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

Re: Conybeare''s attack on Matthew 28:19 - the most strongly attested verse in the Bible ?

Expand Messages
  • robkashow
    A quick count of the ANF, NPNF yields a count of 89 references to Matthew 28.19 (give or take a few due to late-night inaccuracies). I thought I d favor you
    Message 1 of 10 , Jul 16, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      A quick count of the ANF, NPNF yields a count of 89 references to Matthew 28.19 (give or take a few due to late-night inaccuracies). I thought I'd favor you with such a count since I had the time here on an overnight shift.

      Best,

      Rob

      --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Bart Ehrman" <behrman@...> wrote:
      >
      > Steven,
      >
      >
      >
      > It's an interesting issue. What, in your judgment, makes Matthew
      > 28:19 the (or one of the) single most attested verse(s) in the Bible? (I
      > don't know what you're referring to.) And what do you make of Conybeare's
      > argument against its authenticity?
      >
      >
      >
      > n Bart Ehrman
      >
      >
      >
      > Bart D. Ehrman
      >
      > James A. Gray Professor
      >
      > Department of Religious Studies
      >
      > University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
      >
      >
      >
      > <http://www.bartdehrman.com/> http://www.bartdehrman.com
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > From: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
      > [mailto:textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of schmuel
      > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 12:10 AM
      > To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [textualcriticism] Conybeare''s attack on Matthew 28:19 - the most
      > strongly attested verse in the Bible ?
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Hi Folks,
      >
      > 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:
      >
      > James Snapp
      >
      > The first issue of the Hibbert Journal, in which F. C. Conybeare ... ... and
      > that the threefold formula in Mt. 28:19 is an early accretion, His final
      > sentence: "It may confidently be predicted that when the Greek and Latin
      > fathers who wrote before 400 have been more carefully edited than hitherto
      > from the best codices, scores of old readings will be restored in the text
      > of the N.T. of which no trace remains in any Greek MS."
      >
      >
      > Steven Avery
      > The two items contradict each other. Matthew 28:19 may well be the single
      > most strongly-attested verse in the whole Bible, looking at the early church
      > writings before 400 AD. And in addition this verse has close to 100%
      > manuscript support.
      >
      > So how much interest can we have in textual theoretician whose main
      > redaction conflicts with his main theory ?
      >
      > Shalom,
      > Steven Avery
      > Queens, NY
      >
    • Peter M. Head
      Eusebius is the only witness to the shorter form: poreuqénteß maqjteúsate pánta tà ‘eqnj hen t¨^w honómati mou, didáskonteß ... in Demonstratio 3.6,
      Message 2 of 10 , Jul 16, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Eusebius is the only witness to the shorter form:
        poreuqénteß maqjteúsate pánta tà ‘eqnj hen t¨^w
        honómati mou, didáskonteß ... in Demonstratio
        3.6, 7(bis); 9.11; Hist. Eccl. III.5.2; Psalms
        65.6; 67.34; 76.20 (59.9 not the same reading);
        Isaiah 18.2; 34.16 (v.l.); Theophania 4.16; 5.17; 5.46; 5.49; Oratio 16.8.

        For more recent discussion see also H.B. Green,
        ‘The Command to Baptize and Other Matthean
        Interpolations’ Stduia Evangelica IV (ed F.L.
        Cross; TUGaL 102; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1968),
        60-64; and ‘Matthew 28:19, Eusebius, and the lex
        orandi’ The Making of Orthodoxy: Essays in honour
        of Henry Chadwick (ed. R. Williams; Cambridge: CUP, 1989), 124-141.



        At 11:57 16/07/2010, you wrote:
        >A quick count of the ANF, NPNF yields a count of
        >89 references to Matthew 28.19 (give or take a
        >few due to late-night inaccuracies). I thought
        >I'd favor you with such a count since I had the
        >time here on an overnight shift.
        >
        >Best,
        >
        >Rob
        >
        >--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Bart Ehrman" <behrman@...> wrote:
        > >
        > > Steven,
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > It's an interesting issue. What, in your judgment, makes Matthew
        > > 28:19 the (or one of the) single most attested verse(s) in the Bible? (I
        > > don't know what you're referring to.) And what do you make of Conybeare's
        > > argument against its authenticity?
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > n Bart Ehrman
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Bart D. Ehrman
        > >
        > > James A. Gray Professor
        > >
        > > Department of Religious Studies
        > >
        > > University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > <http://www.bartdehrman.com/> http://www.bartdehrman.com
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > From: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
        > > [mailto:textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of schmuel
        > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 12:10 AM
        > > To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
        > > Subject: [textualcriticism] Conybeare''s attack on Matthew 28:19 - the most
        > > strongly attested verse in the Bible ?
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Hi Folks,
        > >
        > > 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:
        > >
        > > James Snapp
        > >
        > > The first issue of the Hibbert Journal, in
        > which F. C. Conybeare ... ... and
        > > that the threefold formula in Mt. 28:19 is an early accretion, His final
        > > sentence: "It may confidently be predicted that when the Greek and Latin
        > > fathers who wrote before 400 have been more carefully edited than hitherto
        > > from the best codices, scores of old readings will be restored in the text
        > > of the N.T. of which no trace remains in any Greek MS."
        > >
        > >
        > > Steven Avery
        > > The two items contradict each other. Matthew 28:19 may well be the single
        > > most strongly-attested verse in the whole
        > Bible, looking at the early church
        > > writings before 400 AD. And in addition this verse has close to 100%
        > > manuscript support.
        > >
        > > So how much interest can we have in textual theoretician whose main
        > > redaction conflicts with his main theory ?
        > >
        > > Shalom,
        > > Steven Avery
        > > Queens, NY
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >------------------------------------
        >
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >



        Peter M. Head, PhD
        Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
        Tyndale House
        36 Selwyn Gardens
        Cambridge CB3 9BA
        01223 566601
      • schmuel
        Hi Folks, Bart Ehrman Steven, It’s an interesting issue. What, in your judgment, makes Matthew 28:19 the (or one of the) single most attested verse(s) in the
        Message 3 of 10 , Jul 16, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Folks,

          Bart Ehrman
          Steven,       It�s an interesting issue.  What, in your judgment, makes Matthew 28:19 the (or one of the) single most attested verse(s) in the Bible?  (I don�t know what you�re referring to.) 

          Steven Avery
          Greetings Bart.
          There are two major components,
             a) early church writers
             b) manuscript lines.

          The first is positive, the second is largely negative (i.e. how many manuscripts show significant variants).  Although it may be helpful also to count early mss noses.

          First we look at the early church writers, and the breadth and depth of Ante-Nicene references.  In a separate post we could go over some of the other issues of Conybeare and the Ploughman paper, things like the many Eusebius citations, the manuscript evidences, doctrinal conjectures, etc. 

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

          Matthew 28:19-20
          Go ye 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: and, lo,
          I am with you alway,
          even unto the end of the world.
          Amen.

          Below are early church writer references (ECW) till 300 AD for Matthew 28:19.
          Possibly the best-attested verse in the Bible.

          In almost every case below, the passage specifically says the words
          were spoken by the Lord, or were in the Gospel. 

          What is omitted ?
          An Ignatius to the Phllippians reference, due to the dating issues.
          Also we might want to indicate the unsureness of the Didache date.
          Feel free to tweak any of the references below, to improve this list.

