The Original Matthew 28:19 Restored

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

We also have a lot of early Latin, and some decently early Syriac and Coptic and other versions. There is nothing extant from Hebrew until way into the middle ages.

Steven

Amen, many Latin manuscripts even before Jerome's Vulgate.

Hebrew Matthew is a corruption from the Rabbis who created the Shem Tov to bring doubt on Jesus as the Messiah. During the Middle Ages the Jewish communities had large numbers of Jews leave Judaism for Christianity. Rabbi Don Isaac Abarbanel who worked for Ferdinand and Isabelle, formulated his commentary on the Book of Daniel. Where he claimed that Islam and Christianity would destroy each other. Then Judaism would reign supreme.
During this time some would come forward to try to disprove Christianity. A debate between Dominican Friar Pablo Christiani, a convert from Judaism to Christianity, and Rabbi Nahmanides took place. Despite all of this a movement evolved to create a more Hebraic Christianity.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

evolved to create a more Hebraic Christianity.

It led into the era of really incredible Christian Hebraists.
The book Hebrew in the Church by Pinchas Lapide is a good resource.

=====================

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:

Lets take Tertullian as an example, more than a century before Nicea and Eusebius.

TERTULLIAN.

De Baptismo (On Baptism ) 6
https://books.google.com/books?id=lxYP4zRWyQkC&pg=PA127
Translation by Ernest Evans is provided with the accompanying Latin text.
http://www.tertullian.org/articles/e...text_trans.htm
https://books.google.com/books?id=CvI2DAAAQBAJ&pg=PA15

As John was our Lord's forerunner, preparing his ways, so also the angel, the mediator of baptism, makes the ways straight for the Holy Spirit who is to come next. He does so by that canceling of sins which is granted in response to faith signed and sealed in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. For if in three witnesses every word shall be established, how much more shall the gift of God? By the benediction we have the same mediators of faith as we have sureties of salvation. That number of the divine names of itself suffices for the confidence of our hope. Yet because it is under the charge of three that profession of faith and promise of salvation are in pledge, there is a necessary addition, the mention of the church: because where there are the three, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, there is the church, which is a body of three.

====================

De Baptismo (On Baptism ) 13
https://books.google.com/books?id=CvI2DAAAQBAJ&pg=PA31

For there has been imposed a law of baptizing, and its form prescribed: `Go,' he says, `teach the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost.' When this law was associated with that well-known pronouncement, `Unless a man has been born again of water and the Holy Spirit he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven,' faith was put under obligation to the necessity of baptism.

====================

Prescription for Heretics ch. 20
De praescriptione haereticorum
https://books.google.com/books?id=fgg4AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA146

Out of the number of His disciples He attached to Himself twelve special ones who were destined to be the teachers of the nations. Consequently, when one of them was struck off, He bade the eleven remaining ones to go and teach all nations, who were to be baptized into the Father and into the Son and into the Holy Spirit.

====================

Against Praxeas ch. 26
https://books.google.com/books?id=nlcPAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA395 – Peter Holmes
http://www.tertullian.org/articles/e...raxeas_eng.htm – Ernest Evans

And after the resurrection He pledges himself to send to His disciples the promise of the Father, and, lastly, commands them to baptize unto the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, not unto one: for not once, but thrice, are we baptized, unto each several Person at each several name.

This whole nonsense argument against the authenticity of the text of Matthew 28:19 has poisoned the writings of a number of apostolics, for the reasons explained by brother Benincasa. And once you start down the road of attacking the Bible, changing it to match your preferences, you do not have a pure Bible to lift up, embrace and defend. And your whole approach to Christian faith is undermined.

Just like I suggest we separate from any who lift up "yahweh" (trying to reach them first in care and love) this is also a dividing issue, at least in terms of Bible and scholastic integrity. When I saw the list of apostolic writers who had hitched their star to attacking Matthew 28:19, I was truly amazed. Thus, at times I make it my reasonable service to show how even the church writers in the Ante-Nicene era support with incredible references and evidences our pure Bible verse of Matthew 28:19.

Steven

[Scott Pitta]

Textual criticism of the NT is fascinating. It is quite complex and in several cases, over my head. But that fact does not stop me from reading in this field of study.

Reading the actual manuscripts and translating from them helps me to understand the issue and also to get a feel for certain manuscripts.

My faith in God or in his book has not been discounted by efforts to understand the history of the transmission of the Greek NT.

Explaining it to others who do not know anything about the subject, without eroding their faith in God is quite the challenge. Frankly, I do not discuss the fine points other than here or if someone asks about it. It has never been discussed in any Sunday School class I have ever sat in.

