₦airaland Forum

MaxInDHouse:
Exactly what i said we will compare to your so called infinite mind to be sure which one is BLIND.
Are you ready?

I am ever ready, but it must be on this thread.

If you still insist, then create a new thread and invite me.

MaxInDHouse:
So you really think i'm that cheap?
Ọmọ nah you dey find my attention i don't even need you at all.

So if you want to engage me i have given you a clue on what interests me.
Take care!

Hahahahahaha

Well, if you're not that cheap, then neither am I.

If you want to discuss about your blind faith, do it on this thread.

But if you insist, you know exactly what to do.

😂😂😂

Dtruthspeaker:
You forget that people have seen you and known your "you hate Godism"

I "hate Godism"?

What is Godism?

so definitely even when your post here was fair, we know your desire is get people to turn away from God and the bible. That's what makes your post deceitful.

This what the Catholic Church itself said in their own Encyclopedia:

The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263:

"The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century."

Why did the Catholic Church admit that they altered Matthew 28 VS 19?

That is the question you can't run away from.

Moreso, if this makes you turn away from "God" and the Bible, then that says a lot about the so-called foundation of your faith.

MaxInDHouse:
@oteneaaron
Are you ready to discuss?

Hahahahaha

You are so predictable Max.

😂😂😂

Why are you trying to divert my attention?

This is the question we are trying to answer - Did the Catholic Church Really Alter Matthew 28 VS 19 in the 2nd Century CE?

If yes, why did they do it?

If you want to discuss about your BLIND FAITH, do it on this thread.

Meaning of Blind Faith : unquestioning belief in something, even when it's unreasonable or wrong.

Between my faith and your infinite mind which is blind and which can see clearly? Psalms 115:4-8

But if you insist, create a new thread and invite me.

Babinski:
I have done my research and the outcome expose the deceit and lies in your claims.

Some people claim that Matthew 28:19 was altered to contain the Trinitarian formula and that the original text supported baptism in the name of Jesus only.

Most proponents of the claim rely on Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew Gospel and writings of Eusebius the Bishop where his quotes of Matthew 28:19 only contain baptism in my name (Jesus name).

Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew Gospel date back to 14th Century while Eusebius and his writings date back to the 4th Century (around 300 AD).

It is widely agreed that the Matthew Gospel was originally written in Aramaic (losely refered to as Hebrew) and that translations followed later in Greek and that the original text was written in the 1st Century (around 60 AD) as attested to be several early Christian Fathers such as Papias (80-155 AD), Irenaeus (130-202 AD) and Origen (185-254 AD).

The original Aramaic text of Matthew Gospel did not survive to date but the Greek translations contain the Trinitarian formula of baptism in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost and the earliest Greek translations date back to the 1st Century (around 75 AD).

The Didache (also known as The Lord's Teaching Through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations), an early Christian Treatise written in Koine Greek dating to the turn of the 1st Century (around 100 AD) and with significant similarities to the Matthew Gospel, contains the Trinitarian formula in its borrowings from Matthew 28:19.

Tertullian (an early Christian author who lived between 155 to 220 AD), writing around the turn of the 2nd century, also cited the bapstismal Trinitarian formula from the Matthean passage in his writings.

From the foregoing, the earliest texts that those who claim alteration of Matthew 28:19 rely upon were written between 300 AD to 1,400 AD while texts and writings as early as 75 AD to 220 AD support the Trinitarian formula in references to Matthew 28:19.

It is clear therefore that the claims of alteration are more recent and difficult to sustain with facts. It is safe to conclude that the allegations of alteration are false.

References:

https://www.quora.com/Was-Matthew-28-19-Trinity-Baptism-a-later-edition-added-in-by-translators

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shem_Tob%27s_Hebrew_Gospel_of_Matthew

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusebius

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Didache

Interesting.

Pray tell, how I am being deceitful when I was only sharing that the Catholic Church themselves admitted in their Encyclopedia that they did change the wordings of Matthew 28 VS 19?

I took my time to check out the references you shared, but unfortunately, the issue still persist.

The Quora link you shared contained numerous opinions for and against the notion that the Catholic Church altered Matthew 28 VS 19.

