Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Matthew 28:19

Expand Messages
  • teddy_trueblood
    As far as the trinity is concerned, it matters little if the wording of Mattthew 28:19 includes the three or just the Son or Jesus. In any case, there
    Message 1 of 13 , Jun 30, 2009
      As far as the trinity is concerned, it matters little if the wording of Mattthew 28:19 includes the 'three' or just 'the Son' or 'Jesus.'  In any case, there is still no honest evidence for the trinity there - see 'HS- Holy Spirit' (part 3, p. 13) in the trinity files here on JWQ&A.

      As for the Shem Tov business, there is quite a bit online concerning its being spurious.  I think it's enough to note the date of the existing (and self-contradictory) manuscript fragments.  Why would we accept manuscripts of the 14th century and later over the testimony of Greek manuscripts of the 4th century?
      ......................................................
      Notes on Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew

      The 14th century polemical treatise Even Bochan [Isaiah 28:16] written by Shem-Tob [or tov] ben-Isaac ben-Shaprut Ibn Shaprut, a Castilian Jewish physician, living later in Aragon. 12th/ 13th book [of Even Bochan] contains a Hebrew version of the complete text of Matthew. EB completed in 1380 CE, revised in 1385 & 1400.  
      -  http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/JDTABOR/shemtovweb.html
      ........................................................................................................

      Quoting Professor George Howard, translator of Shem Tob:
      In regard to theology, Shem-tob's Hebrew Matthew is heretical according to the standard of traditional Christianity. It never identifies Jesus with the Messiah. John the Baptist is given an exalted role (even takes on messianic traits), --- Shem-Tob's text envisions the salvation of the Gentiles only in the Messianic era.

      Shem Tob ben Shaprut of Tudela Castle - Spain

      1385 - 14th Century

      Wrote a polemical work against Christianity entitled 'Eben Bohan' (The Touchstone)
      Matthew is a separate chapter of 'Eben Bohan.'
       - http://www.oneinmessiah.net/HEBREWMATTHEW.htm
      ........................................................................................................
      It's also significant that all the major Bible translations agree on the wording of Matthew 28:19.
       
      In fact, noted NT scholar (and trinitarian) A.T. Robertson claims to have proven in his 'The Christ of the Logia' that the customary rendering of Matt. 28:19 is the correct one. - 'Word Pictures in the New Testament,' vol. 1, p. 245.

      .....................................................................
      .....................................................................

      --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, ginosko92 <no_reply@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > Hello all,
      >
      > question for the board.
      >
      > according to this web site, which is a link found on the main page of
      > this group under the the title "numerous Bible tools ":
      >
      > http://www.2001translation.com/MATTHEW.htm#_name
      > <http://www.2001translation.com/MATTHEW.htm#_name>
      >
      > to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and holy spirit seems not to
      > appear in the original manuscripts, infact this site explains:
      >
      > "The words found at Matthew 28:19, `in the name of the Father, the
      > Son, and [God's] Holy Breath,' are not found in the ancient Shem
      > Tob Hebrew manuscript, so they are likely spurious (words that were
      > added to the Bible). ... At present, we don't have any complete
      > Greek manuscripts of Matthew prior to the 4th Century, and all existing
      > Greek and Latin manuscripts written thereafter contain this phrase.
      > However, there is evidence that this reading is a later corruption of
      > the original text."
      >
      > Then it goes on to quote several scriptures to show what later on it was
      > said regarding baptism:
      >
      > "Acts 2:38, `Repent, and each of you get baptized in the name of
      > Jesus the Anointed One, so your sins can be forgiven. Then you will
      > receive the gift of the Holy Breath.
      >
      > Acts 8:15, 16, `They went [to the Samaritans] and prayed for them to
      > receive the Holy Breath, because it hadn't come to any of them yet,
      > although they had been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.'
      >
      > Acts 10:48, `So he commanded that they should be baptized in the
      > name of Jesus the Anointed One.'
      >
      > Acts 19:5, `When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of
      > the Lord Jesus.' "
      >
      > What are your thoughts in this matter?
      >
      > I have never heard of anything like this.
      >
    • Paul Leonard
      This is correct. The early Church Fathers seem to be unaware of it as well. I am on the road with my business lap top so can t send any confirming material.
      Message 2 of 13 , Jun 30, 2009
        This is correct.

        The early "Church Fathers" seem to be unaware of it as well. I am on the road with my business lap top so can't send any confirming material.

        --- On Tue, 6/30/09, ginosko92 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

        From: ginosko92 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
        Subject: [JWquestions-and_answers] Matthew 28:19
        To: JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Tuesday, June 30, 2009, 2:56 PM

        Hello all,

        question for the board.

        according to this web site, which is a link found on the main page of this group under the  the title "numerous Bible tools ":

        http://www.2001tran slation.com/ MATTHEW.htm# _name

        to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and holy spirit seems not to appear in the original manuscripts, infact this site explains:

        "The words found at Matthew 28:19, `in the name of the Father, the Son, and [God's] Holy Breath,' are not found in the ancient Shem Tob Hebrew manuscript, so they are likely spurious (words that were added to the Bible). ... At present, we don't have any complete Greek manuscripts of Matthew prior to the 4th Century, and all existing Greek and Latin manuscripts written thereafter contain this phrase. However, there is evidence that this reading is a later corruption of the original text."

        Then it goes on to quote several scriptures to show what later on it was said regarding baptism:

        "Acts 2:38, `Repent, and each of you get baptized in the name of Jesus the Anointed One, so your sins can be forgiven. Then you will receive the gift of the Holy Breath.

        Acts 8:15, 16, `They went [to the Samaritans] and prayed for them to receive the Holy Breath, because it hadn't come to any of them yet, although they had been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.'

        Acts 10:48, `So he commanded that they should be baptized in the name of Jesus the Anointed One.'

        Acts 19:5, `When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.' "

        What are your thoughts in this matter?

        I have never heard of anything like this.

         

      • ginosko92
        Teddy, thanks for your input. I totally agree with you on how this verse in no way presents a Devine Trinity! Just so that I understand your point, your saying
        Message 3 of 13 , Jul 1, 2009
          Teddy,

          thanks for your input. I totally agree with you on how this verse in no way presents a Devine Trinity!
          Just so that I understand your point, your saying that the MSS that omit the Father and the holy spirit are dated from the 14th century, and the greek MSS from the 4th century do include the Father and the hs? In other words the older MSS do say in the name of the Father Son and hs?

          --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, teddy_trueblood <no_reply@...> wrote:
          >
          > As far as the trinity is concerned, it matters little if the wording of
          > Mattthew 28:19 includes the 'three' or just 'the Son' or 'Jesus.' In
          > any case, there is still no honest evidence for the trinity there - see
          > 'HS- Holy Spirit' (part 3, p. 13) in the trinity files here on JWQ&A.
          >
          > As for the Shem Tov business, there is quite a bit online concerning its
          > being spurious. I think it's enough to note the date of the existing
          > (and self-contradictory) manuscript fragments. Why would we accept
          > manuscripts of the 14th century and later over the testimony of Greek
          > manuscripts of the 4th century?
          > ......................................................
          > Notes on Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew
          >
          > The 14th century polemical treatise Even Bochan [Isaiah 28:16] written
          > by Shem-Tob [or tov] ben-Isaac ben-Shaprut Ibn Shaprut, a Castilian
          > Jewish physician, living later in Aragon. 12th/ 13th book [of Even
          > Bochan] contains a Hebrew version of the complete text of Matthew. EB
          > completed in 1380 CE, revised in 1385 & 1400.
          > - http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/JDTABOR/shemtovweb.html
          > ........................................................................\
          > ................................
          >
          > Quoting Professor George Howard, translator of Shem Tob:
          > In regard to theology, Shem-tob's Hebrew Matthew is heretical
          > according to the standard of traditional Christianity. It never
          > identifies Jesus with the Messiah. John the Baptist is given an exalted
          > role (even takes on messianic traits), --- Shem-Tob's text envisions
          > the salvation of the Gentiles only in the Messianic era.
          >
          > Shem Tob ben Shaprut of Tudela Castle - Spain
          >
          > 1385 - 14th Century
          >
          > Wrote a polemical work against Christianity entitled 'Eben Bohan' (The
          > Touchstone)
          > Matthew is a separate chapter of 'Eben Bohan.'
          > - http://www.oneinmessiah.net/HEBREWMATTHEW.htm
          > ........................................................................\
          > ................................
          > It's also significant that all the major Bible translations agree on the
          > wording of Matthew 28:19.
          >
          > In fact, noted NT scholar (and trinitarian) A.T. Robertson claims to
          > have proven in his 'The Christ of the Logia' that the customary
          > rendering of Matt. 28:19 is the correct one. - 'Word Pictures in the New
          > Testament,' vol. 1, p. 245.
          >
          > .....................................................................
          > .....................................................................
          >
          > --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, ginosko92 <no_reply@>
          > wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > Hello all,
          > >
          > > question for the board.
          > >
          > > according to this web site, which is a link found on the main page of
          > > this group under the the title "numerous Bible tools ":
          > >
          > > http://www.2001translation.com/MATTHEW.htm#_name
          > > <http://www.2001translation.com/MATTHEW.htm#_name>
          > >
          > > to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and holy spirit seems not to
          > > appear in the original manuscripts, infact this site explains:
          > >
          > > "The words found at Matthew 28:19, `in the name of the Father, the
          > > Son, and [God's] Holy Breath,' are not found in the ancient Shem
          > > Tob Hebrew manuscript, so they are likely spurious (words that were
          > > added to the Bible). ... At present, we don't have any complete
          > > Greek manuscripts of Matthew prior to the 4th Century, and all
          > existing
          > > Greek and Latin manuscripts written thereafter contain this phrase.
          > > However, there is evidence that this reading is a later corruption of
          > > the original text."
          > >
          > > Then it goes on to quote several scriptures to show what later on it
          > was
          > > said regarding baptism:
          > >
          > > "Acts 2:38, `Repent, and each of you get baptized in the name of
          > > Jesus the Anointed One, so your sins can be forgiven. Then you will
          > > receive the gift of the Holy Breath.
          > >
          > > Acts 8:15, 16, `They went [to the Samaritans] and prayed for them to
          > > receive the Holy Breath, because it hadn't come to any of them yet,
          > > although they had been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.'
          > >
          > > Acts 10:48, `So he commanded that they should be baptized in the
          > > name of Jesus the Anointed One.'
          > >
          > > Acts 19:5, `When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of
          > > the Lord Jesus.' "
          > >
          > > What are your thoughts in this matter?
          > >
          > > I have never heard of anything like this.
          > >
          >
        • moto_bl
          I am sure that Teddy and others will comment soon concerning the latest MSS questions regarding Mt. 28:19. But just to let everyone know, if someone wishes to
          Message 4 of 13 , Jul 1, 2009

            I am sure that Teddy and others will comment soon concerning the latest MSS questions regarding Mt. 28:19.

            But just to let everyone know, if someone wishes to access the information that is already found on this site about Mt. 28:19, just click on the following link:

            Mt. 28:19
            "...in the NAME of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit"

             