New titles do come out, but they are notoriously expensive. My budget does not allow for many purchases in that department

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Sounds like you are saying the Bible is NOT the very words straight from the mouth of Jehovah, but is "just a collection of stories to be interpreted."

I believe that the original autographs were inspired and inerrant. I'm not entirely confident saying that of any interpretation used today, but I could be wrong. My preferred translations are King James Version and the English Standard Version.

I'll revisit the issue.

[Steven Avery]

Here is a suggestion:

Let's try to keep this thread mostly on the Matthew 28:19 related issues. It would be easy to go to another thread for general meanderings about textual criticism.

============

The issue of the very slippery slope was raised by brother Benincasa. I do think that is relevant for any oddball attack on the Bible text (Matthew 28:19, Pericope Adulterae, Mark resurrection appearances ending).

If you do not have a pure Bible, if verses and sections can be simply wiped out based on clearly absurd criteria, and hundreds or thousands of verses changed, then how could you really be a Christian whose Bible is the plumb line of faith? Or are you just following the "Spirit"? Or the burning in the bosom, in your beliefs? We had one gentleman say that Laodecians and Jasher were scriptural books! The slope had slid.

It was a good question, I do not see that the last two posts really tried to answer.

Steven

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

Textual criticism of the NT is fascinating. It is quite complex and in several cases, over my head. But that fact does not stop me from reading in this field of study.

Reading the actual manuscripts and translating from them helps me to understand the issue and also to get a feel for certain manuscripts.

My faith in God or in his book has not been discounted by efforts to understand the history of the transmission of the Greek NT.

But you do realize that your faith is because of what you have read, not just based on actual experiences. My point has always been, that if you don't have a reliable text you actually end up question begging. Which means your faith has shreds of doubt. Textual criticism isn't for novices. Take Professor Bart D. Ehrman just as one example. He devolved from a fervent young Christian to a low level agnostic. The reason he gives is that the more he learned about textual criticism and Bible documents, the more his unbelief grew. His fame came from his books discounting the Bible in its original languages. Faith comes by "hearing" and hearing the Word of God. Yet, if the preacher or teacher isn't sounding a clear note from music originally written by our LORD. You are dancing to a different tune? You can by all means take the position that for you this is all about faith and not having the actual Words of Christ. But that isn't logical, nor is it honest. Because you can believe in the tooth fairy based on your missing tooth from under the pillow. Or Santa Claus because presents appear under the Dagon Tree Xmas morning. Yet, there are logical explanations for both of those occurrences. You just don't want to acknowledge them. But, that's fine. Just don't expect many sincerely studious people to take you seriously.

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

Explaining it to others who do not know anything about the subject, without eroding their faith in God is quite the challenge. Frankly, I do not discuss the fine points other than here or if someone asks about it. It has never been discussed in any Sunday School class I have ever sat in.

That's where a gifted teacher comes into play. The job of a teacher isn't to keep the students in the dark so everyone stumbles into a ditch. The teacher's job is to give out information correctly so the student becomes a teacher. Because they are going to find out sooner or later, and with the advent of the Internet and social media, people are walking into all sorts of individuals looking to not only erode, but destroy. Better your students have you prepare them, before someone else ensnares them.

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

New titles do come out, but they are notoriously expensive. My budget does not allow for many purchases in that department

The Lord will always provide tools. The Internet has tons of great tools to discover the Bible in its original language.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

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:

Lets take Tertullian as an example, more than a century before Nicea and Eusebius.

Next is Cyprian, a very major leader of the church, writing in the mid-third century, and similarly way before Nicea and Eusebius.

=================

Cyprian, Epistle XXII
To the Clergy Abiding at Rome, Concerning Many of the Confessors, and Concerning the Forwardness of Lucian and the Modesty of Celerinus the Confessor.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/050622.htm

… while Lucian, as I have said, is less skilful concerning the understanding of the Lord's word, and by his facility, is mischievous on account of the dislike that he causes for my reverential dealing. For while the Lord has said that the nations are to be baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and their past sins are to be done away in baptism; this man, ignorant of the precept and of the law, commands peace to be granted and sins to be done away in the name of Paulus; and he says that this was commanded him by Paulus, as you will observe in the letter sent by the same Lucian to Celerinus …

=================

Cyprian, Epistle XXIV:2
To Moyses and Maximus and the Rest of the Confessors.
Argument.—This Letter is One of Congratulation to the Roman Confessors.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.iv.xxiv.html

The Lord, when, after His resurrection, He sent forth His apostles, charges them, saying, ‘All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go 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.’