George E. Howard in 1985, published a translation of Shem Tob's Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

I couldn't get my hands on this translation by George E. Howard - if you have it can you show me what Matthew 28 VS 19 says in that translation?

William L. Peterson of the Pennsylvania State University, Netherlands Institute for Advanced Studies published a paper titled - Some Observations on a Recent Edition of and Introduction to Shem-Tob's "Hebrew Matthew"

In the paper, this is the only thing he said about Shem Tob's version of Matthew 28 VS 19:

Matt 28:19-20

8. In Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew, the "Great Commission" becomes: "Go and teach them to carry out all the things which I have commanded you forever." No mention is made of "making disciples of all nations," nor does Jesus promise to be "with you always, even unto the end of the world."

If you have the translation, please share with me exactly what Matthew 28 VS 19 says.

Here is a link to the paper - http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/vol03/Petersen1998a.html

The fact still remains the the Catholic Church themselves made clearly said this in their own Encyclopedia:

The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263:

"The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century."

So what gives?

Kobojunkiee:
But you have yet to provide evidence that it was indeed altered though.

The comment claims it is often affirmed but does not state much else aside from what reads like a general opinion. So, evidence?

Oh really?

If that is what you think after all I have shared above then it's cool.

Courz:
This is why we don't take clownish Cults like Jehovah's witnesses serious because all they do is boast and have nothing to show. They can argue so much against Trinity not knowing that they have been practicing it all along. . When Jesus selected them as the One True Religion,why didn't he correct them there and then that baptism is meant to be done in his name and that they have been practicing the Trinity all along? Mad MaxinDhouse will never answer that one.

Well, the source I read mentioned the Fake Jews that follow the Talmud. I believe they are Zionists and at the same time share esoteric beliefs. I will read up on the different groups. This discovery shows that The Catholic Church still has much power to dictate to the whole of Christianity including Jehovah's witnesses. I mean, if you can successfully alter verses and convince the whole of Christianity to follow them, you are still in control. This is a very bad sign as we all know the Dark side of the Catholic church.

I tell you bro.

I think the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses know this but instead, they chose to to be a part of the Catholic Church after their years of bashing the same Catholic Church as Babylon the Great.

They keep shouting "get out of her my people" but they are still part of their so-called Babylon The Great - The World Empire of False Religion.

No wonder they registered be part of the United Nations for 10 years after claiming the UN was the "scarlet colored wild beast".

It is quite shocking.

cornelboy:
I don't have that time a.s.s kissing admirer. I guess you have enough bros kissing your a.s.s now, tctrills and co..

No bro!

We don't do that over here.

They are all critical thinkers - they can never kiss any a.s.s - unlike you.

cornelboy:
That's none of your business. If the a.s.s was bitter I wouldn't have kissed it. It was obviously sweet.

😂😂😂

MaxInDHouse:
I have thought over and over and over again and again your life doesn't make sense to me as long as you can't present your fellow believers!

What has my life got to do with anything?

Are you practicing blind faith?

🤔🤔🤔

Kobojunkiee:
I am anti-religion and no question that I would be happiest to root out every religious lie there is out there. But this claim does not add up given it assumes there has only ever been one manuscript for the scripture in question and that one manuscript was altered by the Catholic church. Manuscripts of the Gospel of Matthew

What is written in Matthew 28 vs 19 is not the Trinity doctrine and is not in support of the Trinity doctrine. Rather it is a statement that acknowledges the involvement of the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit(the Spirit of Truth) in the lives and living of those who are submitted to the New Covenant Law of God, something that was not available to those who were of the Old Law of Moses.

So far, there is no evidence that all manuscripts have been tampered with and no indication of the particular manuscript that may have been tampered with. So let's take these claims with a pinch of salt.

I completely understand you.

But you're missing the point.

The Catholic Church has admitted that they "changed" the text at Matthew 28 verse 19!

The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263:

"The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century."

If you have the original manuscript, then please show me what it says.

cornelboy:
Tell us, do you have any religion mind worshipper?

Check out my reply to your sweet a.s.s MaxInDHouse.

