Matthew 28:19 (?)

[zackabba1]

Hey, just felt like bringing this up.

Many people have said that Matthew 28:19 originally made no mention of the "Father, Son and Holy Spirit," but that it was just added in.

Is this true?

It doesn't really matter a whole lot to me, because there are other references to the Trinity in the Bible anyways..

I guess it would affect baptisms, though.

[Canuckster1127]

It probably is a textual addition. It doesn't appear in any manuscript before the 4th Century. Most likely it was a scribal note that was later erroneously (maybe even deliberately) included in the text.

There are plenty of other areas where the Trinity is drawn from not to have to use this.

This is the only place in the Bible where Father, Son and HS are used as a Baptismal formula. Most passage speak of Baptizing in Jesus name, which makes sense because Jesus, as our Second Adam, is the one whose righteousness reconciles us to God. Baptism however isn't a magical act with magical words that somehow brings about a change in our lives. It's an outward act to demonstrate an inward change that has already taken place. Focusing on the exact words and order of words spoken to determine if a person's baptism is legitimate is departing from what the act represented and meant in the early church.

[B. W.]

It probably is a textual addition. It doesn't appear in any manuscript before the 4th Century. Most likely it was a scribal note that was later erroneously (maybe even deliberately) included in the text.

There are plenty of other areas where the Trinity is drawn from not to have to use this.

This is the only place in the Bible where Father, Son and HS are used as a Baptismal formula. Most passage speak of Baptizing in Jesus name, which makes sense because Jesus, as our Second Adam, is the one whose righteousness reconciles us to God. Baptism however isn't a magical act with magical words that somehow brings about a change in our lives. It's an outward act to demonstrate an inward change that has already taken place. Focusing on the exact words and order of words spoken to determine if a person's baptism is legitimate is departing from what the act represented and meant in the early church.

Even if a scribe inserted it there instead of baptize in Jesus' name - it still promotes a truth Jesus brings out in Scripture: John 17:21, 22c and John 14:17, 18, 19, 20, 21c helps explains what truths Matthew 28:19 is conveying. Remember the basic meaning of baptism is simple: to place into, be immersed into something or something placed or immersed into you. The word baptism does not necessarily imply water.
-
-
-

[zackabba1]

Alright, well, thank you for both of your answers.

This isn't a big issue to me, but I just wanted this to be cleared up a little bit, and see other perspectives on this.

Thank you and God Bless!