=================

Cyprian, “Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews,” Chapter II:26
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/050712b.htm

And He laid His right hand upon me, and said, ‘Fear not; I am the First and the Last, and He that liveth and was dead; and, lo, I am living for evermore and I have the keys of death and of hell.’ Likewise in the Gospel, the Lord after His resurrection says to His disciples: ‘All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go 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.’

=================

Cyprian, Epistle LXXII:5
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.iv.lxxii.html

For the Lord after His resurrection, sending His disciples, instructed and taught them in what manner they ought to baptize, 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.” He suggests the Trinity, in whose sacrament the nations were to be baptized.

=================

Cyprian, Epistle LXXII:18
To Jubaianus, Concerning the Baptism of Heretics - #5
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.iv.lxxii.html

17
For whereas in the Gospels, and in the epistles of the apostles, the name of Christ is alleged for the remission of sins; it is not in such a way as that the Son alone, without the Father, or against the Father, can be of advantage to anybody; but that it might be shown to the Jews, who boasted as to their having the Father, that the Father would profit them nothing, unless they believed on the Son whom He had sent. For they who know God the Father the Creator, ought also to know Christ the Son, lest they should flatter and applaud themselves about the Father alone, without the acknowledgment of His Son, who also said, “No man cometh to the Father but by me.” But He, the same, sets forth, that it is the knowledge of the two which saves, when He says, “And this is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” Since, therefore, from the preaching and testimony of Christ Himself, the Father who sent must be first known, then afterwards Christ, who was sent, and there cannot be a hope of salvation except by knowing the two together; how, when God the Father is not known, nay, is even blasphemed, can they who among the heretics are said to be baptized in the name of Christ, be judged to have obtained the remission of sins? For the case of the Jews under the apostles was one, but the condition of the Gentiles is another. The former, because they had already gained the most ancient baptism of the law and Moses, were to be baptized also in the name of Jesus Christ, in conformity with what Peter tells them in the Acts of the Apostles, saying, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For this promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.” Peter makes mention of Jesus Christ, not as though the Father should be omitted, but that the Son also might be joined to the Father.

18
Finally, when, after the resurrection, the apostles are sent by the Lord to the heathens, they are bidden to baptize the Gentiles in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. How, then, do some say, that a Gentile baptized without, outside the Church, yea, and in opposition to the Church, so that it be only in the name of Jesus Christ, everywhere, and in whatever manner, can obtain remission of sin, when Christ Himself commands the heathen to be baptized in the full and united Trinity?

=================

I’ve included section 17 above for more context and because it is very interesting from our perspective of studying the water baptisms in the Ante-Nicene era.

=================

Next is planned the Council of Carthage and the Treatise on Rebaptism, both connected to Cyprian.

Do we need to point out how this prolific Ante-Nicene referencing obliterates the piddle case against the pure Matthew 28:19 text based on the Eusebius mixed referencing?

=================

Steven

[Scott Pitta]

Steve Avery, has done us a great service by pointing our discussion in the right direction.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Amen

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Next is Cyprian, a very major leader of the church, writing in the mid-third century, and similarly way before Nicea and Eusebius.

=================

Cyprian, Epistle XXII
To the Clergy Abiding at Rome, Concerning Many of the Confessors, and Concerning the Forwardness of Lucian and the Modesty of Celerinus the Confessor.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/050622.htm

=================

Cyprian, Epistle XXIV:2
To Moyses and Maximus and the Rest of the Confessors.
Argument.—This Letter is One of Congratulation to the Roman Confessors.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.iv.xxiv.html

=================

Cyprian, “Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews,” Chapter II:26
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/050712b.htm

=================

Cyprian, Epistle LXXII:5
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.iv.lxxii.html

=================

Cyprian, Epistle LXXII:18
To Jubaianus, Concerning the Baptism of Heretics - #5
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.iv.lxxii.html


=================

I’ve included section 17 above for more context and because it is very interesting from our perspective of studying the water baptisms in the Ante-Nicene era.

=================

Next is planned the Council of Carthage and the Treatise on Rebaptism, both connected to Cyprian.

Do we need to point out how this prolific Ante-Nicene referencing obliterates the piddle case against the pure Matthew 28:19 text based on the Eusebius mixed referencing?

=================

Steven

Pope Stephen called Cyprian the bishop of Carthage “a false Christ and a false apostle, and a deceitful worker” and excommunicated him for his opposition to baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, he also disfellowship Firmilian bishop of Caesarea for he also refused to accept baptism in Jesus’ name as valid.