The great commision

  • Thread starter Thread starter tealblue
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tealblue

Guest
I’m looking for an answer to someone who claims that in Matt 18:19 Father ,son and holy spirit was added to the original text and it originaly said baptize in my name only.
 
I’m looking for an answer to someone who claims that in Matt 18:19 Father ,son and holy spirit was added to the original text and it originaly said baptize in my name only.
Ask them to show you the original text so you can see for yourself. 🙂
 
Ask them to show you the original text so you can see for yourself. 🙂
Exactly…or that they need to show you some kind of proof…then you can soundly refute said proof…if they can come up with any.
 
Ah, the old “Bible has been corrupted/tampered so it’s unreliable and untruthful” argument.
 
If they’re protestant ask them why they add the doxology to the Lord’s prayer in Matthew chapter 6, when it does not exist in the original mauscripts, as far as I’m aware?

Matt
 
Here is a response to the claim:

*CLAIM: We now have absolute proof the Catholic Church fathers perverted the text in Matthew 28:19. We now have the Hebrew Matthew Gospel, a manuscript that was preserved by the Jews from the first century. In this Shem Tov MSS, the text at Matthew 28:19 does not contain the trinitarian statement.

RESPONSE: Poor Pastor Reckart, and the black helicopters are coming after him, too. But watch out. Reckart purposely obscures the fact that this manuscript dates from 1380 AD. In other words, it is practically useless for textual criticism on this point. Indeed Howard clearly asserts that it “reflects contamination by Jewish scribes in the Middle Ages,” and you might guess that in such an instance any text smacking of Trinitarianism would be one of the first to go.

Reckart thinks that the Trinitarian world is in for a “shaking” but the fact is that anyone who is up on the scholarship of late (Witherington, Hurtado, Dunn, etc.) knows good and well that this is merely pompous posturing. Reckart is banging his head against the front door so hard that he doesn’t see what’s coming in the back door, through the windows, and down the chimney.*
 
“CLAIM: We now have absolute proof the Catholic Church fathers perverted the text in Matthew 28:19. We now have the Hebrew Matthew Gospel, a manuscript that was preserved by the Jews from the first century. In this Shem Tov MSS, the text at Matthew 28:19 does not contain the trinitarian statement.”

So, let’s see this absolute proof. The Church is not afraid of documents.
 
If they’re protestant ask them why they add the doxology to the Lord’s prayer in Matthew chapter 6, when it does not exist in the original mauscripts, as far as I’m aware?

Matt
It was present in some texts, but not others … so some versions include it as a postscript and others don’t mention it at all.

Indeed, it does seem very appropriate language to end the Lord’s prayer with. IMO … the H.S. added it at later date … just to challenge the bible scholars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top