In 1961, Pastor A. Ploughman from Birmingham (England) published „A Collection of Proofs For and Against the Traditional Wording in the Baptism Phrase in Matt. 28:19”. Based on this publication, the brochure „A Closer Look at Mt 28:19 – A Study in Textual Criticism” by Mark Kennicott was created. Extensive excerpts appeared on the website jeszua.pl, but unfortunately, that text disappeared and is no longer available. This shows that certain important information is worth preserving in a lasting way and this is also one of the reasons why I decided to publish my materials in print. As we know, the Messiah mainly preached through the spoken word and today everything we know about him comes from recorded messages. This shows how valuable books are and praise God that we have print today. The internet is very helpful in preaching, but I have learned several times that it is not secure as an archive of content. Similarly, computers are not safe; I have lost disk contents multiple times due to failures. The text below is a corrected reprint of an earlier version available on the Polish internet and was created upon request to address the content of Matthew 28:19 in the context of the Trinity. Usually, in such situations, I would refer to the relevant link on the jeszua.pl site, but since it is outdated, I have recreated the topic anew.

Introduction.

Many people have difficulty understanding the phraseology of Matthew 28:19. The difficulty comes from the words „baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” This expression was questioned not because of the specific doctrine it leads to, but rather due to early testimonies that attest to different content, as well as because of the grammar and syntax of the words themselves.

Is this „nomenclature expression” in Matthew 28:19 genuine, original? Or is it false, like the „three witnesses” we read about in 1 John 5:7, introduced into early manuscripts to support a developing doctrine? To understand the significance of this question, consider the words of the well-known Bible scholar F.C. Conybeare (19th century).

„Until the mid-nineteenth century, the text about the three witnesses from 1 John 5:7, along with Matt. 28:19, shared the burdensome task of providing biblical proof for the Trinity… (false words added in 1 John)… are now rejected by all authorities except the Pope in Rome. As a result, the entire burden of proving the Trinity has fallen on Matthew 28:19.”

If indeed the titles „Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” were added and were not the words of our Lord, then what biblical authority do we have to immerse in any name other than Yeshu? The answer – none.

By applying textual criticism methods, you will discover which words Matthew actually used and which were added to this gospel by others.

About Textual Criticism Generally.

Textual criticism refers to the methodological and deliberate study of various documents to recover the original form of a text or at least the form closest to the original.

SWETE, „Aids to the student” – Variorum Bible:

„The text of the New Testament rests on the combined testimony of a series of documented evidences: preserved manuscripts in the original Greek, early translations, and quotations from the Church Fathers (fragments cited by successors of ancient Christian writers known as 'Fathers’).”

Regarding Manuscript Evidence.

„Autographs (originals) of the New Testament probably disappeared within a few years after being written. No early Christian writer refers to them as still existing […] they could not foresee their significance for posterity.”

About Early Translations.

„As next in line after manuscripts—as channels transmitting the Greek text of the Testament—ancient translations must be placed, which were created from Greek manuscripts. In most cases, they are older than those we currently possess. Old Latin and Syriac translations,”belong to the second century and lead to the time of the direct successors of the Apostles.”

On the Patristic Writings.

„New Testament quotations in Christian Greek and Latin writers’ writings from the first five centuries are so extensive that it would be possible, if all Canon manuscripts were lost, to reconstruct almost the entire text solely from this source. There are many examples where patristic authority can tip the balance for or against the discussed reading.”

Using the above sources of textual criticism, as well as what is called „internal evidence,” we can reconstruct the true text with high reliability. Let us then apply these methods to uncover the true reading of Matthew 28:19…

Manuscript Evidence.

If the Greek manuscripts of the Gospel of Matthew were our only source to determine the text of this passage, then further study would be unnecessary, since all surviving manuscripts either contain the phrase „baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” or omit this passage entirely.

However, we must remember that we do not have any (existing) manuscript written in the first, second, or even third century—that is, before the doctrine of the Trinity was established. There is a three-century gap between the actual writing of the Gospel of Matthew and our oldest manuscript copies. Today’s translations of the Gospel of Matthew rely on manuscripts written after the Council of Nicaea. We must also remember that no surviving manuscript is free from textual errors. Some have unique errors, others, whole families of manuscripts share the same errors. Textual criticism aims to reconstruct the likely original reading by examining all the evidence.

Facts suggest that it is possible that all existing manuscripts contain one or more common textual errors. This fact must be accepted, however reluctantly. Another fact before us is that during this time span of the first three centuries, false teachings emerged that developed into the Great Apostasy. Already the messenger John at the end of the first century wrote that „many antichrists have appeared,” that is, proclaimers of a false version of Christ. How far had the apostasy advanced by the fourth century?

According to the well-known textual critic Dr. C.R. Gregory:

„Greek New Testament manuscripts were often altered by scribes who incorporated readings familiar to them and considered correct.”

Another author states the following about the „importance” given to manuscript evidence:

„We make great progress when we assign manuscripts significance not according to their age, but according to the age of the text they contain. Tregelles deserves credit for introducing this procedure, which he called 'Comparative Criticism.’ It is a scientific method and leads us for the first time to reliable results. […] There is reason to believe that the greatest errors that ever distorted the text appeared as early as the second century. […] What we need is not an ancient text, but the true text.”

Of course, when the author speaks of „the greatest errors,” he is not referring to doctrinal errors but, as a textual critic, to errors in the text itself. Some of these errors appeared simultaneously with false teachings in the early church.

Where Are the Earliest Manuscripts?