            --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, ginosko92 <no_reply@...> wrote:
            >
            > Teddy,
            >
            > thanks for your input. I totally agree with you on how this verse in no way presents a Devine Trinity!
            > Just so that I understand your point, your saying that the MSS that omit the Father and the holy spirit are dated from the 14th century, and the greek MSS from the 4th century do include the Father and the hs? In other words the older MSS do say in the name of the Father Son and hs?
            >
            > --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, teddy_trueblood no_reply@ wrote:
            > >
            > > As far as the trinity is concerned, it matters little if the wording of
            > > Mattthew 28:19 includes the 'three' or just 'the Son' or 'Jesus.' In
            > > any case, there is still no honest evidence for the trinity there - see
            > > 'HS- Holy Spirit' (part 3, p. 13) in the trinity files here on JWQ&A.
            > >
            > > As for the Shem Tov business, there is quite a bit online concerning its
            > > being spurious. I think it's enough to note the date of the existing
            > > (and self-contradictory) manuscript fragments. Why would we accept
            > > manuscripts of the 14th century and later over the testimony of Greek
            > > manuscripts of the 4th century?
            > > ......................................................
            > > Notes on Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew
            > >
            > > The 14th century polemical treatise Even Bochan [Isaiah 28:16] written
            > > by Shem-Tob [or tov] ben-Isaac ben-Shaprut Ibn Shaprut, a Castilian
            > > Jewish physician, living later in Aragon. 12th/ 13th book [of Even
            > > Bochan] contains a Hebrew version of the complete text of Matthew. EB
            > > completed in 1380 CE, revised in 1385 & 1400.
            > > - http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/JDTABOR/shemtovweb.html
            > > ........................................................................\
            > > ................................
            > >
            > > Quoting Professor George Howard, translator of Shem Tob:
            > > In regard to theology, Shem-tob's Hebrew Matthew is heretical
            > > according to the standard of traditional Christianity. It never
            > > identifies Jesus with the Messiah. John the Baptist is given an exalted
            > > role (even takes on messianic traits), --- Shem-Tob's text envisions
            > > the salvation of the Gentiles only in the Messianic era.
            > >
            > > Shem Tob ben Shaprut of Tudela Castle - Spain
            > >
            > > 1385 - 14th Century
            > >
            > > Wrote a polemical work against Christianity entitled 'Eben Bohan' (The
            > > Touchstone)
            > > Matthew is a separate chapter of 'Eben Bohan.'
            > > - http://www.oneinmessiah.net/HEBREWMATTHEW.htm
            > > ........................................................................\
            > > ................................
            > > It's also significant that all the major Bible translations agree on the
            > > wording of Matthew 28:19.
            > >
            > > In fact, noted NT scholar (and trinitarian) A.T. Robertson claims to
            > > have proven in his 'The Christ of the Logia' that the customary
            > > rendering of Matt. 28:19 is the correct one. - 'Word Pictures in the New
            > > Testament,' vol. 1, p. 245.
            > >
            > > .....................................................................
            > > .....................................................................
            > >
            > > --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, ginosko92 <no_reply@>
            > > wrote:
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Hello all,
            > > >
            > > > question for the board.
            > > >
            > > > according to this web site, which is a link found on the main page of
            > > > this group under the the title "numerous Bible tools ":
            > > >
            > > > http://www.2001translation.com/MATTHEW.htm#_name
            > > > <http://www.2001translation.com/MATTHEW.htm#_name>
            > > >
            > > > to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and holy spirit seems not to
            > > > appear in the original manuscripts, infact this site explains:
            > > >
            > > > "The words found at Matthew 28:19, `in the name of the Father, the
            > > > Son, and [God's] Holy Breath,' are not found in the ancient Shem
            > > > Tob Hebrew manuscript, so they are likely spurious (words that were
            > > > added to the Bible). ... At present, we don't have any complete
            > > > Greek manuscripts of Matthew prior to the 4th Century, and all
            > > existing
            > > > Greek and Latin manuscripts written thereafter contain this phrase.
            > > > However, there is evidence that this reading is a later corruption of
            > > > the original text."
            > > >
            > > > Then it goes on to quote several scriptures to show what later on it
            > > was
            > > > said regarding baptism:
            > > >
            > > > "Acts 2:38, `Repent, and each of you get baptized in the name of
            > > > Jesus the Anointed One, so your sins can be forgiven. Then you will
            > > > receive the gift of the Holy Breath.
            > > >
            > > > Acts 8:15, 16, `They went [to the Samaritans] and prayed for them to
            > > > receive the Holy Breath, because it hadn't come to any of them yet,
            > > > although they had been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.'
            > > >
            > > > Acts 10:48, `So he commanded that they should be baptized in the
            > > > name of Jesus the Anointed One.'
            > > >
            > > > Acts 19:5, `When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of
            > > > the Lord Jesus.' "
            > > >
            > > > What are your thoughts in this matter?
            > > >
            > > > I have never heard of anything like this.
            > > >
            > >
            >

          • teddy_trueblood
            Yes, that s my understanding. We know the three are found in complete Greek NT manuscripts of the 4th (and later) century A.D. The Hebrew Tov manuscripts,
            Message 5 of 13 , Jul 1, 2009

              Yes, that's my understanding.  We know the 'three' are found in complete Greek NT manuscripts of the 4th (and later) century A.D.