          ========================================================
          INDEX OF REFERENCES

          Ignatius  (110 AD)
             Epistle to the Philadelphians

          Justin Martyr (c. 150 AD)
            First Apology

          Irenaeus - (2nd century)
            Against Heresies

          Diatessoran (Tatian, c.175 AD)

          Didache  (c. 2nd century)

          Apostolic Teachings (2nd Century)   (x references) 

          The Ecclesiastical Canons of the Same Holy Apostles

          Tertullian  - (c. 200 AD)
            On Baptism.-- Chapter XIII.
            Against Praxeas
            Prescription against Heretics

          Hippolytus (c.200 AD)
            Against the Heresy of One Noetus

          Cyprian  (c. 230 AD)
             Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews
             Epistle LXXII.1 To Jubaianus

          The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian
            Lucius of Castra Galbae 
            Munnulus of Girba
            Euchratius of Thenae
            Bishop Vincentius of Thibaris
            
          Origen (c.250 AD)
             Commentary on Romans
             Origen de Principiis Book I

          Gregory Thaumaturgus  (c. 250 AD) 
             A Sectional Confession of Faith, XIII     

          Treatise Against Novatian by an Anonymous Bishop.
          (c.255)

          Treatise on Rebaptism (c 250)

          Victorinus (c.300AD)

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

          IGNATIUS

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-20.htm#P2080_351579
          The Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians
          Chapter IX.-The Old Testament is Good: the New Testament is Better

          "Go ye and teach all nations,
          baptizing them in the name of the Father,
          and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
          All then are good together, the law, the prophets, the apostles,
          the whole company [of others] that have believed through them:
          only if we love one another.

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

          JUSTIN MARTYR (c. 150 AD)

          First Apology of Justin 
          http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-46.htm#P3593_620967
          Chapter LXI.-Christian Baptism.

          Then they are brought by us where there is water,
          and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated.
          For, in the name of God,
          the Father and Lord of the universe,
          and of our Saviour Jesus Christ,
          and of the Holy Spirit,
          they then receive the washing with water.
          For Christ also said,
          "Except ye be born again, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

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

          IRENAEUS [a.d. 120-202.],

          Irenaeus Against Heresies Book III
          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-60.htm#P7716_2104969
          Chapter XVII.-The Apostles Teach that It Was Neither Christ Nor the Saviour,
          But the Holy Spirit, Who Did Descend Upon Jesus. The Reason for This Descent.

          That is the Spirit of whom the Lord declares,
          "For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.
          And again, giving to the disciples the power of regeneration into God,
          He said to them,
          Go and teach all nations,
          baptizing them in the name of the Father,
          and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
          "  

          =====================================================|

          DIATESSORAN - TATIAN 
          [c.175] 

          http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-10/anf10-07.htm#P4782_510770
          Tatian - The Diatessaron 55

          Then said Jesus unto them, I have been given all authority in heaven and earth;
          and as my Father hath sent me, so I also send you.
          Go now into all the world, and preach my gospel in all the creation;
          and teach all the peoples,
          and
          baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit;
          and teach them to keep all whatsoever I commanded you:
          and lo, I am with you all the days, unto  the end of the world.

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

          DIDACHE
          (c. 2nd century)

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-07/anf07-36.htm#P5064_1872815
          Chapter VII:I - Concerning Baptism.
          Having first said all these things,
          baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water

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

          APOSTOLIC TEACHINGS - (Late 2d to early 3d century)
          Apostolic Teaching and Constitutions - Constitutions of the Holy Apostles

          http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-07/anf07-36.htm#P4972_1856878
          The Lord's Teaching Through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations
          Chapter VII.-Concerning Baptism.

          And concerning baptism, thus baptize ye: Having first said all these things,
          baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,
          in living water.

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-07/anf07-41.htm#P5554_2009442
          Book II - Of Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons.

          our Lord, when He sent us, said,
          Go ye, and make disciples of 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.

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-07/anf07-46.htm#P6455_2237399
          Book VI. XV -
          That We Ought Not to Rebaptize, Nor to Receive that Baptism Which is Given by the Ungodly

          Be ye likewise contented with one baptism alone,
          that which is into the death of the Lord..
          not that which is conferred by wicked heretics,
          but that which is conferred by unblameable priests,
             
          "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: "

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-07/anf07-47.htm#P6794_2298792
          Book VII. XXII - A Constitution of Our Lord, How We Ought to Baptize, and into Whose Death.

          thou shalt so baptize
          as the Lord commanded us, saying:
          "Go ye, 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):

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

          The Ecclesiastical Canons of the Same Holy Apostles - Apostolic Canons
          http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-07/anf07-50.htm#P7376_2463844

          the Lord did not say, "Baptize into my death," but,
          "Go ye and make disciples of all nations,
           baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

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

          TERTULLIAN

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-03/anf03-49.htm#P11646_3280473
          On Baptism.-
          Chapter XIII.-Another Objection: Abraham Pleased God Without Being Baptized

          "For the law of baptizing has been imposed, and the formula prescribed:
          "Go," He saith, "teach the nations,
          baptizing them into the name of the Father,
          and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

          http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-03/anf03-43.htm#P10395_2912630
          Against Praxeas, Chapter XXVI 

          After His resurrection He promises in a pledge to His disciples
          that He will send them the promise of His Father; and lastly,
          He commands them to baptize into the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost,

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-03/anf03-24.htm#P3389_1178816
          The Prescription Against Heretics.
          Chapter XX.-Christ First Delivered the Faith. The Apostles Spread It

          Accordingly, after one of these had been struck off,
          He commanded the eleven others, on His departure to the Father, to
          "go and teach all nations, who were to be baptized into the Father,
           and into the Son, and into the Holy Ghost."

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

          HIPPOLYTUS [170-236 AD]

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-05/anf05-18.htm#P3712_1172813
          Part II.- Section 14 Dogmatical and Historical, Against the Heresy of One Noetus

          The Father's Word, therefore, knowing the economy (disposition) and the will of the Father,
          to wit, that the Father seeks to be worshipped in none other way than this,
          gave this charge to the disciples after He rose from the dead:
          "Go ye and teach all nations,
          baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

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

          CYPRIAN (c. 230 AD)

          http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-05/anf05-122.htm#P7907_2659601
          The Treatises of Cyprian -Treatise XII.1
          Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews. [c.200-258]

          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.

          http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-05/anf05-97.htm#P6266_1984159
          Epistle LXXII.18 To Jubaianus, Concerning the Baptism of Heretics.

          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."

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

          COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE

          http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-05/anf05-124.htm#P9402_2932994
          The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian.
          Concerning the Baptism of Heretics.

          Lucius of Castra Galbae
          And again, after His resurrection, sending His apostles,
          He gave them charge, saying,
          "All power is given unto me, in heaven and in earth.
          Go and teach all nations,
          baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
          '
          Munnulus of Girba
          as our Lord says,
          "Go ye and baptize the nations, in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit

          Euchratius of Thenae
          God and our Lord Jesus Christ,
          teaching the apostles with His own mouth,
          has entirely completed our faith,
          and the grace of baptism,
          and the rule of the ecclesiastical law, saying:
          "Go ye and teach all nations,
          baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

          Bishop Vincentius of Thibaris
          "We have assuredly the rule of truth which
          the Lord by His divine precept commanded to His apostles, saying,
          'Go ye, lay on hands in My name, expel demons.'
          And in another place:
          "Go ye and teach the nations,
          baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.'"

