Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Matthew 28:19 In Original Gospel of Matthew: Trinitarian Formula or Not?

  1. #1
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    426
    Amen (Given)
    56
    Amen (Received)
    95

    Matthew 28:19 In Original Gospel of Matthew: Trinitarian Formula or Not?

    https://www.jesuswordsonly.com/home/...f-matthew.html

    How do we know that Matthew 28:19 is original?

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    tWebber tabibito's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    DownUnder
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,958
    Amen (Given)
    202
    Amen (Received)
    851
    The book of Acts and Paulís epistles repeatedly show the original baptismal formula was to baptize into only Jesusí name. See Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15.


    Flatly, we don't. However,

    επι - epi - upon: Acts 2:38,
    εις - heis - into: Acts 8:16, 19:5, Gal 3:27, Rom 6:3, 1 Cor 1:13, 15, Matt 28:19
    εν - en - in: Acts 10:48
    Acts 10:43 - no direct reference to baptism

    1/ εις is frequently used where εν would normally be expected (BDAG).
    2/ In Matt 28:19, baptise is in the active voice, the other occurrences are passives.

    Thus, the person in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit baptises; the person getting baptised gets baptised into Christ. The claim then, that "Jesus, however, cannot have given His disciples this Trinitarian order of baptism after His resurrection; for the New Testament knows only one baptism in the name of Jesus," stands unsubstantiated.

    "the Trinitarian formula occurs only in Matt. 28:19, and then only again (in the) Didache 7:1"
    The problem with the argument here? Not that 7:1 gives any clear statement of trinity, but the Didache dates to circa AD 96. The Didache does however, give a clear indication here and there of familiarity with the gospels.

    Even so, Matthew 28:19 still needs to be considered with caution. "It may be that this formula, [i.e., the Trinitarian Baptismal Formula of Matthew 28:19] so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the liturgical usage established later in the primitive community." may well be true.
    Last edited by tabibito; 04-07-2019 at 06:04 AM.
    1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

  3. Amen Rushing Jaws amen'd this post.
  4. #3
    tWebber ReformedApologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Reformed Baptist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    167
    Amen (Given)
    29
    Amen (Received)
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Christian3 View Post
    https://www.jesuswordsonly.com/home/...f-matthew.html

    How do we know that Matthew 28:19 is original?

    Thanks.
    I see this often used by Oneness Pentecostals who try and pit this text against others. To me it makes no difference, the author is arguing from silence. Yes we do baptize in the name Christ but this does not deny the Father or the Holy Spirit are part of it. To me its just petty nitpicking. Secondly it was quoted by Irenaeus in his book "Irenaeus Against Heresies book 3 ch.17.1", and Tertullian in On Prescription Against Heretics ch.20. Many claim that Nicaea invented the Trinity as well but there is no evidence for that except the wild claims you find in the Davinci Code.

  5. Amen KingsGambit, lee_merrill amen'd this post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •