Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Bible Study Is Matthew 28:19 a scribal addition?

While I defer to the fact that the Lord need only say a thing once to make it true, we can rest assured the doctrine of the Trinity is secure because it is biblical and can be found throughout scripture. If indeed the Matthew 28:19 text does in fact prove to be a tampered with verse or one simply added by a well meaning misguided individual, there will be no blow to the Trinity doctrine whatsoever. What the late great Dr. Walter Martin called "pop apologetics / slop apologetics" were the kind that usually hung its hat on one or two verses of scripture or some catch phrase.

There are many ways to show the doctrine of the Trinity is biblical. I like to do the study that shows what each did / does uniquely that the other two do not do.

Father created the body of the Son (John 1:14b, Heb 10:5) and nothing else.
Son created all things created alone by himself (John 1:1-3 Colossians 1:13-16, Isaiah 44:24)
Spirit wrote the Bible (2 Peter 1:20-21)

Now the Father and the Spirit were present at the creation in the beginning (Genesis 1:2 / 1 John 1:2) but the preincarnate Jesus did all the creating by himself alone in the beginning:

Isaiah 44:24 (KJV)
24 Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;
 
While I defer to the fact that the Lord need only say a thing once to make it true, we can rest assured the doctrine of the Trinity is secure because it is biblical and can be found throughout scripture. If indeed the Matthew 28:19 text does in fact prove to be a tampered with verse or one simply added by a well meaning misguided individual, there will be no blow to the Trinity doctrine whatsoever. What the late great Dr. Walter Martin called "pop apologetics / slop apologetics" were the kind that usually hung its hat on one or two verses of scripture or some catch phrase.

There are many ways to show the doctrine of the Trinity is biblical. I like to do the study that shows what each did / does uniquely that the other two do not do.

Father created the body of the Son (John 1:14b, Heb 10:5) and nothing else.
Son created all things created alone by himself (John 1:1-3 Colossians 1:13-16, Isaiah 44:24)
Spirit wrote the Bible (2 Peter 1:20-21)

Now the Father and the Spirit were present at the creation in the beginning (Genesis 1:2 / 1 John 1:2) but the preincarnate Jesus did all the creating by himself alone in the beginning:

Isaiah 44:24 (KJV)
24 Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

I would have to agree. The Holy Spirit does not speak on his own, and only testifies of the Lord Jesus. To think the Holy Spirit is teaching us to baptise someone in His name is just real stupid. He would never do that, nor does that verse match anything else concerning Baptism.

It's just not possible that the Holy Spirit would exalt himself like that adding that scripture himself as the teacher.
 
Again, please understand that I am not convinced Matthew 28:19 is a scribal addition. I am saying IF it is, it is no threat to any basic doctrine of Christianity.

And I agree with Brother Mike that the Holy Spirit is in the office of uplifting (and revealing) Jesus and often downplays his own import. But the scriptures (which he wrote through the prophets) do contain his deity (Acts 5:3-4) his supremacy (Acts 13:2 and that he is also YHVH the Lord Kurios) and that he is in fact our teacher (John 16:13).

He is just not often in the business of even mentioning himself but rather shining the spot light on the Father and the Son. With this we are in agreement, Brother!
 
Last edited:
John D, you write well, but I am interested in your text Is 44:24, the word there is YHWH, thy redeemer....etc how can you say this was Yeshua who created ? I too believe that Jesus created all things, but finding Hebrew proof is proving not as easy as it seems... especially against others who refute this claim...do you have any really good proofs?

Shalom & God bless you
 
Okay. The very point I was about to make about Matthew 28:19 is that the NAME of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit IS YHVH (YHWH).

Compare Exodus 3:15 with John 8:58 where Yeshua states clearly enough for the unbelieving rabbis in company to want to stone him that he Yeshua was claiming to be the great I AM (YHVH).

And as I said the Holy Spirit is kurios / Lord / YHVH (2 Corinthians 3:17-18)

And the name of Jesus Yeshua or more fully Yehoshua = YHVH Shua / YHVH Saves / Salvation of YHVH could be interpreted as a fully name for YHVH in Matthew 28:19 and in that event it is not likely that an over zealous scribe in the 4th century CE had that amount of biblical insight... in other words the text is biblical after all. We have today the ability to compare the whole of scripture with scripture to interpret all. It is unlikely that the scribes back then did.
 
John D, you write well, but I am interested in your text Is 44:24, the word there is YHWH, thy redeemer....etc how can you say this was Yeshua who created ? I too believe that Jesus created all things, but finding Hebrew proof is proving not as easy as it seems... especially against others who refute this claim...do you have any really good proofs?

Shalom & God bless you

Brother JohnD would not agree with this, unless he researches it more. I am not caught up in Romes Trinity doctrine, though the first 325ad original is spot on scriptures. I most definitly do not like the Oneness doctrine.

Trinity (True Trinitarians) do not believe Jesus is the creator. Modalist and Oneness do.

Your also right about one thing, we have far greater advantages over those in the early years when it comes to bible study and ability to look things up and compare quickly. Most doctrines were based on partial knowledge of what they remembered they have read and notes.

However, Trinity is correct. Jesus is not the creator. I can show you clearly that in scripture, or if you want I can post you the Original Trinity doctrine. Scripture or doctrine it does not matter. (I hope you pick scripture)

Blessings.
 
Okay. The very point I was about to make about Matthew 28:19 is that the NAME of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit IS YHVH (YHWH).

Compare Exodus 3:15 with John 8:58 where Yeshua states clearly enough for the unbelieving rabbis in company to want to stone him that he Yeshua was claiming to be the great I AM (YHVH).

And as I said the Holy Spirit is kurios / Lord / YHVH (2 Corinthians 3:17-18)

And the name of Jesus Yeshua or more fully Yehoshua = YHVH Shua / YHVH Saves / Salvation of YHVH could be interpreted as a fully name for YHVH in Matthew 28:19 and in that event it is not likely that an over zealous scribe in the 4th century CE had that amount of biblical insight... in other words the text is biblical after all. We have today the ability to compare the whole of scripture with scripture to interpret all. It is unlikely that the scribes back then did.
Thanks John, you continue in your faith and be blessed by it....let no one take it from you....I like your idea that Yeshua is a term for he saves or salvation, both verbs are found in the OT as symbols of Jesus in action....

God bless
 
Brother JohnD would not agree with this, unless he researches it more. I am not caught up in Romes Trinity doctrine, though the first 325ad original is spot on scriptures. I most definitly do not like the Oneness doctrine.

Trinity (True Trinitarians) do not believe Jesus is the creator. Modalist and Oneness do.

Your also right about one thing, we have far greater advantages over those in the early years when it comes to bible study and ability to look things up and compare quickly. Most doctrines were based on partial knowledge of what they remembered they have read and notes.

However, Trinity is correct. Jesus is not the creator. I can show you clearly that in scripture, or if you want I can post you the Original Trinity doctrine. Scripture or doctrine it does not matter. (I hope you pick scripture)

Blessings.

Brother Mike, Jesus is our Creator, but your welcome to your theory of faith...I find looking at Scripture the Father and His Son were both involved in Creation....
and in the OT the Son is often called Messenger..."malak of YHWH"

Shalom
 
Trinity (True Trinitarians) do not believe Jesus is the creator. Modalist and Oneness do.
Not sure where you are getting all these quirky notions. Let's forget all the labels and opposition to Rome for the moment. Labels are meaningless, and Rome's teachings are meaningless to those who uphold the authority of Sola Scriptura.

Just open your Bible to John 1:1-3 and Hebrew 1:1-12 and simply MEDITATE on just those two portions of Scripture. I mean seriously meditate on them. (There's many more but that should suffice).

True Trinitarians believe that Jesus is FULLY GOD and fully man. Since God is indeed the Creator, then Christ is also indeed the Creator. Just because our puny human minds cannot comprehend this truth does not mean that we cannot believe it absolutely.
 
Brother Mike, Jesus is our Creator, but your welcome to your theory of faith...I find looking at Scripture the Father and His Son were both involved in Creation....
and in the OT the Son is often called Messenger..."malak of YHWH"

Shalom

Nope, Jude settled that arguement. There are two of them, the Father is the Creator. However, I won't waste your time if your not interested. There is only ONE LORD GOD, ONE SAVIOUR, ONE CREATOR. It was the Father that crucified the son for us.

Jesus is the Father of Eternity or eternal life. The True God, the Father called his son God, His throne forever and ever.

I have scripture if interested.

Blessings.
 
Not sure where you are getting all these quirky notions. Let's forget all the labels and opposition to Rome for the moment. Labels are meaningless, and Rome's teachings are meaningless to those who uphold the authority of Sola Scriptura.

Just open your Bible to John 1:1-3 and Hebrew 1:1-12 and simply MEDITATE on just those two portions of Scripture. I mean seriously meditate on them. (There's many more but that should suffice).

True Trinitarians believe that Jesus is FULLY GOD and fully man. Since God is indeed the Creator, then Christ is also indeed the Creator. Just because our puny human minds cannot comprehend this truth does not mean that we cannot believe it absolutely.

Do you need I fetch your own trinity doctrine for you? Jesus is the 2nd person in the Godhead, subject to the Father, God of God, Not the Father, of the same substance as God.

It's Oneness that uses John and makes Jesus out to be some Word part of God, or 1/3 of some God machine. ONENESS.

Trinity never used such scriptures. Most people that say they are Trinitarian are not trinitarian or even know what their Doctrine says.

I will be happy to post the original and true Trinity doctrine for you if your interested.
 
I will be happy to post the original and true Trinity doctrine for you if your interested.
No need. Since you did not agree to simply meditate on the Scriptures provided, we could go round and round unceasingly. Ulitmately God's Word determines our beliefs, and we must give account on that basis.
 
Um, this has gotten a bit off course... but hopefully this will answer the questions / different theologies here.

When human traditions are set aside and the Bible is the only authority (not a teaching or a church leader etc.), the not even the Roman hijacking of the faith could squelch doctrines of truth like the Triune nature of the one God. Nor could fallible creeds with lofty names and connected claims to apostolic teachings hide the fact that Jesus (preincarnate) created all things alone by himself in the beginning (which is not modalism or oneness theology which is cultic).

Brother Mike. Set aside for a moment what you [think] is biblical but is rather the first part of the so-called apostle's creed.

"I believe in God the Father Creator of heaven and earth..."

The only think God the Father created is the body of the Son Jesus Christ.

John 1:14 (KJV)
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Hebrews 10:5 (KJV)
5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:

Hebrews 1:5 (KJV)
5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

Jesus preexisted the incarnation as God the Word and he was with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit

John 1:1-2 (KJV)
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.

1 John 1:1-2 (KJV)
1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

Genesis 1:1-2 (KJV)
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Proof that God is triune (three persons / individuals).

There are many more passages, but these are about the clearest you can have this snapshot of the beginning of creation.

All three were simultaneously present together with one another, not different modes of the same person / individual. This completely refutes oneness / modalism.

Are we clear on this?

Now observe what the Bible says about the lone creator:

Isaiah 44:24 (KJV)
24 Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

1. don't assume anything. LORD / YHVH is not just the name of the Father. In fact, it was Jesus (preincarnate) who spoke through the burning bush to Moses.

Exodus 3:1-15 (KJV)
1 Now Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father in law, the priest of Midian: and he led the flock to the backside of the desert, and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb.
2 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.
3 And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt.
4 And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I.
5 And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.
6 Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.
7 And the LORD said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in Egypt, and have heard their cry by reason of their taskmasters; for I know their sorrows;
8 And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey; unto the place of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites.
9 Now therefore, behold, the cry of the children of Israel is come unto me: and I have also seen the oppression wherewith the Egyptians oppress them.
10 Come now therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou mayest bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Egypt.
11 And Moses said unto God, Who am I, that I should go unto Pharaoh, and that I should bring forth the children of Israel out of Egypt?
12 And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain.
13 And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?
14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
15 And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.

John 8:56-59 (KJV)
56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

If he was only saying he was alive before Abraham they would not have reached for stones to kill him (for blasphemy). Remember they did not believe in him. He was claiming to be the great I AM and they knew it.

2. Let's take Isaiah 44:24 in bite sized pieces.

Thus saith the LORD {{ YHVH }}

thy redeemer (( the one who paid the redemption price }}
when the kinsman redeemer paid the price in the example of Ruth and Boaz, Boaz paid the price not the relative who chose to pass on redeeming Ruth. The Father is not the redeemer. The Son is. The Father is the one who received the payment appeasement.

Jesus is our redeemer.


and he that formed thee from the womb,


Colossians 1:13-16 (KJV)
13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

I am the LORD that maketh all things;

that stretcheth forth the heavens

alone;

that spreadeth abroad the earth

by myself;
 
Matthew 28:19 (KJV)
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:


Chances are likely that this text is a scribal addition by a foolish (if well meaning person):
Hi John,
This is an interesting question. The passage seems to read much more smoothly without the section from "baptizing" to "ghost".
Here is the passage with the phrase taken out:
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age. (ESV, with "baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" removed)

In Greek, with:
πορευθέντες οὖν μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, βαπτίζοντες αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ Ἁγίου Πνεύματος, διδάσκοντες αὐτοὺς τηρεῖν πάντα ὅσα ἐνετειλάμην ὑμῖν· καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ μεθ’ ὑμῶν εἰμι πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας ἕως τῆς συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος.

Without:
πορευθέντες οὖν μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, διδάσκοντες αὐτοὺς τηρεῖν πάντα ὅσα ἐνετειλάμην ὑμῖν· καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ μεθ’ ὑμῶν εἰμι πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας ἕως τῆς συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος.

I could see how this could be a scribal addition, but on the other hand there is no manuscript evidence for this that I know of. If a scribe added the phrase in question, he would have had to been a very early scribe in order to have the phrase be copied in every subsequent manuscript. Do you know of any manuscripts which do not have this phrase?
I think the weight of the evidence shows that the passage is not an addition, but I would like to see more research.

Thanks for bringing this up.

Edit to add:
J. R. Ensey says this in his book The Book We Call the Bible:
Sometimes Matthew 28:19 is put into the same category as I John 5:7 as an interpolation. The renowned scholar and commentator F. C. Conybeare has said: "In only the codices which would be even likely to preserve an older reading, namely the Sinaitic Syriac and and oldest Latin manuscript...the pages are gone which contained the end of Matthew...In the course of my reading I have been able to substantiate these doubts of the authenticity of the text Matthew 28:19 by adducing patristic evidence against it, so weighty that in the future the most conservative of divines will shrink from resting on it any dogmatic fabric at all, while the more enlightened will discard it as completely as they have its fellow-text of the 'three witnesses' [I John 5:7]​

I (myself) disagree with Conybeare that "the more enlightened will discard it completely", but I would (and his "conservative divines") shrink from resting dogma on any ONE passage of scripture. However, I believe the doctrine of the trinity is well attested to throughout scripture.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top