😅😅

Kobojunkiee:
Is there only exactly one original manuscript in existence for the book of Matthew chapter 19?

Why don't you enlighten me?

MaxInDHouse:
So in a nutshell you don't have any religion shey?
There's no need talking about what others chose to do with their lives after all you've made your own choice let others make theirs as well!

Hahahahahahaha

He cannot answer those shocking questions!

How does it feel to learn that your religion wasn't that special after all?

You are just like EVERYONE else.

How come did "Jesus" chose your organization in 1919?

Think Max!

Think!

😂😂😂

Courz:
Yes. That's true. Jehovah's witnesses are actually practicing the Trinity doctrine without even knowing it.

It was quite shocking when I found this out.

It is really interesting that the Catholic church went ahead to change verses and that is what Christians today are living by. This really makes you look at the Bible differently. What else have they altered?

That is the biggest question!

This admission from the Catholic Church confirms another source of info I bumped into that stated that the Fake Jews that practice Judaism and Kaballa connived with the Catholic Church to fix whatever they liked into the Bible including the name they claim is the name of God.

You do have a point, but from what I learned, there are two groups of people who practice Judaism -

1. The Zionists who believe every word of the Torah and their other sacred texts to be actual history and thus follow it word for word in its literal sense - just like fundamental Muslims.

Because of this, they believe in war and conquering of other nations, just like the ancient Israelites are described in the Bible.

2. They is another group of people who practice true Judaism and look beneath the surface of these Bible stories - they look beyond the "history" and practice the hidden or esoteric meaning of these texts - more like the Sufist Muslims.

Study these two groups, and see will see a big difference.

Kobojunkiee:
Altered in

▢ Greek manuscripts?
▢ Aramaic manuscripts?
▢ Catholic writings?

Which? Where is this stated and by whom?

See my first post on this thread.

The original manuscript never had "in the name of the Father and the Son, and the Holy Spirit".

They are many quotes from books, Bible translations and Encyclopedias where this was stated.

You can follow the trace the books to where they were quoted from to confirm for yourself.

Kobojunkiee:
The doctrine of the Trinity does not exist in Scripture. It is instead formulated in the doctrines and traditions of men — extra-scriptural in the formulation.

So why did the Church alter the same verse at Matthew 28 verse 19?

The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275:

"It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but...a later liturgical addition."

Kobojunkiee:
The doctrine of the Trinity does not exist in Scripture. It is instead formulated in the doctrines and traditions of men — extra-scriptural in the formulation.

The key issue here is that the scripture at Matthew 28 VS 19 as we currently have it in majority of translations are all wrong because the Catholic Church altered it in the 2nd Century CE.

MaxInDHouse:
See example of a direct answer!

What is your own religion?

After my horrible experience of been a Jehovah's Witness for many years, I currently practice no religion per se.

I have learned to never ever in my life again, allow any man-made religion to come in-between me and my creator.

I have direct access to the Omniscient, Omnipotent and Omnipresent creator of the entire cosmos.

I don't need any religion in between.

I'm something of what you could call an ECLECTIC - check your dictionary.

Whatever anyone believes is not my own problem i'm only presenting my own religion as the only religion approved by my GOD.

So speak about yours others may pick interest in your criticism of different religions i'm not if you want to engage me talk about your own religion!

So does that mean you believe in the Trinity just like the Catholic Church and EVERY OTHER Christian Denominations?

If yes, why do you say that you are the only true religion.

Does this mean that "Jesus" never really selected your organization in 1919?

Because of "Jesus" truly selected your organization in 1919 as your ciam, you wouldn't be teaching the same doctrine of Trinity found at Matthew 28 VS 19 just like the Catholic Church and EVERY OTHER Christian denominations.

Kobojunkiee:
That comments say the Baptismal formula was changed. Is Baptismal Formula some sort of a reference to Matthew 28 vs 19 in particular or what?

But the formula is clearly stated at Matthew 28 verse 19:

NIV, St. Matthew 28:19:
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

I understand what you are getting at and while I do understand the desire to distance oneself from all introduced ideas, the verse itself does not stand as support for any of the catholic rituals in place even to this day.