          Vincentius also discussed at
          www.waynecoc.org/MarkTwo.html
          because of the usage of the ending of Mark

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

          ORIGEN (c.230 AD) 

          Commentary on Romans (Romans 5:8) - (available in published versions)
          the Lord himself told his disciples that they should
          baptize all peoples in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit
           
          http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-04/anf04-45.htm
          Origen de Principiis Book I

          saving baptism was not complete except by the authority
          of the most excellent Trinity of them all,
          i.e., by
          the naming of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,

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

          GREGORY THAUMATURGUS  (c. 250 AD) 

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-06/anf06-14.htm#P688_203127
          A Sectional Confession of Faith, XIII  

          And what can the impious have to say if
          the Lord sends forth His
          disciples to
          baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?

          http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-06/anf06-03.htm#P222_12052
          Introductory Note to Gregory Thaumaturgus

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

          TREATISE AGAINST NOVATIAN by an ANONYMOUS BISHOP (c.255)

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-05/anf05-146.htm#P10605_3336918
          A Treatise Against the Heretic Novatian by an Anonymous Bishop. (c.255)

          Whence also
          the Lord Christ charges upon Peter,
          and moreover also upon the rest of His disciples,
          "Go ye and preach the Gospel to the nations,
           
          baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

          Introductory Notice To an Anonymous Treatise Against the Heretic Novatian.
          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-05/anf05-145.htm#P10586_3334831

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

          TREATISE ON REBAPTISM (c. 250)

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-05/anf05-148.htm#P10720_3373547
          Neither must you esteem
          what our Lord said as being contrary to this treatment:
          "Go ye, teach the nations;
          baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-05/anf05-147.htm#P10705_3371855
          Introductory Notice Anonymous Treatise on Re-Baptism.

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

          VICTORINUS (c. 300 AD)

          http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-07/anf07-30.htm#P4546_1741041
          Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed John

          The many waters are understood to be many peoples,
          or the gift of baptism that
          He sent forth by the apostles, saying:
          "Go ye, teach all nations,
          baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

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

          So if you have any other verses with this depth of Ante-Nicene citation, please share away. 
          Perhaps John 10:30 ? 

          And what do you make of Conybeare�s argument against its authenticity?  

          Actually, I think it is good to first digest the above, since most papers, including that of Conybeare,
          do not give solid Ante-Nicene referencing information.  Having the data sensibly displayed comes first :) .

          Shalom,
          Steven Avery
          Queens, NY

          James Snapp
          The first issue of the Hibbert Journal, in which F. C. Conybeare ... ... and that the threefold formula in Mt. 28:19 is an early accretion,  His final sentence:  "It may confidently be predicted that when the Greek and Latin fathers who wrote before 400 have been more carefully edited than hitherto from the best codices, scores of old readings will be restored in the text of the N.T. of which no trace remains in any Greek MS."

          Steven Avery
          The two items contradict each other. Matthew 28:19 may well be the single most strongly-attested verse in the whole Bible, looking at the early church writings before 400 AD.  And in addition this verse has close to 100% manuscript support.
          So how much interest can we have in textual theoretician whose main redaction conflicts with his main theory ?
        • james_snapp_jr
          Steven, Here s another look at the early church writers with a few differences from the list you provided, and some analysis. (If you want to skip the list and
          Message 4 of 10 , Jul 17, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Steven,

            Here's another look at the early church writers with a few differences from the list you provided, and some analysis. (If you want to skip the list and get to the analysis, jump to the "+++++++" marker.)

            (1) DIDACHE. In the Holmes-Lightfoot-Harmer "Apostolic Fathers," Holmes dates its assembly to the first half of the 100's using components that were produced earlier, as early as 70. Chapter 7 begins, "Now concerning baptism, baptize as follows: after you have reviewed all these things, baptize `in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,' in running [literally, "living"] water. But if you have no running water, then baptize in some other water, and if you are not able to baptize in cold water, then do so in warm. But if you have neither, then pour water on the head three times, `in the name of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit.'" Clear usages of the threefold formula. But how can we tell for sure that this is dependent upon Matthew 28, and not something else? Also, we should bear in mind that in the next chapter, the Didache quotes Mt. 6:9-13 with the closing phrase, "For yours is the power and the glory forever," The same folks who suggest that the Didache's inclusion of Mt. 6:13 is an interpolation in chapter 8 might argue similarly that the threefold formula was inserted into the text of chapter 7. (Btw, Steven, the list you presented had a double-citation, as if the Didache and the Apostolic Teachings are two things, but they're the same thing.)

            (2) IGNATIUS. In the Holmes-Lightfoot-Harmer "Apostolic Fathers," does not use Mt. 28:19 in his Letter to the Philadelphians. In the introduction (in the 2nd ed.), Holmes states that "middle recension" of Ignatius' letters "preserves the original form of the letters." The "longer recension" is "an expanded version of the original letters created in the fourth century to which six spurious letters have been added." The citation you presented is from part of the expansion to which Holmes referred. (You can see the "longer recension" and the "middle recension" compared to one another, bit by bit, at
            http://www.tertullian.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-20.htm#P2080_351579 .)

            In the Letter to the Philippians, ch. 2, after a strong allusion to John 1:18 (with "the only-begotten Son"), and a few other snippets, we find: "There are not then either three Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracletes, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete. Which is why the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to "baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," not unto one individual with three names, nor into three individuals who became incarnate, but into three possessed of equal honour." This entire epistle, though, is one of the six spurious epistles of the "longer recension."

            So there goes Ignatius' testimony. At these particular points, Pseudo-Ignatius attests to a text of the late 300's.

            (3) JUSTIN. Conybeare attempted to enlist Justin in support of his theory, using an excerpt from Dialogue With Trypho 39:2. (A fresh English translation is at Bombaxo: http://www.bombaxo.com/trypho.html ) The passage may be rendered -- "Just as God, because of those 7,000 men, did not show His anger, so now He has not yet exacted judgment from you, because He knows that every day some of you are forsaking your mistaken ways to become disciples in the name of Christ, and being illumined by the same name of Christ, you receive all the appropriate gifts." Conybeare emphasized the "become disciples in the name of Christ" part of the passage. But the "being illumined by the same name of Christ" (or, "being illumined by the name of the same Christ"?) part may also be in the equation, since to Justin, being "illumined" was a way of referring to baptism. I don't think this reference gets us anywhere, though, when we have Justin's two statements in First Apology 61:
            ( http://earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-firstapology.html )

            First, Justin writes, "They are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, "Except ye be born again, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven."" This is an early example of the use of the threefold formula – but it is not an exact quote, and it is interesting that Justin inexactly cites Jn. 3:5 here instead of Mt. 28:19. The deduction to be made, though, is that patristic writers did not feel obligated to ground a point or practice by citing what is, to us, its most obvious Scriptural grounds. For just a little further on, Justin says, as he describes the baptismal rite itself, "There is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe; he who leads to the laver the person that is to be washed calling him by this name alone. For no one can utter the name of the ineffable God; and if any one dares to say that there is a name (? – renderings vary), he raves with a hopeless madness. And this washing is called illumination, because they who learn these things are illuminated in their understandings. And in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and in the name of the Holy Ghost, who through the prophets foretold all things about Jesus, he who is illuminated is washed." Which is all a spectacularly clear use of the threefold baptismal formula. But Justin does not say that he got the idea for this from a statement at the end of the Gospel of Matthew.

            (4) TATIAN'S DIATESSARON. The Arabic Diatessaron, ch. 55, says, "Then said Jesus unto them, `I have been given all authority in heaven and earth; and as my Father hath sent me, so I also send you. Go now into all the world, and preach my gospel in all the creation; and teach all the peoples, and baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and teach them to keep all whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you all the days, unto the end of the world." A clear combination of Mt. 28:18 (as it exists in the Peshitta; it looks like Jn. 20:21b, but in the Peshitta it's both. It looks like we have here a Diatessaronic reading that entered the Peshitta's text of Matthew, and then went from there into the Arabic Diatessaron.), Mk. 16:15, and Mt. 28:19. (This is followed by Mk. 16:16.) But how do we know that the usual form of Mt. 28:19 here hasn't been adopted from the Peshitta? We need a Western (geographically Western, that is, not textually "Western") witness. Enter Codex Fuldensis. On p. 164 of Ranke's 1868 presentation of Codex Fuldensis, Part CLXXXII, we find the following arrangement:

            "Et locutus est eis dicens data est mihi omnis potestas; in caelo et in terra euntes in mundum uniuersum; praedicate euangelium omni creaturae; docete omnes gentes baptizantes eos in nominee patris, et fili es spiritus sancti; docents eos seruare omnia quaecumque mandaui uobiset ecce ego uobiscum sun omnibus diebus usque ad consummationem saeculi." Again, a clear combination of Mt. 28:18 (without the Peshitta's extra phrase), Mk. 16:15, and Mt. 28:19. (And, again, this is followed by Mk. 16:16.)