              The Hebrew 'Tov' manuscripts, on the other hand, are dated to the 14th century (and later?), and apparently that is also the time period when they were first authored. 

              Some claim that the 'Matthew' chapter of this 14th century Jewish writing ('Even Bochan') was copied from some ancient manuscript, but there is no actual evidence for this wishful thinking that I have seen.   

              Just one of the inconsistencies mentioned in examining this Hebrew writing is that it includes portions which would only be found in another language: Matthew 1:23 is written in this Hebrew manuscript as it is in Greek: "Immanuel, which is translated, 'God with us'."  Well, of course, 'Immanuel' is already in the Hebrew and would not have to be translated in a Hebrew document!


              --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, ginosko92 <no_reply@...> wrote:
              >
              > Teddy,
              >
              > thanks for your input. I totally agree with you on how this verse in no way presents a Devine Trinity!
              > Just so that I understand your point, your saying that the MSS that omit the Father and the holy spirit are dated from the 14th century, and the greek MSS from the 4th century do include the Father and the hs? In other words the older MSS do say in the name of the Father Son and hs?
              >
              > --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, teddy_trueblood no_reply@ wrote:
              > >
              > > As far as the trinity is concerned, it matters little if the wording of
              > > Mattthew 28:19 includes the 'three' or just 'the Son' or 'Jesus.' In
              > > any case, there is still no honest evidence for the trinity there - see
              > > 'HS- Holy Spirit' (part 3, p. 13) in the trinity files here on JWQ&A.
              > >
              > > As for the Shem Tov business, there is quite a bit online concerning its
              > > being spurious. I think it's enough to note the date of the existing
              > > (and self-contradictory) manuscript fragments. Why would we accept
              > > manuscripts of the 14th century and later over the testimony of Greek
              > > manuscripts of the 4th century?
              > > ......................................................
              > > Notes on Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew
              > >
              > > The 14th century polemical treatise Even Bochan [Isaiah 28:16] written
              > > by Shem-Tob [or tov] ben-Isaac ben-Shaprut Ibn Shaprut, a Castilian
              > > Jewish physician, living later in Aragon. 12th/ 13th book [of Even
              > > Bochan] contains a Hebrew version of the complete text of Matthew. EB
              > > completed in 1380 CE, revised in 1385 & 1400.
              > > - http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/JDTABOR/shemtovweb.html
              > > ........................................................................\
              > > ................................
              > >
              > > Quoting Professor George Howard, translator of Shem Tob:
              > > In regard to theology, Shem-tob's Hebrew Matthew is heretical
              > > according to the standard of traditional Christianity. It never
              > > identifies Jesus with the Messiah. John the Baptist is given an exalted
              > > role (even takes on messianic traits), --- Shem-Tob's text envisions
              > > the salvation of the Gentiles only in the Messianic era.
              > >
              > > Shem Tob ben Shaprut of Tudela Castle - Spain
              > >
              > > 1385 - 14th Century
              > >
              > > Wrote a polemical work against Christianity entitled 'Eben Bohan' (The
              > > Touchstone)
              > > Matthew is a separate chapter of 'Eben Bohan.'
              > > - http://www.oneinmessiah.net/HEBREWMATTHEW.htm
              > > ........................................................................\
              > > ................................
              > > It's also significant that all the major Bible translations agree on the
              > > wording of Matthew 28:19.
              > >
              > > In fact, noted NT scholar (and trinitarian) A.T. Robertson claims to
              > > have proven in his 'The Christ of the Logia' that the customary
              > > rendering of Matt. 28:19 is the correct one. - 'Word Pictures in the New
              > > Testament,' vol. 1, p. 245.
              > >
              > > .....................................................................
              > > .....................................................................
              > >
              > > --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, ginosko92 <no_reply@>
              > > wrote:
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > Hello all,
              > > >
              > > > question for the board.
              > > >
              > > > according to this web site, which is a link found on the main page of
              > > > this group under the the title "numerous Bible tools ":
              > > >
              > > > http://www.2001translation.com/MATTHEW.htm#_name
              > > > <http://www.2001translation.com/MATTHEW.htm#_name>
              > > >
              > > > to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and holy spirit seems not to
              > > > appear in the original manuscripts, infact this site explains:
              > > >
              > > > "The words found at Matthew 28:19, `in the name of the Father, the
              > > > Son, and [God's] Holy Breath,' are not found in the ancient Shem
              > > > Tob Hebrew manuscript, so they are likely spurious (words that were
              > > > added to the Bible). ... At present, we don't have any complete
              > > > Greek manuscripts of Matthew prior to the 4th Century, and all
              > > existing
              > > > Greek and Latin manuscripts written thereafter contain this phrase.
              > > > However, there is evidence that this reading is a later corruption of
              > > > the original text."
              > > >
              > > > Then it goes on to quote several scriptures to show what later on it
              > > was
              > > > said regarding baptism:
              > > >
              > > > "Acts 2:38, `Repent, and each of you get baptized in the name of
              > > > Jesus the Anointed One, so your sins can be forgiven. Then you will
              > > > receive the gift of the Holy Breath.
              > > >
              > > > Acts 8:15, 16, `They went [to the Samaritans] and prayed for them to
              > > > receive the Holy Breath, because it hadn't come to any of them yet,
              > > > although they had been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.'
              > > >
              > > > Acts 10:48, `So he commanded that they should be baptized in the
              > > > name of Jesus the Anointed One.'
              > > >
              > > > Acts 19:5, `When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of
              > > > the Lord Jesus.' "
              > > >
              > > > What are your thoughts in this matter?
              > > >
              > > > I have never heard of anything like this.
              > > >
              > >
              >