Really?

Can you explain?

Kobojunkiee:
Where is this solid proof again?

Admitted by the Catholic Church itself:

The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263:

"The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century."

Botragelad:
Hmm

Makes you think right?

MaxInDHouse:
What is your own religion?

So that means Jehovah's Witnesses are also practicing the doctrine of the Trinity.

Right?

If yes, why do you claim to be the only true religion?

Your practice of baptism is based on Matthew 28 VS 19 just like EVERY OTHER Christian Denomination on earth today.

What now makes your organization special?

Does this mean your organization was never really chosen by "Jesus" in 1919?

tctrills:
They added lots of nonbibilical manmade nonsense so no surprises.

You do have a point.

Because this means Jehovah's Witnesses are also practicing the doctrine of the Trinity.

So what really makes them different from the Catholic Church and other Christian denominations who already believe in the Trinity Doctrine?

LipozSwiminPool:
Yes they did at the Nicaea Council led by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325.

Do your research 🔬

Was this verse altered during that particular council?

I know for a fact that the doctrine of Trinity was promulgated during that Nicean council.

Jehovah's Witnesses as a religious organization are one of few sects of Christianity who have vehemently refused doctrine of the Trinity.

They claim that the doctrine of Trinity is a pagan practice.

But when we check out their own translation of the Bible aka The New World Translation, we find the same alteration from the Catholic Church.

Matthew 28 VS 19, according to the New World Translation:

Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all the nations,+ baptizing them+ in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit,

The Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses claim that they are the only channel of communication with God in these times we live.

They also claim that the Jehovah's Witness organization is the only true religion.

Now, I have a couple of questions:

1. If they are only true religion and only they are sole channel of communication with God, why couldn't they recognize the alteration of Matthew 28 VS 19 by the Catholic Church?

2. Why did they add the same mistake or alteration to their own translation of the Bible?

3. Why do they follow this exact formula as created by the Catholic Church when practicing baptism in their religion?

4. Does this mean that Jehovah's Witnesses are in reality, in full support of the doctrine of the Trinity?

What do you think?

CC: Janosky, MaxInDHouse, Aemmyjah, Cornelboy, Archoladey, Courz, Emusan, Maynman, tctrills

At this point, we have to ask some very important questions:

1. Since we have solid proof that the Catholic Church altered Matthew 28 VS 19, what other Bible verses have they altered?

2. Can we really trust the Bible with this sort of evidence?

3. What if we dug deeper into the Bible and found out that many other verses were altered by the Catholic Church - what happens in that case?

Don't forget that the Bible as we know it today, was practically given to the world by the Catholic Church - it was they who canonized the entire books of the bible.

For majority of Christians, they believe that being baptized is a one of the most important tenets of Christianity.

Some people get baptized as children, others get baptized as adults when they join specific Christian denomination or sect.

The act of being baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, is based on the instructions explicitly stated at Matthew 28 verse 19:

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,"

But while doing some research, I found out that there seems to be a problem with the above verse, because there is solid evidence that proves that the Catholic Church in the Second Century CE, altered the above verse to propagate the doctrine of the Trinity.

Here is a collection of some of these evidences to prove that the Catholic Church really did alter Matthew chapter 28 verse 19:

The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263:

"The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century."

The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275:

"It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but...a later liturgical addition."

Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28:

"The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church."

The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics:

As to Matthew 28:19, it says: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism. The same Encyclopedia further states that: "The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition."

The Jerusalem Bible, a scholarly Catholic work, states:

"It may be that this formula, (Triune Matthew 28:19) so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Man-made) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community. It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing "in the name of Jesus,"..."

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Under "Baptism," says: "Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus."

New Revised Standard Version says this about Matthew 28:19:
"Modern critics claim this formula is falsely ascribed to Jesus and that it represents later (Catholic) church tradition, for nowhere in the book of Acts (or any other book of the Bible) is baptism performed with the name of the Trinity..."

Please don't take my word for it, do your own research.


