that negative individual out of our discussions, I totally ignore anything that he says, and do not bother to read his posts,

If this is true, that would go a long way to explaining why the shoddy scholarship, misinformation, misquoting, plagiarism, etc. in its various forms, is never corrected. Ignoring informed critics is not wisdom.

And I actually do not think that FZ keeps a record of where he picks up snippets of information, and misinformation. Generally, he accepts whatever he reads, if he views it favorably, without making an effort to find and check and work with the primary sources. Exceptions have been relatively rare so far.

Remember the disaster when he tried to describe translation, and every paragraph was curiously uneven, or incoherent.

And I am very happy to be "negative" toward shoddy scholarship, used to try to attack the pure Reformation Bible, including the wonderful and majestic Authorized Versions, and try to sow confusion and doubt about the integrity of God's word.

Thank you Lord Jesus for providential negativity!

Originally Posted by Esaias

If a guy tries to sell me on something, then yes, I become judge as to whether or not the sale is worthwhile.

Thanks for giving brother Avery opportunity to bring up a lot of interesting information.

Most welcome on my 3ne. This is why I have no objection to the thread continuing, repetitive and new shoddy scholarship expected, and then exposed and rejected.

The goal is to really understand what is going on with the Matthew 28:19 shell game.

As a simple example, the simple fact that the Shem Tov is so distant from the FZ text has been kept hidden. And in this environment, the huge flaws in Bible faith, logic and scholarship are exposed.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Case Closed?

Who are you to decide when a case is closed or not.

Are you the decider on when a case is closed.

So you have set up yourself as judge?

Case closed was decided due to lack of real evidence.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Case closed was decided due to lack of real evidence.

Et tu Brutus?

I am surprised that you give up so easily.
I have tons of evidence and information, and you already have surrendered to me.

as, John Paul Jones said "I have not yet begun to fight!" I have so much ammunition, enough to fight WWWIII and I shoot just a few BBs and you are already crying uncle?

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Esaias

If a guy tries to sell me on something, then yes, I become judge as to whether or not the sale is worthwhile.

Thanks for giving brother Avery opportunity to bring up a lot of interesting information.

you are getting the same attitude of those folks which refuse many of our teachings.Think about this;

You teach the sabbath and I teach the Sabbath, do people readily accept the sabbath teaching?

You teach the oneness of God and I teach the oneness of God, do people readily accept the oneness of God?

You teach baptism in the name of Jesus and I teach baptism in the name of Jesus, do people readily accept baptism in the name of Jesus?

I was going to include partial preterism, in this list, but I think that is bro Blume and bro Benicasa.

but the point is that you and I teach many similar doctrines, yet we also encounter resistance when teaching those other doctrines.

[FlamingZword]

Rheinisches Museum für Philologie (G) Rhenish Museum of Philology (1903) pp. 38-41 by Professor of Philology Hermann Karl Usener, calls Matthew 28:19 an acknowledged forgery