            The odds that two independent editors would insert non-Diatessaronic material into Tatian's text, in such a parallel arrangement, phrase-for-phrase, with Mt. 28:20 appearing in the middle of Jesus' final commands, seems incredibly low. So the Diatessaron weighs in for the inclusion of "in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit." (And, btw, for Mk. 16:9-20.)

            (5) IRENAEUS. In Against Heresies III:17:1, Irenaeus states, "And again, giving to the disciples the power of regeneration into God, He said to them, `God and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." The only resort of those who would deny that Irenaeus therefore knew Mt. 28:19 is to assert that this is an interpolation in the text of "Against Heresies."

            (6) TERTULLIAN. Conybeare granted that Tertullian knew the text of Mt. 28:19 with the threefold formula. In "De Baptismo," as Tertullian discusses baptism, he provides early attestation for the passage about the angel and the moving of the water in John 5:4. (At
            http://www.tertullian.org/articles/evans_bapt/evans_bapt_text_trans.htm
            the translation by Ernest Evans is provided with the accompanying Latin text.)
            "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."

            If the objection is made that "De Baptismo" 6 doesn't include an explicit quotation from Matthew 28, then we may proceed to ch. 13: "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."

            In "Against Praxeas," Tertullian refers to the threefold formula repeatedly. In ch. 26, he uses Mt. 28:19 as one item in a list of things by which Christ showed that He was a Son: "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." (Evans' English translation is at http://www.tertullian.org/articles/evans_praxeas_eng.htm .)

            In "Prescription for Heretics" ch. 20, Tertullian used Mt. 28:19 pretty clearly, as he explains that after Judas fell away, Jesus "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." (Notice the variant: in De Baptismo, the phrase "in the name" is present, but not in the other two places.)

            (7) HIPPOLYTUS. In "Against the Heresy of One Noetus," ch. 14
            (at http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/hippolytus-dogmatical.html )
            Hippolytus says, "The Father's Word, therefore, knowing the economy (disposition) and the will of the Father, specifically, that the Father seeks to be worshipped in no other way but this, gave this order to the disciples after He rose from the dead: "Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." And by this He showed, that whosoever omitted any one of these, failed in glorifying God perfectly. For it is through this Trinity that the Father is glorified."

            (8) CYPRIAN. In Epistle 24:2, Cyprian states that the Lord, "after His resurrection, sent forth His apostles, charging 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." Barring an explicit statement that the writer is quoting from the conclusion of the Gospel of Matthew, it can't get much clearer than this.

            In Epistle 72:1 (To Jubaianus), Cyprian states, "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, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.'"

            In Book 2:26 of his "Three Books of Testimonies," Cyprian explicitly states that he is quoting the Gospel: "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." Downright pellucid.

            (9) SEVENTH COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE. Four North African bishops use Mt. 28:19, with the triune formula: Lucius of Castra Galbae, Munnulus of Girba (an island), Euchratius of Thenae (on the coast), and Vincentius of Thibaris. (This should really be counted as four witnesses, not just one.)
            (Note to Steven A.: the page www.waynecoc.org/MarkTwo.html hasn't existed for a while; a very similar page is at http://www.curtisvillechristian.org/MarkTwo.html .)

            (10) ORIGEN. Conybeare stated, "In the writings of Origen and Clement of Alexandria there is no certain instance of Matthew xxviii. 19 being cited in the usual form." Conybeare also states that in the Greek text of Origen's works, "the first part of the verse is thrice adduced, but his citation always stops short at the words TA EQNH." But in "De Principiis" III:2, we find: "And in the New Testament we have abundant testimonies, as when the Holy Spirit is described as having descended upon Christ, and when the Lord breathed upon His apostles after His resurrection, saying, "Receive the Holy Spirit;" and the saying of the angel to Mary, "The Holy Spirit will come upon thee;" the declaration by Paul, that no one can call Jesus Lord, save by the Holy Spirit. In the Acts of the Apostles, the Holy Spirit was given by the imposition of the apostles' hands in baptism. From all this, we learn that the person of the Holy Spirit was of such authority and dignity, that saving baptism was not complete except by the authority of the most excellent Trinity of them all, that is, by the naming of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and by joining to the unbegotten God the Father, and to His only-begotten Son, the name also of the Holy Spirit." Some interpreters may find this interesting because Origen doesn't actually quote Matthew; he cites these other passages, and says that they teach that without the triune formula, saving baptism is not achieved. It would have been more practical to just explicitly quote Mt. 28:19. But patristic writers were frequently not practical; they enjoyed reinforcing one passage with another, and using one passage as a lens by which to view another. And here it looks to me like Origen is just using some passages to support another passage. Conybeare dismissed one or two other references in translations of Origen's compositions as being from the translator, Rufinus.

            Also, in Origen's Commentary on Romans, on p. 356 of Thomas Scheck's English presentation, as Origen discusses Romans 6, he states, "You may perhaps also be asking this: Since the Lord himself told the disciples to baptize all nations in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, why does the Apostle employ here the name of Christ alone in baptism? For he says, "We have been baptized into Christ," although surely it should not be deemed a legitimate baptism unless it is in the name of the Trinity." Origen does not note any manuscript-variations; instead, he reasons that Paul focused on Christ exclusively because he was picturing baptism as illustrative of death, and inasmuch as the Father and the Spirit did not die, Christ is the more appropriate reference-point.

            (11) DE REBAPTISMATE. Despite attempts to assign this to Ursinus, a contemporary of Damasus, I think it's safe to say that the author was a contemporary of Cyprian, writing in 256-258. The author begins by referring to people who were baptized by heretics "in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord" and "in the name of Jesus Christ." This continues in ch. 6. In ch. 7, the author uses Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula: "Neither must you esteem what our Lord said as being contrary to this treatment: `Go, teach the nations; baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' Because, although this is true and right, and to be observed by all means in the Church, and moreover has been used to be observed, yet it behooves us to consider that invocation of the name of Jesus should not be considered futile by us on account of the veneration and power of that very name."

            (12) AGAINST NOVATIAN. In paragraph 3, the unknown author offers an allegorical interpretation of the significance of the dove that returned to Noah: being sent from the ark three times, and flying through the air over the water, it "signified the sacraments of our Church. Whence also the Lord Christ charges upon Peter, and moreover also upon the rest of His disciples, `Go and preach the Gospel to the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' That is, that that same Trinity which operated figuratively in Noah's days through the dove, now operates in the Church spiritually through the disciples." An inexact reference, but still clearly a reference.

            (13) GREGORY THAUMATURGUS. In "a Sectional Confession of Faith," in ch. 5, Gregory affirms, "In the name of the Holy Trinity baptism and invocation and worship are administered." A more explicit use of Matthew 28:19 is found in ch. 13 of the same composition: "What can the impious have to say if the Lord sends forth His disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?"

            (14) VICTORINUS. In his Commentary on Revelation, as presented by Jerome, Victorinus of Petau states, in a comment on the meaning of "many waters" in Rev. 1:15, "The many waters are understood to be many peoples, or the gift of baptism that He sent forth by the apostles, saying: `Go ye, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.'"