            • ginosko92
              Thanks for the clarification!
              Message 6 of 13 , Jul 1, 2009
                Thanks for the clarification!

                --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, teddy_trueblood <no_reply@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                > Yes, that's my understanding. We know the 'three' are found in complete
                > Greek NT manuscripts of the 4th (and later) century A.D.
                >
                > The Hebrew 'Tov' manuscripts, on the other hand, are dated to the 14th
                > century (and later?), and apparently that is also the time period when
                > they were first authored.
                >
                > Some claim that the 'Matthew' chapter of this 14th century Jewish
                > writing ('Even Bochan') was copied from some ancient manuscript, but
                > there is no actual evidence for this wishful thinking that I have seen.
                >
                > Just one of the inconsistencies mentioned in examining this Hebrew
                > writing is that it includes portions which would only be found in
                > another language: Matthew 1:23 is written in this Hebrew manuscript as
                > it is in Greek: "Immanuel, which is translated, 'God with us'." Well,
                > of course, 'Immanuel' is already in the Hebrew and would not have to be
                > translated in a Hebrew document!
                >
                >
                > --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, ginosko92 <no_reply@>
                > wrote:
                > >
                > > Teddy,
                > >
                > > thanks for your input. I totally agree with you on how this verse in
                > no way presents a Devine Trinity!
                > > Just so that I understand your point, your saying that the MSS that
                > omit the Father and the holy spirit are dated from the 14th century, and
                > the greek MSS from the 4th century do include the Father and the hs? In
                > other words the older MSS do say in the name of the Father Son and hs?
                > >
                > > --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, teddy_trueblood
                > no_reply@ wrote:
                > > >
                > > > As far as the trinity is concerned, it matters little if the wording
                > of
                > > > Mattthew 28:19 includes the 'three' or just 'the Son' or 'Jesus.' In
                > > > any case, there is still no honest evidence for the trinity there -
                > see
                > > > 'HS- Holy Spirit' (part 3, p. 13) in the trinity files here on
                > JWQ&A.
                > > >
                > > > As for the Shem Tov business, there is quite a bit online concerning
                > its
                > > > being spurious. I think it's enough to note the date of the existing
                > > > (and self-contradictory) manuscript fragments. Why would we accept
                > > > manuscripts of the 14th century and later over the testimony of
                > Greek
                > > > manuscripts of the 4th century?
                > > > ......................................................
                > > > Notes on Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew
                > > >
                > > > The 14th century polemical treatise Even Bochan [Isaiah 28:16]
                > written
                > > > by Shem-Tob [or tov] ben-Isaac ben-Shaprut Ibn Shaprut, a Castilian
                > > > Jewish physician, living later in Aragon. 12th/ 13th book [of Even
                > > > Bochan] contains a Hebrew version of the complete text of Matthew.
                > EB
                > > > completed in 1380 CE, revised in 1385 & 1400.
                > > > - http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/JDTABOR/shemtovweb.html
                > > >
                > ........................................................................\
                > \
                > > > ................................
                > > >
                > > > Quoting Professor George Howard, translator of Shem Tob:
                > > > In regard to theology, Shem-tob's Hebrew Matthew is heretical
                > > > according to the standard of traditional Christianity. It never
                > > > identifies Jesus with the Messiah. John the Baptist is given an
                > exalted
                > > > role (even takes on messianic traits), --- Shem-Tob's text envisions
