Gospels of Matthew without Trinitarian ending

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Absurd. The verse appears so entirely modalistic and Oneness, one wonders why Trinitarians aren't chomping at the bit to try and prove it is a Sabellian interpolation.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Absurd. The verse appears so entirely modalistic and Oneness, one wonders why Trinitarians aren't chomping at the bit to try and prove it is a Sabellian interpolation.

True.

And this is fairly common with the heavenly witnesses. Since the verse dropped out of the Greek line early, a common theory is that the oneness (Sabellian) nature of the verse was a bit discomfiting in the Ante-Nicene era.

1 John 5:7
For there are three that bear record in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:
and these three are one.

This came up even in the 1600s, in a report by Christopher Sand with the Sabellian interpolation element. Edward Freer Hills wrote cogently on the question in the 20th century. And I believe it was a part of the textual question in the Latin after the time of Peter Abelard, involving Thomas Aquinas and the Lateran Council. The "three are one" phrase was a controversy. And I may prepare a small article on the history.

Here is what I put together earlier.

scholars theorizing that the Sabellian controversies contributed to the Greek ms line drop
http://www.purebibleforum.com/showth...k-ms-line-drop

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Die Symphonie der Evangelien: eine Zusammenstellung der ächten Bestandtheile der 4 evangelischen Urkunden, in einer neun Uebersetzung und mit wissenschaftlichen Erläuterungen (G) The Symphony of the Gospels: a Compilation of the Prohibited Constituents of the Four Protestant Documents, in a Nine Translation and with Scientific Explanations (1863) by Doctor Gustav Adolph Freytag. Has the following “Therefore go out and convert all peoples, baptizing them in my name and teaching them to keep all that I have commanded you. Yes, rely on it, I am with you all the days to the end of the world." (Translation by Gerd Imhoff)

The translation of the title looks like puter mangle and my conjecture on the (G) is that it was brought over from a secondary or tertiary source. We are given no idea as to who is Gerd Imhoff, or what page is the German text, or the url for the book. At least the translation of the actual section from the Gospel harmony looks properly done.

Gustav Freytag (1816-1895)
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustav_Freytag

is known for his writing on dramatic structure, with an analysis of ancient Greek and Shakespearean drama, with a theory involving the "tragic pyramid."

Die Symphonie der Evangelien. Eine Zusammenstellung der ächten Bestandtheile (1863)
Gustav Adolph Freytag
https://books.google.com/books?id=6klVAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA166
https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/011635928

There is a discussion of Matthew 28:19 on p. 166, comparing it with Mark 16:15-17. And possibly p. 133 or 209. Presumably the actual translated text can be found, if the reference is accurate.

A Gospel harmony is always drawing from the four gospels, so there is no surprise whenever a phrase from one gospel is omitted. (Scholastically, this is an essentially irrelevant reference.)

It is possible that FZ is working with material from Grzegorz Kaszyński, who mentions this reference (however, not all the detail or the translator) in a 2017 Polish work that is online.

Krótki logion Mateusza 28:19,20 w hebrajskiej Ewangelii Mateusza z dzieła Szem-Toba (2017)
Grzegorz Kaszyński
https://synopsa.pl/krotki-logion-mat...ela-szem-toba/
"1863: Die Symphonie der Evangelien eine Zusammenstellung der ächten Bestandtheile, (harmonia 4 Ewangelii), Gustav Adolph Freytag"

Interestingly, Grzegorz has a similar work listing all the versions and references that do not have John 1:1 as "the Word was God." This argument is usually associated with the JWs.

106 Translations Not Rendering Theos En Ho Logos As “the Word Was God”
https://archive.org/details/Grzegorz...stheWordWasGod

This next was translated from Spanish to English by Jorge Cárdenas.

Ministerios Siega Mundial Evangelista Jorge Cárdenas. Revisión y cambios editoriales Grzegorz Kaszyński
https://docplayer.es/14644605-Minist...kaszynski.html

Another one:

MATTHEW 28:19,20
62 VERSIONS WITH THE SHORTER ENDING
http://truthandlightministries.org/M...ter-ending.pdf

One writer who connects his Gospel harmony with his other writings is Priscilla Porthen in Hope in the Social Context of the Epistle to the Romans on p. 45 and the summary on p. 215, emphasizing the "tragic pyramid" theory. Since there is so little about this Gospel harmony written, that paper helped connect the author as the dramatic structure Gustav Freytag. He rarely if ever has the middle name Adolph or initial A given with his books or bio, except for the Gospel harmony. Thus the name Gustav Adolph Freytag will generally only show the one book.

And it should be confirmed that they really are the same person, perhaps there is something about literary structure in the Gospel harmony, and presumably Priscilla Porthen did some checking. For now, I would leave open the possibility that they are different individuals, I sent an email over to Larry L. Ping, who has written on Gustav Freytag.