            (15) APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS. Although assigned in your list to the "Late 2d to early 3d century," the Apostolic Constitutions is usually given a date c. 380. Book 7:22 says, "We now say that you shall so baptize as the Lord commanded us, saying, `Go ye, 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)' - of the Father who sent, of Christ who came, of the Comforter who testified."

            In Apostolic Constitutions II:26 (which has a different source than Book VII), we find the following: "Let the presbyters be esteemed by you to represent us the apostles, and let them be the teachers of divine knowledge; since our Lord, when He sent us, said, `Go ye, and make disciples of 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.'" So there is no doubt that the triune formula was used by the author/compiler; this is, though, a text from the late 300's.

            (16) APHRAHAT. Conybeare cited Aphrahat for an unusual variant: in Demonstration 1, Of Faith, paragraph 8, Aphrahat (= Aphraates) wrote, "When He sent forth His apostles He spake thus to them: - Go forth, make disciples of all nations and they will believe on me." After presenting this reading, Conybeare offered the conjecture that the original text of Matthew 28:19 stopped with the words "all nations," and was expanded differently in three different ways:
            (1) the addition of "in my name," attested by Eusebius.
            (2) the addition of "and they shall believe on me" attested by Aphraates.
            (3) the triune baptismal formula.

            (17) CLEMENTINE HOMILIES. Just to be thorough we should probably mention the first sentence of 17:7 in "Clementine Homilies" – "Knowing therefore that we knew all that was spoken by Him, and that we could supply the proofs, He sent us to the ignorant Gentiles to baptize them for remission of sins, and commanded us to teach them first." A perfectly vague allusion.

            +++++++

            So here are some thoughts – just some initial impressions; there's more to this than can be digested in just a few days.

            First, when we review the cited witnesses, their values are as follows:

            (1) DIDACHE: clearly uses the triune baptismal formula. But the Gospel of Matthew is not named as the source. And in 9:5 the Didache has a reference to being baptized "in the Lord's name."
            (2) IGNATIUS: at the pertinent points, the quotations become Pseudo-Ignatius (late 300's).
            (3) JUSTIN: clear use of the triune baptismal formula. No statement that the Gospel of Matthew is being quoted.
            (4) TATIAN'S DIATESSARON: blends the usual text of Mt. 28:19 into the narrative.
            (5) IRENAEUS: quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
            (6) TERTULLIAN: mentions that faith is sealed in baptism "in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" and repeatedly quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
            (7) HIPPOLYTUS: quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
            (8) CYPRIAN: quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source, but he states in Testimonies 2:26 that he is quoting from the Gospel (without specifying Matthew).
            (9) SEVENTH COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE: four quotations of Mt. 28:19 with the triune baptismal formula, but without explicit identification of the Gospel of Matthew as the source.
            (10) ORIGEN: alludes to the triune baptismal formula, and cites Matthew 28:19 in its usual form, without stating that he is quoting from Matthew. He does this when addressing the question of why Paul, in Romans 6, says that we are baptized into Christ, rather than that we are baptized into the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
            (11) DE REBAPTISMATE: quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
            (12) AGAINST NOVATIAN: quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
            (13) GREGORY THAUMATURGUS: strongly alludes to Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
            (14) VICTORINUS: quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
            (15) APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS: quotes Mt. 28:19 at least twice with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
            (16) APHRAHAT: alludes loosely to Christ's words in Mt. 28:19, without mentioning baptism or the triune formula: "Go forth, make disciples of all nations and they will believe on me."
            (17) CLEMENTINE HOMILIES: very vaguely alludes to Mt. 28:19, without naming Matthew as the source.

            If, for simplicity's sake, we eliminate the post-Nicene witnesses from the list, there are 13 ante-Nicene pieces of support (16 if we count the bishops at Carthage in 257 individually) for the triune formula, and they represent a broad geographical spectrum. None of them explicitly say that they have obtained it from the Gospel of Matthew, but they treat it in the same way that Gospel-quotations are routinely treated. Cyprian says that he got the statement from the Gospel (which in this case is as good as saying that he got it from Matthew, since the other Gospels don't have parallel wording). So a person taking an unreasonably minimalistic approach could argue that since Cyprian is the only one who states that he was quoting from the Gospel, all the others either used some uniquely popular oral tradition, or a now-lost written source, or have had their writings interpolated by interpolators (who didn't also add an explicit mention of the Gospel of Matthew). But such a conclusion involves the idea that if a citation does not explicitly name its source, even in a case where the material being cited is unique to a single known source, the logical thing to do is to posit a hypothetical source for it. Such an idea puts a special burden on the patristic writers.

            If the same standard were applied to the quotations from Eusebius listed by Conybeare (A PDF of his article in the 1901 Zeitschrift fur Neutestamentlich Wissenschaft can be downloaded from
            http://www.godglorified.com/Conybeare.htm (Thanks to Randall D. Hughes.)), they would melt away. A few examples:

            (1) In Commentary on the Psalms, Eusebius uses Mt. 15:24 and 10:5-6 to show that Jesus first sent his disciples to the Jews. Then he refers to the command to evangelize (not "disciple" or "teach") all the nations in his name. An allusion to Mt. 28:19, or to Lk. 24:47?

            (2) In Demonstration of the Gospel, Book 3, part 6, Eusebius wrote, "With one word and voice He said to His disciples: "Go, and make disciples of all the nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you," and He joined the effect to His Word; and in a little while every race of the Greeks and barbarians was being brought into discipleship." Looks like a loose recollection – not a citation, but a summarization, utilizing Mt. 28:19 and Lk. 24:47. There is no mention of baptism at all.

            (3) In Demonstration of the Gospel, Book 3, part 7, "For He did not bid them simply and indefinitely make disciples of all nations, but with the necessary addition of `In my Name.'" Since the subject is not specifically baptism, but disciple-making, a leap from the thought of Mt. 28:19 to Lk. 24:47 would be natural for someone as familiar with parallel-passages as Eusebius. The statement, "He showed the virtue of the power in His Name concealed from the crowd when He said to His disciples: `Go, and make disciples of all nations in my Name'" looks like a summarized reference (the triune formula is not in the picture because baptism is not in the picture) to Mt. 28:19 and Lk. 24:47. (Is there a double-citation? Hastily using electronic search to find the references, I may have overlooked some transition, but this looks like the very same statement that Conybeare says he found in Theophania V:49.)

            Eusebius' use of the phrase, "Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in my name," might be a symptom of his desire to harmonize. Take the command to baptize out of the equation, and you take the triune formula out of the equation, too. In all these places, Eusebius seems to use "make disciples" as the antecedent for "in my name." As far as I can tell, he doesn't ever say, in connection with the scene of the Great Commission, that Jesus told His disciples to baptize in His name. This could all just be a loose way of referring to the first part of Mt. 28:19 and Lk. 24:47 at once.

            Conybeare did not accept as legitimate the only explicit reference to the Gospel of Matthew: the statement of Eusebius himself, in Theophania IV:8. We should bear in mind that the Syriac text of Theophania is the third composition in BL. Syriac Add. MS 12150, produced in 411. The chapter-title runs, "He foretold at the outset to His disciples that He would make them fishers of men, and, that they should eventually, openly, immediately, (and) through His power, make disciples of all nations. From the Gospel of Matthew." Then comes the following:
            "After his resurrection from the dead, all of them – being together as they had been commanded – went to Galilee, as He had said to them. But, when they saw Him, some worshipped Him, but others doubted. But He drew near to them, spoke with them, and said, "All power (both) in heaven and earth, is given to me of my Father. Go ye and make disciples of all nations, and baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. And teach them to observe all that I have commanded you. And, behold! I am with you always even to the end of the world.""

