Baptism - Is the Text of Matt. 28:19 Original?

User avatar
_Evangelion
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 3:58 pm
Location: Black Country, UK (ex-Australia)

Post by _Evangelion » Sat Jul 08, 2006 9:06 am

Paidion wrote:Matthew 27 and 28 are entirely absent from any extant manuscripts dating before 300 A.D. So it doesn't matter how many later manuscripts contain the "baptismal formula". That only means that the probable later addition became widely distributed.

Personally, I am inclined to think it was indeed a later addition placed their to support trinitarianism.
How do you account for its appearance in the Didache and the various texts from early Church Fathers such as Iganatius and Cyprian (who quotes it pefectly, along with the entire verse as we have it today)?
However, I think "baptising in Jesus name" was not a verbal formula in the early church. It was a fact.

A soldier could shout, "Stop in the name of the king" because he had the authority from the king to arrest a person. Yet, he could still arrest that person in the name of the king without out stating that he was doing so.

I think it is the same with baptism. I have seen people baptised where the one doing the baptism said nothing at all to the baptized person. Yet it was known by all present, that he was baptising in the name of Jesus.
Agreed. :D
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.

Søren Kierkegaard

User avatar
_Homer
Posts: 639
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:43 pm
Location: Brownsville

Post by _Homer » Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:05 am

Jesusfollower,

You said:
it seems apparent that no one here can see that water baptism was replaced by holy spirit baptism.
To believe this borders on an absurdity. As Evangelion points out the Apostles continued to baptize and command people to be baptized. Or are we to believe men are capable of baptizing with the Holy Spirit?

Acts 10:47-48; "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.

1 Corinthians 1:14; "I thank God I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius," v.16; "Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas."

If this statement of yours reflects what your T&T teachers believe and teach they have zero credibility with me.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
A Berean

_Jesusfollower
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: NW

Post by _Jesusfollower » Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:46 am

Acts 1
4On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: "Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. 5For John baptized with[a] water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."
a. Acts 1:5 Or in

Tells me everything I need to know about who is credible.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

User avatar
_Evangelion
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 3:58 pm
Location: Black Country, UK (ex-Australia)

Post by _Evangelion » Sat Jul 08, 2006 2:09 pm

Jesusfollower wrote:Acts 1
4On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: "Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. 5For John baptized with[a] water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."
a. Acts 1:5 Or in

Tells me everything I need to know about who is credible.
JF, you've merely countered one text with another. What you need to do is explain how they can be successfully resolved.

You can't just take one text and ignore the other because it doesn't suit your theology. You have to deal with both.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.

Søren Kierkegaard

_Jesusfollower
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: NW

Post by _Jesusfollower » Sat Jul 08, 2006 2:31 pm

I already did. I'm not going to continue to repeat myself for the benefit of those so Holy in their ritual that they have already sealed the matter.
No water in the word baptism, it means to immerse and what we are immersed in is holy spirit. Period.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

User avatar
_Homer
Posts: 639
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:43 pm
Location: Brownsville

Post by _Homer » Sat Jul 08, 2006 4:24 pm

Jesusfollower,

You ignored Peter's reference to water regarding his command that those at the house of Cornelius be baptized. Also please tell us how you folks obey the command to baptize so we will know how to baptize with the Holy Spirit. I was under the impression God took care of that Baptism.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
A Berean

User avatar
_Paidion
Posts: 944
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:42 pm
Location: Chapple, Ontario

Post by _Paidion » Sat Jul 08, 2006 7:13 pm

Quote from Evangelion:
How do you account for its appearance in the Didache and the various texts from early Church Fathers such as Iganatius and Cyprian (who quotes it pefectly, along with the entire verse as we have it today)?
An excellent question, Evangelion! And one that requires an answer from anyone tending to believe that the so-called "Trinitarian formula" of baptism found in Matthew 28 was added to the text of Matthew at a later date.

The earliest post-biblical Christian writers were the apostle Paul's fellow-labourer, Clement [A.D. 30-100] and his contemporary Ignatius [A.D. 30-107]. As you are probably aware, there is extant a shorter and a longer recension of the main writings purporting to be those of Ignatius. The quote "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" is found only in the longer recension. Most experts consider the shorter one as more likely
to be what Ignatius actually wrote. Other experts believe that we do not possess any genuine writings of Ignatius today.

The "writings of Ignatius" which we possess today, uphold the elder-overseer distinction, a distinction which was not made by Paul, Peter, or any of the other apostles. In his letters to the churches, the writer recommended regarding that the believers regard the overseer (or "bishop") as they would regard Jesus Christ Himself. This does not seem characteristic of the first-century apostolic practice.

Third-century Cyprian lived in a day when Trinintarian thinking was common in the church, although the dogma was not universally accepted.
His contemporary, Novatian, wrote an article about the Trinity.

The didache certainly gives evidence of having been written at a very early date. Yet, some of the advice given therein seems to be ritualistic ---- again not characteristic of age. Perhaps portions of the didache were also interpolated by later writers. Some of these later writers were unscrupulous in their practice of adding their ideas to Christian texts in order to make them appear to have validity.

Tertullian [A.D. 145-200] was at some point a Montanist for a period of time. This sect was later declared a "heresy" by the main church. Tertullian held to a sort of proto-type of the Trinitarianism that later developed. He was the first known to use the word "Trinity" in a writing. Indeed, it may have been he who initially copied the "Trinitarian Formula" into Matthew 28.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Paidion
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald

_Jesusfollower
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: NW

Post by _Jesusfollower » Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:25 pm

Homer, I have already answered your questions. Were you not paying attention? Are you trying to play with me? you will have to page back I guess. A man of your spiritual gigantism should not play games like that.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

User avatar
_Homer
Posts: 639
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:43 pm
Location: Brownsville

Post by _Homer » Sun Jul 09, 2006 12:24 am

Jesusfollower,

OK, I will take the 11:31am post as your best answer. Have a nice Lord's day! :)
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
A Berean

_Jesusfollower
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: NW

Post by _Jesusfollower » Sun Jul 09, 2006 12:40 am

Is he coming back today? do you have info I should know?
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

Post Reply

Return to “Miscellaneous”