[Evang.Benincasa]

FZ, do you know what is really important about the German theologians? Is that the were heavily opinionated. While that may not be a bad thing at times, these guys had some wild ideas. There was German theologians who were scholars in Christianity. Yet, with their Christian studies they were also scholars of "religions." Surprisingly for us, Hinduism and Judaism. Two religions which are pretty close to each other. Hinduism and Talmudic Judaism. The German scholars tended to mix these up a little while commenting on what they saw within the scripture. Like I said in another thread, commentators borrowed from the teachings of the Rabbis to explain the New Testament. Yet, that must be taken with more than just a grain of salt. Because the Rabbis hate Jesus Christ, the Apostles, the Gospel, and most of all the Apostle Paul. In their Babylonian Talmud there is no solace offered the Christian. Therefore anything gleaned from their "wisdom" isn't formulated to move us forward, but take us backward. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump, so watch out for the leaven of the pharisees and the scribes. You propose that the traditional reading of Matthew 28:19 is incorrect, spurious, interpolation by Greek Trinitarian scribes. Injecting their doctrine while wringing their hands. Yet, consider this, could it be you being deceived and manipulated into chopping up our New Treatment? Doing the job of the Talmudic Rabbi? Rabbi Tovia Singer would be as pleased as Punch, to see this discussion. All the while cheering you on forward ho. FZ, please consider what you are doing here, because it cannot logically stop with matthew 28:19. There are theologians and scholars who didn't just want to change one verse. But many verses and chapters. Textual criticism is a wild web, and sadly when you are done, you will find yourself strangled in that web. I care about you my brother, please consider your direction.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

Copyists copy manuscripts. Sometimes they edit them. In the case of Mt. 28:19, they simply copied what was written. Had there been editing, there would have been variation in the manuscripts. But there is none.

Copyists simply copy it down. Some copyists edit. Or others edited the finished work.

Has FZ studied the copyist behavior of the manuscripts of Matthew ??

Dear Scott, your behavior is like that of The Apostle Thomas.

Except I shall see in in my hands the manuscripts, and put my finger into the print of the letters, and thrust my hand into its pages, I will not believe.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Esaias

If you say THE TEXT WE HAVE IS WRONG, then my ONLY response is SHOW ME THE MANUSCRIPTS.

I go by the Word, AS WRITTEN, not as a bunch of messed up agnostics and atheists and antichrists and goofy theologians want it to be.

You aren't in a rush because you're playing 3 Card Monte and simply put don't have the goods on this issue. Sorry, but some of us aren't impressed or moved by volume of posts when it comes to THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE.

Et tu, Brutus?

You too are like the Apostle Thomas.

Except I shall see in in my hands the manuscripts, and put my finger into the print of the letters, and thrust my hand into its pages, I will not believe.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Esaias

You aren't in a rush because you're playing 3 Card Monte and simply put don't have the goods on this issue.

I am sure you have plenty of food in your house, would you feed all that food to your child in one meal?

One meal at a time, so you will not choke and have time to digest it.
Do you even read the posts and masticate them or you simply look at them and like a precocious brat simply throw them into the ground.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Amen. FZ, please forgive me, your argument isn't dying a slow and painful death. It is already dead. The only reason why we are still posting in this thread because you are still posting dead theologians (now Germans) so we comment. You're still refuse to answer my questions. Can you tell me how you fix passages that don't work in Hebrew? Since you claim that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew by the opinions and taken out of context dead people, can you explain this issue to me? I believe I asked you a few times but you seem to ignore it. That isn't very honest . So, please answer, how to do straighten out the problem of Greek only passages? How can you translate them into Hebrew, without them making NO SENSE. Does a camel go through the eye of a needle, or does a rope go through the eye of a needle? Is the foundation built on Peter, or not? Did Jesus call a woman a dog or a little dog that eats scraps? Ball is in your court Mr Hebrew Onlyist Translator of Bibles.

OK let me put to rest one of your issues, the rest I will deal with them later.

Does a camel go through the eye of a needle, or does a rope go through the eye of a needle?

The answer to that is that since they are similar and do not affect our salvation, then it could be either and it would not make a bit of difference.
I consider that saying as just a proverb which means it is pretty difficult.

Are you lost if you think it is a rope? are you from the Camelist school of theology?
Are you lost if you think it is a camel? are you from the Ropeist school of theology?

However the issue of baptism is quite relevant for the Bible clearly states in many places that there is salvation in no other name but in the name of Jesus.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

FZ, how do you plead?

Dear Votivesoul, I have a lot of respect from you, but I will simply refuse to answer this, because you are citing a person who is totally negative and which I have no dealings with, I have no interest in anything this person says.

So no I will not answer, and remember that in a court of law, a refusal to answer can not be taken as a no or as a yes.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Circumstantial evidence doesn't hold up in court. If you have the trump card, just play out your best argument and change the world, already.

I am already changing the world, one mind at a time, plenty of people are slowly waking up to the realization that Mat 28:19 should say "in my name"