            Conybeare states, "The Syriac translator, obliged to render so long a consecutive passage of the Gospels, has merely availed himself of his Syriac vulgate; and copied out from it the entire five verses." Lee, likewise assuming the existence of the Peshitta in 411, observed (in a footnote in his translation of Theophania) that the differences from the Peshitta are slight, and show "that the translator, having the words of the Peshitta in his mind, rather translated afresh than followed it literally."

            However, it looks to me like there is quite a large difference from the text of the Peshitta! The phrase, "As the Father has sent Me, so send I you" (to which I referred above in the description of the evidence from the Arabic Diatessaron) is absent.

            There is no further comment from Eusebius on the triune formula, and the only possible allusion to the phrase about baptism begins with the statement, ""But of necessity he added the mystery of cleansing," (without mention of the series of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) followed by a verbose description of the effects of the conversion of bad people, all of which which Conybeare attempted to explain as something not connected at all to the text of Mt. 28:19.

            Meanwhile, there is another reference to consider. On p. 283 of the issue of the 1901 ZNW, Conybeare mentioned Theodotus, whose literary activity he says must have been as early as 160. In an excerpt from Theodotus appended to the eighth book of Stromateis, Theodotus is presented as writing, KAI TOIS APOSTOLOIC ENTELLETAI, PERIIONTES KHRUSSETE KAI TOUS PISTEUONTAS BAPTIZETE EIS ONOMA PATROS KAI UIOU KAI AGIOU PNEUMATOS. "And the apostles he commanded to go around preaching, and to baptize the believers in the name of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit." But I haven't tracked down verification of this; probably the material mentioned by Peter Head addresses it.

            My initial impression is that the least complicated solution is that the evidence other than Eusebius against the triune formula is just a series of imprecise allusions and summarizations. In the case of Eusebius, though, his harmonistic tendencies may have led him to conclude, for a while at least, that the triune baptismal formula was a liturgical accretion, and that Matthew must have written "in my name," a la Luke 24:47. (Similarly Eusebius resolved the apparent discrepancy between Mark 15:25 and John 19:14 via a conjectural emendation.)

            Eusebius may have encountered a text of Matthew in which the entire baptismal formula had been excised, and /preferred/ it (rather than conjectured it) because it was apologetically convenient (i.e., easier to harmonize). I wonder: could a liturgical formula be specially marked in a MS, and then be excised by a dense novice copyist who misunderstood the special marks in his exemplar? If this could happen in the case of the baptismal formula in Mt. 28:19, could the same phenomenon occur very early in, say, Matthew 6:13, or even in Acts 8:37?

            Yours in Christ,

            James Snapp, Jr.
          • schmuel
            Hi Folks, And I think it was Hort who had a comment about getting the data first, before the analysis :) . So let us continue. The analysis of Conybeare (and
            Message 5 of 10 , Jul 18, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Folks,

              And I think it was Hort who had a comment about getting the data first, before the analysis :) .
              So let us continue.

              The analysis of Conybeare (and some others) is a bit naive, it is largely based on his own doctrinal confusions and convolutions, e.g. his comment
              "Origen gives no hint of the important precept to baptise in the triune name" involves his own doctrinal interpretation of the harmony of the Matthew and Acts verses.  Conybeare confuses the textual with the doctrinal, after super-imposing his own doctrinal understandings, or misunderstandings.

              Yet before going into that, it is good to see how amazingly overwhelming is the actual evidence, both in manuscripts and early church writer evidences.

              James Snapp,
              (1)  DIDACHE.  In the Holmes-Lightfoot-Harmer "Apostolic Fathers," Holmes dates its assembly to the first half of the 100's using components that were produced earlier, as early as 70.  Chapter 7 begins, "Now concerning baptism, baptize as follows:  after you have reviewed all these things, baptize `in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,' in running [literally, "living"] water.  But if you have no running water, then baptize in some other water, and if you are not able to baptize in cold water, then do so in warm.  But if you have neither, then pour water on the head three times,

              Steven
              And I have long been skeptical of this as fully an early document, mainly because of
              pour water on the head three times And the actual manuscript is quite late.  I wonder where else this "pour water on the head" appears early.  If this is unique to the Didache text, and does not show up in the Didiscalia or Apostolic Consitutions or early writers (I have not checked this) then I would be very, very slow to accept this as an ancient phrase, which would weaken any particular words, even if the Didache aas a whole is referenced by various early church writers.  The question is whether we really have an accurate text.  (I am more interested in this from the Didache side than from the Matthew 28:19 side.

              James
              `in the name of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit.'"  Clear usages of the threefold formula.  But how can we tell for sure that this is dependent upon Matthew 28, and not something else?  ... (Btw, Steven, the list you presented had a double-citation, as if the Didache and the Apostolic Teachings are two things, but they're the same thing.)

              Steven
              The Apostolic Teachings (Didascalia) and the Apostolic Constitutions are different than the Didache, and I had Apostolic Teachings with four references. However, as you point out one of the references is apparently the one Didache reference (and is not in the Didascalia or Apostolic Constitutions).

              And I did forget to update the URLs, so later I will try to make the list available with updated urls and various tweaks.

              (2)  IGNATIUS. ....So there goes Ignatius' testimony.  At these particular points, Pseudo-Ignatius attests to a text of the late 300's.

              Steven
              A bit of an overstatement, since it is only granting those late dates, which is not so clear, last time I read the literature :) .  And it is still very close to the time of Eusebius, and would still be in the large list of 300s citation.

              Howvever we were not working with the umpteen post-Nicea references, so I will include it in later groupings and/or with a note in the future, and in that sense
              the testimony goes.

              (3)  JUSTIN.  Conybeare attempted to enlist Justin in support of his theory ..
              ... Conybeare emphasized the "become disciples in the name of Christ" part of the passage. But the "being illumined by the same name of Christ" (or, "being illumined by the name of the same Christ"?) part may also be in the equation, since to Justin, being "illumined" was a way of referring to baptism. 
              Steven
              Numerous writers, and you have added more, have pointed out that this reference is simply not any support for Conybeare at all, and can simply be placed in a neutral camp textually.  Conybeare desperately needed an early straw to grasp since Eusebius is later than a dozen Father, Son and Holy Spirit references, so he stirred in Justin Martyr.

              James
              I don't think this reference gets us anywhere, though, when we have Justin's two statements in First Apology 61: 
              ( http://earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-firstapology.html )

              First, Justin writes, ... For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water.  .... And in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and in the name of the Holy Ghost, who through the prophets foretold all things about Jesus, he who is illuminated is washed."  Which is all a spectacularly clear use of the threefold baptismal formula.  But Justin does not say that he got the idea for this from a statement at the end of the Gospel of Matthew.

              Steven
              Spectacularly clear ?  A bit of an overstatement.  However a general confirmation.  Surely nobody can place Justin overall as in opposition to Matthew 28:19 as in the manuscripts.

              James
              (4)  TATIAN'S DIATESSARON.  The Arabic Diatessaron, ch. 55, says, "Then said Jesus unto them, `I have been given all authority in heaven and earth; and as my Father hath sent me, so I also send you. Go now into all the world, and preach my gospel in all the creation; and teach all the peoples, and baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and teach them to keep all whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you all the days, unto the end of the world."  A clear combination of Mt. 28:18 (as it exists in the Peshitta; it looks like Jn. 20:21b, but in the Peshitta it's both.  It looks like we have here a Diatessaronic reading that entered the Peshitta's text of Matthew, and then went from there into the Arabic Diatessaron.), Mk. 16:15, and Mt. 28:19.  (This is followed by Mk. 16:16.)  But how do we know that the usual form of Mt. 28:19 here hasn't been adopted from the Peshitta?

              Steven
              That could only be the case with an early Peshitta, in which case the Peshitta becomes the powerful 2nd century witness. One hand giveth, another taketh. 

