Welcome Guest Login or Signup
FLASHCHAT | INSTANT MESSENGER | BOOKMARK
| LANGUAGE:
 

BLOGS  
 
RSS
Word Biblical Commentary admits Matt. 28:19 is probably not original
Posted On 06/28/2009 01:22:53 by npjrtony

Word Biblical Commentary admits Matt. 28:19 is probably not original.

by
William Arnold III
WmArnold@gmail.com


Some time ago, I came across a web site titled A Closer Look at Matthew 28:19, claiming that the reading in Matthew 28:19 was probably not original. The claims were quite interesting, but very difficult to verify as most of the sources given are not very accessible to the average person. However, I recently purchased Word Biblical Commentary on CD-ROM and was amazed at what it had to say about this passage, especially since it was written and published by Trinitarians. It is also one of the most respected commentary series which could still be called evangelical (that's with a very small "e") in print today. In fact, I recently examined three independent scholars' (D. A. Carson, Gorden Fee & David R. Bauer) recommendations for commentaries on every book in the new testament (I intend to have an article up on this soon) and Word Biblical Commentary received more recommendations than any other. This is what it says in its comment on Matthew 28:19:

The threefold name (at most only an incipient trinitarianism) in which the baptism was to be performed, on the other hand, seems clearly to be a liturgical expansion of the evangelist consonant with the practice of his day (thus Hubbard; cf. Did. 7.1). There is a good possibility that in its original form, as witnessed by the ante-Nicene Eusebian form, the text read "make disciples in my name" (see Conybeare). This shorter reading preserves the symmetrical rhythm of the passage, whereas the triadic formula fits awkwardly into the structure as one might expect if it were an interpolation (see H. B. Green; cf. Howard; Hill [IBS 8 (1986) 54-63], on the other hand, argues for a concentric design with the triadic formula at its center). It is Kosmala, however, who has argued most effectively for the shorter reading, pointing to the central importance of the "name of Jesus" in early Christian preaching, the early practice of baptism in the name of Jesus, and the singular "in his name" with reference to the hope of the Gentiles in Isa 42:4b, quoted by Matthew in 12:18-21. As Carson rightly notes of our passage: "There is no evidence we have Jesus' ipsissima verba here" (598). The narrative of Acts notes the use of the name only of "Jesus Christ" in baptism (Acts 2:38; 8:16 10:48; 19:5; cf. Rom 6:3; Gal 3:27) or simply "the Lord Jesus" (tou kuriou Iesou; Acts 8:16; 19:5). . . . Schaberg's theory that the triadic formula goes back to the triad in Dan 7 (Ancient of Days, one like a son of man, and angels) remains an improbable speculation.1


Footnotes

1. Hagner, D. A. 1998. Word Biblical Commentary : Matthew 14-28 (electronic ed.). Logos Library System;Word Biblical Commentary. Vol. 33B (Mt 28:20). Word, Incorporated: Dallas

Email IBS | Statement of Faith | Home | Browse by Author | Q & A
Links | Virtual Classroom | Copyright | Submitting Articles | Search

Tags: Theology Commentary



Bookmark:



Viewing 1 - 4 out of 4 Comments

From: npjrtony
06/29/2009 03:47:17


derick wrote:
I copy that, Derick.  



If not then okay but you too have a good day.









 



From: derick
06/29/2009 02:07:17

We  had a good sunday morning, The Holy Ghost moved in our hearts  , and the Bible still says Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,


And it is faith in Christ that saves us from our sins, that is what I am trying to say


not baptism, that is what I am  trying to say, And yeah i would like to show you that in the scriptures,


I will be going out of town this week June 29-3rd, for Church camp, yeah if you would like to share scripture that would be great.


If not then okay but you too have a good day.


 


 


 



From: npjrtony
06/28/2009 14:50:48

Greetings Derick,


I am beginning to wonder if you really read the full text of any article that I have posted (or any other article for that matter). As it stands, it seems to me that you merely speed read. Speed reading is not a bad thing when one is pressed for time, however, reading in general (and anything in particular) should be done slowly so that there would be no misunderstanding of the substance of what was put into words. 

Derick, if you want to have open and honest dialogue with anyone here at PentecostZone (and elsewhere), then I suggest that you read slowly so as to grasp what the author is attempting to say. Once that occurs, proceed with what you understood by responding to the parts that you seriously disagreed with. I have printed out your "Salvation" article to re-read it for clarity. You obviously realize that I do not agree with you. When I decide that I am ready to offer a rejoiner to you, I hope to do so in an 'open and honest' means. 

Have a great Sunday service. 

Natividad



From: derick
06/28/2009 02:33:31

To say this is not in the Bible is distorting it. 


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


This means "by the authority of" Here it means by the authority of all three persons and not by the authority of Jesus only. He is the one authorizing us to recognize the others as well as Himself. This will help us to understand Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5. It is by the authority of Jesus Christ that we baptize at all, and it is by His authority that we baptize in the name of, or by the authority of all three persons.


and baptism doesn't doesn't save from sins.


if it did, you realize then Paul wouldn't had been a great Preacher! 1Corinthians 1:17


but you repent and put your faith and trust in Christ. By grace are ye saved through faith. Ephesians 2:8





*** PentecostZone ***