To help you on your research journey, here is a link to a collection of these hard to believe evidences - https://www.onenesspentecostal.com/matt2819-willis.htm

MaxInDHouse:
Of course they are my neighbours so i must love them {Mark 12:31}

Mark 12:31
The second is this: ’Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these."

With all your actions on Nairaland, does it show that you love your neighbor as yourself?

Do you even know what it means to love yourself?

Why quote scriptures when you can't even practice what you preach?

they're the ones following me from thread to thread as if i'm their enemy yet Jesus commanded me to love them {Luke 6:27-28}

And yet another LIE.

Luke 6:27, 28

"But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you,

bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.

With all the INSULTS and LIES you spread on Nairaland, are you practicing the Bible passage you quoted above?

When threads are created, you can't help yourself.

You jump on threads to showcase your superior "knowledge and wisdom" even when you were not invited.

MaxInDHouse is LYING your natural way of speaking?

MaxInDHouse:
So these quotes are found on this particular thread shey?

These were your words:

MaxInDHouse:
I have a beef yet i have not insulted anyone till now. Hmmmmmmm are you really sincere?

Whether it's on this thread or not, the fact remains that you have on countless occasions, insulted many people on Nairaland.

Why don't you deny it?

I dare you to deny it.

You can't stop me from chatting with interested listeners on this forum so your troubles can't change me you can only run here and there on this forum sincere and honest hearted individuals will focus on what yields positive results as promised in God's word.

I don't have any problem with your marketing efforts on Nairaland.

I am always here to expose your LIES and the many LIES of your Governing Body.

It's just a pity that you don't even believe in God's word!

You should pity yourself more.

You claim to "believe God's word" and yet, your actions on Nairaland proves the complete opposite.

What an irony!

MaxInDHouse:
You don't know the meaning of LOVE.

Please how do you define LOVE?

You always boast about your superior "knowledge and wisdom".

You always boast that the Bible is "your book", but yet, have you forgotten what the same Bible says?

1 Corinthians 13:4 - 6

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.

It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.

Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.

Is this the type of "LOVE" you practice?

MaxInDHouse why is LYING your natural way of speaking?

There is still more!

MaxInDHouse is LYING your natural way of speaking?

Here is still more evidence of MaxInDHouse insulting other people on Nairaland:

MaxInDHouse:
Idiot!

If not Jesus Christ even all your Jewish idiots know that nobody cares about their hopeless, worthless and useless Torah after all everything in it is fictional from your fictional god!

MaxInDHouse:
Idiot!

Later you will say your thread is making the front page while responding to your since 2009

MaxInDHouse:
Idiot!

Answer him!

Must he be one of Jehovah's Witnesses before asking you thought provoking questions?

Do you see why only JWs are capable of being called out to defend our faith?

MaxInDHouse:
The idiot has always have doubts but he doesn't know how to come out openly because he's just following the crowd {Exodus 23:1-2} if anyone should come out to help him he will never ever say thank you as long as you tell him to join a better performing group, all he wants is support for his choice of religion!

MaxInDHouse:
Idiot of the highest order.


No sane person ask rhetorical question without answering for others to know what he meant.

There is still much much more.

Is this what it means to be a Christian?

I wonder.

🤔🤔

More evidence showing MaxInDHouse insulting other people on Nairaland:

MaxInDHouse:
It's stupidity that's worrying you!

There's no reason for laws if people aren't organized it's due to orderliness that laws came to be established that's why your stupid Jews and their Torah has become worthless today!

MaxInDHouse:
Because i chose to ignore you and your stupid friends doesn't mean there is no reasonable answer to your question but it's faithlessness that's worrying all of you..

MaxInDHouse:
Ọmọ keep your thread i just want everyone to know that you're a stupid old fool [/b]hiding your religion yet talking about others.
Goodbye!

MaxInDHouse:
[b]Faithless miscreant.

Kumuyi is CURSING Oyedepo and Oyedepo is CURSING Kumuyi.

Yet idiot like you say the peace among those claiming disciples of the Prince of Peace is not strong evidence shey?
Ọ̀DẸ̀ ÒPÒNÚ OLÓDO!

There is still more, should I continue?

😅😅😅

MaxInDHouse why do you love LYING?

Is that your natural way of speaking?