              Interestingly, the Diatessoran --> Peshitta addition (by standard thinking, and since the Diatessoran is the harmony, it makes sense to be the culprit) is not noted frequently.  Here is one note.

              Aramaic Primacy for the New Testament?
              http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?8573-Aramaic-Primacy-for-the-New-Testament/page2

              Mark notes the issues, however his idea that "SyP itself was created by breaking the Diatessaron down into the four separate Gospels and substantially conforming it to the koine." makes very little sense.

              Your Fuldensis find helps, although I am not sure how that would prove the Diatessoran-->Peshitta chronology, since how Fuldensis gets the phrase remains a puzzle in any regards, since it really is basically simply a Vulgate manuscript. (This is the earliest Vulgate manuscript that has the famous Prologue discussing the heavenly witnesses.)   Was Fuldensis influenced by either the Diatessoran or Peshitta lineage in any other verses ?

              (5)  IRENAEUS.  In Against Heresies III:17:1, Irenaeus states, "And again, giving to the disciples the power of regeneration into God, He said to them, `God and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."  The only resort of those who would deny that Irenaeus therefore knew Mt. 28:19 is to assert that this is an interpolation in the text of "Against Heresies." 

              :)
              You can get any redaction you want, in the scientific textcrit restaurant.

              (6)  TERTULLIAN.  Conybeare granted that Tertullian knew the text of Mt. 28:19 with the threefold formula.  In "De Baptismo,"

              Which in a logical analysis alone, or with Cyprian, essentially destroys the Conybeare argument (even before the dozen other citations).  Which is why Conybeare strained mightily on Justin. I may add your text from Tertullian about the baptism of John - "De Baptismo" 6 - as an additional auxiliary reference, to my list.

              (7)  HIPPOLYTUS.

              A complete citation of the verse.

              (8)  CYPRIAN.
              In Epistle 72:1 (To Jubaianus), Cyprian states, "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, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.'" 

              This one is 72:5 not 72:1
              http://www.tertullian.org/fathers2/ANF-05/anf05-97.htm

              On the same page is also 72:18 which was in my list. you might like to add.

              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."

              (9) SEVENTH COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE.  Four North African bishops use Mt. 28:19, with the triune formula:  Lucius of Castra Galbae, Munnulus of Girba (an island), Euchratius of Thenae (on the coast), and Vincentius of Thibaris.  (This should really be counted as four witnesses, not just one.) 

              Four witnesses, agreed

              (10)  ORIGEN.  ... "De Principiis" III:2, we find: .....   saving baptism was not complete except by the authority of the most excellent Trinity of them all, that is, by the naming of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and by joining to the unbegotten God the Father, and to His only-begotten Son, the name also of the Holy Spirit."... (snip Snapp analysis) And here it looks to me like Origen is just using some passages to support another passage.  Conybeare dismissed one or two other references in translations of Origen's compositions as being from the translator, Rufinus.

              Steven
              I see that Conybeare references Numeros Hom XII,2 which is very strong evidence for our starndard text.

              One strange little writing idea of Conybeare is to refer to the "textus receptus" of Matthew 28:19, yet the reading is standard in every Greek, Latin and Syriac line, and every versional line ..  way, way beyond the "textus receptus".

              Also, in Origen's Commentary on Romans,

              Steven
              Nice. Conybeare acknowledges three in that one Commentary, but since you cannot be sure where Origen ends and Rufinus begins, he would like to handwave all the references.  One problem with that is that Origen, Cyprian, Tertullian, Rebaptism, etc are all corroborative.  Occam's razor shaves smoother just allowing the references to be most likely Origen.

              Also Conybeare acknowledges clearly the
              Commentary on John tom VI:17 with yet another handwave, different than Rufinus.  When a person handwaves all day, do they get tired ?

              (11)  DE REBAPTISMATE. 

              Very powerful.

              (12)  AGAINST NOVATIAN ...  An inexact reference, but still clearly a reference.

              (13)  GREGORY THAUMATURGUS.    In "a Sectional Confession of Faith," in ch. 5, Gregory affirms, "In the name of the Holy Trinity baptism and invocation and worship are administered."

              Thanks for the additional reference to ch. 13 in Gregory

              (14)  VICTORINUS.   In his Commentary on Revelation,

              (15)  APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS.  Although assigned in your list to the "Late 2d to early 3d century," the Apostolic Constitutions is usually given a date c. 380.

              Steven
              I'll check and correct.  As I understand the Apostolic Constitutions are an outgrowth of the Didascalia so they may be worth keeping in with a special note as it is considered the summation of teachings.  Also will check if something within the Didascalia has been overlooked or if the writings are sometimes grouped together. Just a little busy today.

              (16)  APHRAHAT.  Conybeare cited Aphrahat for an unusual variant:  in Demonstration 1, Of Faith, paragraph 8, Aphrahat (= Aphraates) wrote, "When He sent forth His apostles He spake thus to them: - Go forth, make disciples of all nations and they will believe on me."  After presenting this reading, Conybeare offered the conjecture that the original text of Matthew 28:19 stopped with the words "all nations," and was expanded differently in three different ways: 
              (1) the addition of "in my name," attested by Eusebius.
              (2)  the addition of "and they shall believe on me" attested by Aphraates.
              (3)  the triune baptismal formula.

              Steven
              Since Aphrahat omitted everything about "baptizing them"..  he would be no evidence of anything.
              The creative triple redaction of Conybeare should be retired in :

              Fenton Hort's Museum of Primitive Corruptions

              (17)  CLEMENTINE HOMILIES.  Just to be thorough we should probably mention the first sentence of 17:7 in "Clementine Homilies" ­ "Knowing therefore that we knew all that was spoken by Him, and that we could supply the proofs, He sent us to the ignorant Gentiles to baptize them for remission of sins, and commanded us to teach them first."  A perfectly vague allusion.

              Steven
              What is surprising is how few are vague, so many have the Matthew words quite precisely. Can we add the Shepherd of Hermas reference as similar to Clementine ?  There is also mention of a reference from the gnostic Theodotus.

              Is this more references to one verse, corroborating the Bible text, in the ECW than any other verse ?

              I've never seen more.  John 10:30 comes to mind, as another one that is widely quoted.  What else ?

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

              REVIEW

              James
              (1)  DIDACHE:  clearly uses the triune baptismal formula.  But the Gospel of Matthew is not named as the source.  And in 9:5 the Didache has a reference to being baptized "in the Lord's name."

              Steven
              However, the book of Acts clearly shows this as clearly Bible (especially Acts 10:48, 19:5 and 22:16).

              Acts 10:48
              And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.
              Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

               Many see this connection as doctrinally important, yet here we can just say that it demonstrates that no conclusions can be drawn from the phrase as Matthew evidence unless it is specifically connected to the Matthew verse.

              (2)  IGNATIUS:  at the pertinent points, the quotations become Pseudo-Ignatius (late 300's). 
              (3)  JUSTIN:  clear use of the triune baptismal formula.  No statement that the Gospel of Matthew is being quoted. 
              (4)  TATIAN'S DIATESSARON:  blends the usual text of Mt. 28:19 into the narrative.
              (5)  IRENAEUS:  quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.  
              (6)  TERTULLIAN:  mentions that faith is sealed in baptism "in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" and repeatedly quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
              (7)  HIPPOLYTUS:  quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
              (8)  CYPRIAN:  quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source, but he states in Testimonies 2:26 that he is quoting from the Gospel (without specifying Matthew).
              (9)  SEVENTH COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE:  four quotations of Mt. 28:19 with the triune baptismal formula, but without explicit identification of the Gospel of Matthew as the source.
              (10)  ORIGEN:  alludes to the triune baptismal formula, and cites Matthew 28:19 in its usual form, without stating that he is quoting from Matthew.  He does this when addressing the question of why Paul, in Romans 6, says that we are baptized into Christ, rather than that we are baptized into the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
              (11)  DE REBAPTISMATE:  quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source. 
              (12)  AGAINST NOVATIAN:  quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
              (13)  GREGORY THAUMATURGUS:  strongly alludes to Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
              (14)  VICTORINUS:  quotes Mt. 28:19 with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
              (15)  APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS:  quotes Mt. 28:19 at least twice with the triune formula, without naming Matthew as his source.
              (16)  APHRAHAT:  alludes loosely to Christ's words in Mt. 28:19, without mentioning baptism or the triune formula:  "Go forth, make disciples of all nations and they will believe on me."
              (17)  CLEMENTINE HOMILIES:  very vaguely alludes to Mt. 28:19, without naming Matthew as the source. 

