Gospels of Matthew without Trinitarian ending

[navygoat1998]

I for one have enjoyed reading the discourse between you brethren.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by navygoat1998

I for one have enjoyed reading the discourse between you brethren.

I have begun a new thread called "The traditional Matthew 28:19 is an interpolation" it is in the general debate and discussion topics page.

In that new thread I will slowly but surely will show that it is in deed a changed scripture.

I will be giving some of my information in small chunks so people will not choke.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

I have begun a new thread called "The traditional Matthew 28:19 is an interpolation" it is in the general debate and discussion topics page.

In that new thread I will slowly but surely will show that it is in deed a changed scripture.

I will be giving some of my information in small chunks so people will not choke.

People will not choke?

You still never discuss the real problem of your textual criticism. If one verse was added what about all the others? Why can't you explain the technical problems concerning the impossibility of translating certain verses of Matthew into Hebrew?

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

People will not choke?

You still never discuss the real problem of your textual criticism. If one verse was added what about all the others? Why can't you explain the technical problems concerning the impossibility of translating certain verses of Matthew into Hebrew?

I am not interested in all the others.
I am only exclusively interested in Matthew 28:19, that's it.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

I am not interested in all the others.

I am only exclusively interested in Matthew 28:19, that's it.

Well, sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but it doesn't matter what you are interested in or not. Life is about what is logically the outcome, or illogically the outcome. You choose. By you stating that the original wording of Matthew 28:19 is some how been added. You automatically bring doubt on the entire Gospel document. Also you have offered us the idea that Matthew was originally penned entirely in the Hebrew language. Therefore you should be easily able to answer my questions on some of the problems. Which are that some verses in Matthew cannot possibly translated into Hebrew. While it seems to be that you must be surrounded in your own private Idaho by yes men and women. You, therefore continue in live with your head buried in the ecclesiastical sand. I pray that you would consider your lack of understanding of these simple illogical results of your quest.

Your friend ( I hope)

Brother B

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

I have begun a new thread called "The traditional Matthew 28:19 is an interpolation" it is in the general debate and discussion topics page.

In that new thread I will slowly but surely will show that it is in deed a changed scripture.

I will be giving some of my information in small chunks so people will not choke.

The Saga continues... Still not one shred of proof after 2 years and 50 + pages on this thread, now it's time for the sequel he is ready to unleash the Revelation. Coming to a theatre near you..

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

The Saga continues... Still not one shred of proof after 2 years and 50 + pages on this thread, now it's time for the sequel he is ready to unleash the Revelation. Coming to a theatre near you..

Oh I have plenty of proofs, the point is will you accept the proofs, that I present?

You see evolutionists will not accept any proofs from Christians, no matter what kind they are.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Oh I have plenty of proofs, the point is will you accept the proofs, that I present?

This shows that you approach this issue with delusions.

If you were rational, you might claim that you have some evidences, at best. And we would tell you that the evidences are minuscule, compared to the massive evidences for the traditional ending. A real discussion.

Talking of supposed "proofs", besides being delusionary, is a bit irritating to those who like to have sensible discussion.

Plus you have your major scholarship non-credibility problem. And you do not make corrections even when they are shown to you carefully. Thus, your references are largely worthless.

Plus, you have this habit of quoting tons of liberals and unbelievers who theorized that Matthew's ending was not authentic, usually attacking full verses. As if that is relevant.

Plus, you have the trickster problem of not even following the wording of Eusebius, ShemTob, etc.

It is fun to take your errors, and then learn, study and correct the scholarship. So as the springboard to real learning, I try to make some sense out of your spaghetti scholarship.

Steven

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Oh I have plenty of proofs

, the point is will you accept the proofs, that I present?

You see evolutionists will not accept any proofs from Christians, no matter what kind they are.

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

You captured my exact reaction..