                > > > the salvation of the Gentiles only in the Messianic era.
                > > >
                > > > Shem Tob ben Shaprut of Tudela Castle - Spain
                > > >
                > > > 1385 - 14th Century
                > > >
                > > > Wrote a polemical work against Christianity entitled 'Eben Bohan'
                > (The
                > > > Touchstone)
                > > > Matthew is a separate chapter of 'Eben Bohan.'
                > > > - http://www.oneinmessiah.net/HEBREWMATTHEW.htm
                > > >
                > ........................................................................\
                > \
                > > > ................................
                > > > It's also significant that all the major Bible translations agree on
                > the
                > > > wording of Matthew 28:19.
                > > >
                > > > In fact, noted NT scholar (and trinitarian) A.T. Robertson claims to
                > > > have proven in his 'The Christ of the Logia' that the customary
                > > > rendering of Matt. 28:19 is the correct one. - 'Word Pictures in the
                > New
                > > > Testament,' vol. 1, p. 245.
                > > >
                > > >
                > .....................................................................
                > > >
                > .....................................................................
                > > >
                > > > --- In JWquestions-and_answers@yahoogroups.com, ginosko92
                > <no_reply@>
                > > > wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > Hello all,
                > > > >
                > > > > question for the board.
                > > > >
                > > > > according to this web site, which is a link found on the main page
                > of
                > > > > this group under the the title "numerous Bible tools ":
                > > > >
                > > > > http://www.2001translation.com/MATTHEW.htm#_name
                > > > > <http://www.2001translation.com/MATTHEW.htm#_name>
                > > > >
                > > > > to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and holy spirit seems
                > not to
                > > > > appear in the original manuscripts, infact this site explains:
                > > > >
                > > > > "The words found at Matthew 28:19, `in the name of the Father, the
                > > > > Son, and [God's] Holy Breath,' are not found in the ancient Shem
                > > > > Tob Hebrew manuscript, so they are likely spurious (words that
                > were
                > > > > added to the Bible). ... At present, we don't have any complete
                > > > > Greek manuscripts of Matthew prior to the 4th Century, and all
                > > > existing
                > > > > Greek and Latin manuscripts written thereafter contain this
                > phrase.
                > > > > However, there is evidence that this reading is a later corruption
                > of
                > > > > the original text."
                > > > >
                > > > > Then it goes on to quote several scriptures to show what later on
                > it
                > > > was
                > > > > said regarding baptism:
                > > > >
                > > > > "Acts 2:38, `Repent, and each of you get baptized in the name of
                > > > > Jesus the Anointed One, so your sins can be forgiven. Then you
                > will
                > > > > receive the gift of the Holy Breath.
                > > > >
                > > > > Acts 8:15, 16, `They went [to the Samaritans] and prayed for them
                > to
                > > > > receive the Holy Breath, because it hadn't come to any of them
                > yet,
                > > > > although they had been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.'
                > > > >
                > > > > Acts 10:48, `So he commanded that they should be baptized in the
                > > > > name of Jesus the Anointed One.'
                > > > >
                > > > > Acts 19:5, `When they heard this, they were baptized in the name
                > of
                > > > > the Lord Jesus.' "
                > > > >
                > > > > What are your thoughts in this matter?
                > > > >
                > > > > I have never heard of anything like this.
                > > > >
                > > >
                > >
                >
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.