              And I will stop here for now before the further analysis section :) We could also look at the Eusebius references, although that has been done by many, if I remember Peter Head gives a breakdown.

              Nicely done, James.

              Shalom,
              Steven Avery

              Queens, NY
            • james_snapp_jr
              F.C. Conybeare s proposal that Mt. 28:19 originally did not contain the triune baptismal formula did not go unnoticed by his contemporaries. Here are excerpts
              Message 6 of 10 , Jul 19, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                F.C. Conybeare's proposal that Mt. 28:19 originally did not contain the triune baptismal formula did not go unnoticed by his contemporaries. Here are excerpts from three other writers of the early 1900's - Kirsopp Lake, J. Albert Edmunds, and J. R. Wilkinson.

                LAKE: In "The Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1907), p. 87, Lake wrote:

                "Textually this passage gives rise to a difficult problem in verse 19. The facts may be summarized as follows. The text as given above is found in all MSS. and versions; but Eusebius of Caesarea, in his frequent quotations of this verse, frequently, if not always, used a text giving it in the form, "Go ye therefore and make disciples of all the nations in my name" – omitting all reference to baptism. The obvious suggestion is that this form was found in MSS. known to Eusebius, though no longer extant. Possibly Hermas (c. 140 A.D.), and probably Justin Martyr, show acquaintance with the same form. These facts were first pointed out by Mr Conybeare, and no other explanation has been offered, except that Eusebius may have concealed his knowledge of the text under the influence of the /Disciplina arcani,/ which forbade Christian mysteries to be made known to the heathen. This is an unsatisfactory suggestion, for Eusebius shows no signs of special respect for the /Disciplina arcani,/ and there is no reason why he should have been silent on the baptismal formula in commentaries on scripture, which were surely intended for the initiated. Thus it is probable that Eusebius used MSS. which omitted the command to baptize, and it is a question whether this is not really the original text of Matthew, and the command to baptize a later interpolation, due to the influence of ecclesiastical custom. A decision on this point must depend largely on considerations which cannot be fully discussed here. The main argument in favour of the usual text is the alleged improbability that all existing MSS. and versions should agree in a wrong reading; but against this may be set the view of many students of the text that no existing MSS. or versions do more than represent comparatively late recensions; the probability that baptismal use undoubtedly very early influenced the text; and the improbability, in view of the great importance attached to baptism, that such a form as the Eusebian text of Matt. xxviii. 19 could ever have evolved out of the ordinary text. Moreover, those who ascribe an early date to Matthew ought naturally to be inclined to prefer the Eusebian text, for they are then relieved from the well-known difficulty caused by the fact that in the Acts baptism is always in the name of Christ (or a similar expression), and never in the Trinitarian formula. The balance of argument seems to be in favor of the Eusebian text."

                Lake proceeded, on pp. 88-90, to summarize cases for and against the idea that this incident is based on the (posited) lost conclusion of Mark; he concluded (though not strongly) that the best explanation is that Mark was already mutilated when it came into Matthew's hands; the closing section of Matthew "cannot be regarded as adequately representing the lost conclusion of Mark."

                EDMUNDS - A decade after Lake wrote that, J. Albert Edmunds wrote a book called "The Oldest Resurrection Documents – Showing that Event to Have Been a Series of Apparitions." The second text he examines (#1 is Acts 9:1-9) is ""MATTHEW" XXVIII, 16-20." Edmunds presented this in the following way:

                The eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. [Probably referring to the scene in Mark III, 13-19.] And when they saw him they worshipt [him]; BUT SOME DOUBTED. And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying: A;; authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth. Go ye therefore and made disciples of all the nations IN MY NAME, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you; and lo! I am with you always, even unto the end of the age.*

                The asterisk is followed by a paragraph-sized note:

                *NOTE. – This ancient form of the text, reconstructed from the lost MSS. of Origen and Pamphilus, as used by Eusebius, omits the Trinitarian formula and the Baptismal Charge (Conybeare: Hibbert Journal, 1902.) Observe that the disciples go away into Galilee, as ordered by the young man in white in Mark xvi, 7. This priceless fragment preserved in the First Gospel is probably older than our present text of Mark, and if not taken from the original ending of the latter, represented the same Galilean tradition. This was afterwards supplanted by the snobbish assertion of the capital, which said: "It all happened here!" In the interest of this Jerusalem prepossession the account in Luke was written, Mark was mutilated and Matthew interpolated. This has been clearly shown by Kirsopp Lake and Clayton R. Bowen, in their monographs on the Resurrection in the Crown Theological Library (New York, Putnam, 1907 and 1911). The apparitional character of the phenomenon is evidence from the phrase: /Some doubted,/ that is, some saw the figure and others did not. Very different from the materialized forms of Luke and John!

                Just to be thorough, I investigated Clayton Bowen's 1911 monograph, "Resurrection in the New Testament," but he doesn't add anything to the text-critical discussion. He does, though, mention a few replies to Conybeare, including one that was written by J. R. Wilkinson, and which can be found in the same issue of Hibbert Journal, beginning on p. 571.

                WILKINSON - The gist of Wilkinson's answer to Conybeare is that the Eusebian form of Matthew 28:19, instead of displaying any omission of the usual baptismal triune formula, contained an insertion: the phrase "in my name" between "of all nations" and "baptizing." Wilkinson seems content to regard the phrase "Go ye therefore and make disciples of all nations in my name" as a phrase which was in a "the pre-Matthean gospel postulated by our St Matthew." In other words, "Make disciples of all nations in my name" was in the source-material, and Matthew (or, as Wilkinson diplomatically puts it, "the canonical evangelist" – the anonymous author known as the author of the Gospel of Matthew) declined to perpetuate it alongside the triune formula, but the words crept "back into the text even without any conscious purpose on the part of a copyist who was familiar with the language of the ancient source. In this way was formed the conflate reading, for which we have the testimony of Eusebius." Wilkinson's whole article should be required reading for everyone who reads Conybeare's.

                (Btw, Wilkinson provisionally favors the reading, "Do not call me good," at least in Luke 18:19.)

                Yours in Christ,

                James Snapp, Jr.
              • Wieland Willker
                ... this ... the ... nations ... What we really, really need is an early, extensive papyrus of Matthew, like P66. Best wishes     Wieland       
                Message 7 of 10 , Jul 20, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  > The text as given above is found in all MSS. and versions;

                  > but Eusebius of Caesarea, in his frequent quotations of
                  this
                  > verse, frequently, if not always, used a text giving it in
                  the
                  > form, "Go ye therefore and make disciples of all the
                  nations
                  > in my name" – omitting all reference to baptism. The
                  > obvious suggestion is that this form was found in MSS.


                  What we really, really need is an early, extensive papyrus
                  of Matthew, like P66.


                  Best wishes
                      Wieland
                         <><
                  ------------------------------------------------
                  Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
                  http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
                  Textcritical Commentary:
                  http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.