The fact that we do not possess copies dated earlier than the fourth century naturally leads to the question: „What happened to the earliest manuscripts?” The following quote largely serves as an answer:

„Diocletian in 303 A.D ordered all sacred books to be burned, yet enough survived to transmit the text.” Swete in Variorum „Aids to the Student.”

The reason the earliest manuscripts have not been found is that they were destroyed by persecutors of the early Church before Christianity became the „state” religion during Constantine’s time. Eusebius, who looked after the great library in Caesarea wrote:

„I have seen with my own eyes, prayer houses being torn down and holy Scriptures burned in the market.”

Our conclusions from the first method of inquiry are as follows:

1. All known manuscripts containing the Gospel of Matthew in full support the three-name phrase in Matthew 28:19.

2. Early scribes introduced changes to the text, some due to error, others intentionally, nevertheless – changes. Textual criticism reveals these changes quite clearly.

3. It is possible that early distortions of the text are preserved in all surviving manuscripts.

4. The goal of textual criticism is not so much to find the oldest but the correct text.

5. Manuscripts from before the 4th century do not exist, mostly due to persecutions of the early church, but deliberate destruction by the apostate church of doctrinally inconvenient versions cannot be excluded.

Due to the above facts, the manuscripts alone are not enough to reveal the true text. We must therefore turn to the second part of our evidence – the early translations.

Testimony of Translations.

F. C. Conybeare notes:

„In the only codices that could contain an older reading, that is in the Sinaitic Syriac and the oldest Latin Manuscript, there are no pages that relate to the ending of Matthew.”

Thus, although all early translations contain the traditional three-name phrase of Matthew 28:19, the earliest do not contain these texts at all. Strangely, not because of omission but removal!

Let us suppose we do not know why these pages were destroyed. We are forced to consult our next authority – the patristic writings, i.e., quotations from the Holy Scripture contained in other writings, e.g., private letters.

Testimony of early writings.

„During my study, I became aware of doubts regarding the authenticity of the text of Matthew 28:19. Patristic testimonies (quotations) against this text are clear […].” F.C Conybeare in the Hibbert Journal

While no manuscript from the first three centuries now exists, we have the writings of at least two people who possessed or had access to those manuscripts. There are also others who quote Matthew 28:19, whose writings we have, dating much earlier than our best manuscript copies.

Who were these men? When did they live? Were they trustworthy? How did they quote Matthew 28:19? These are all questions that must now be answered. We will consider the testimonies of the following people, either by quoting their writings or indirectly by quoting the writings of their contemporaries:

1) Eusebius of Caesarea

2) Unknown author of De Rebaptismate

3) Origen

4) Clement of Alexandria

5) Justin Martyr

6) Macedonius

7) Eunomius

8) Afrates

Before we proceed to the testimonies of these early writers, we must strongly assert that if their testimonies were to decide theological matters, they would be worthless. Our faith must be based on the Holy Scripture. The testimony of so-called „fathers” of the church is valuable because it informs us what was in those manuscripts that were destroyed before the Council of Nicaea. Therefore, our search in their writings does not serve to form doctrine or theology but to find early testimonies of disputed verses.

Eusebius of Caesarea.

Our first witness will be Eusebius of Caesarea. He was born around 270 A.D and died around 340 A.D. He lived in times of great departure from the pure anointed faith. In the later period of his life, he assisted in the creation of the Nicene Creed.

Mosheim wrote about him in an editorial note:

„Eusebius Pamphili, bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, an educated man, gained fame through his theological writings. Until about the age of 40, he was in close contact with the martyr Pamphilus, a scholar, founder of the library in Caesarea, from whom Eusebius received most of his teachings.”

F.C. Conybeare wrote:

„Among the patristic witnesses, none is as important as Eusebius of Caesarea, for he lived in the finest library of that age,”which was gathered by Origen and Pamphilus…

Testimony of Eusebius.

According to Conebeare:

„Eusebius quoted this text (Matt. 28:19) multiple times in his writings between 300 and 336, for example in his commentaries on the Psalms, Isaiah, in Demonstratio Evangelica, Theophania… in his famous church history and in the work on Constantine. I found in them 18 quotations of Matthew 28:19 and always in the following form:

„Go and make disciples of all nations in my name, teaching them to observe what I have commanded you.”

Eusebius not only quotes these verses in this form, but more than twice he comments on them in a way that emphasizes the words „in my name”. In his Demonstratio Evangelica he writes (col. 240, page 136):

„For he not only commanded them to make disciples of all nations, but with the essential addition 'in his name.’ For so great was the value of this appeal that the Apostle said, 'God gave him a name above all, so that at the name of Yeshu* every knee should bow in heaven and on earth and under the earth.’ Therefore it was proper to lay stress on the virtue of the power contained in his name, but hidden to many, and thus he said to his apostles: Go, and make disciples of all nations in my name.”

Conybeare continues in Hibbert Journal 1902:

„It is obvious that such a text was found by Eusebius in ancient manuscripts, gathered from 50 to 150 years before his birth by his predecessors. He had not heard of other forms until the moment he visited Constantine and took part in the Council of Nicaea. Then, in his later years, in two of his controversial writings 'Against Marcellus’ and 'On the Theology of the Church’, he used the common wording. Another similar writing of his is a letter after the Council of Nicaea written to his protégés in Caesarea.”

From the example of Eusebius, we see the progress the doctrine of the Trinity made over the course of one person’s life. Eusebius before the Council of Nicaea quotes Matthew „in my name” and after the council „in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”

End of part 1

Today we will finish here and if God permits, next week we will continue this topic.

Article from 23rd November 2014
Author: Krzysztof Król