Table of Contents
 
Defending the TRUE Godhead
Exposing Satan's Greatest Deception on God's Remnant Church


Matthew 28:19 and the Trinitarian Formula.
Chapter 21

The subject matter that we have been studying on this website will always be rejected by those who bring prejudice, bias and a closed mind to the table. While they should be searching for God's truth, they feel compelled to search for errors. It is for that reason they will never get it for God will not allow it. While those who have been studying the evidence with an open mind will see the truth, as they are guided by the Spirit of Christ, who is the Spirit of Truth. Sister White has cautioned us as follows:



We have been dealing with a subject of critical importance and God warns of the danger of trusting in men as the majority are doing today. His prophet wrote this:

“Our faith is not to stand in the ability of men but in the power of God. There is danger of trusting in men, even though they may have been used as instruments of God to do a great and good work. Christ must be our strength and our refuge. The best of men may fall from their steadfastness, and the best of religion, when corrupted, is ever the most dangerous in its influence upon minds. Pure, living religion is found in obedience to every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God. Righteousness exalts a nation, and the absence of it degrades and ruins man.” — Faith and Works, p. 89.1 — Ellen G. White

We know that there have been great men in Adventism who have done many good things. She says the best of men may fall from their steadfastness, and the best of religion, when corrupted, is ever the most dangerous in its influence upon minds. This is being fulfilled in the Omega of Apostasy and many more that we have admired for their brilliance will fall in the shaking.

There are some Scriptures that Trinitarians use to justify their position. We looked at 1 John 5:7 in the previous Chapter 20. Now we need to look at Matthew 28:19, keeping in mind that no Trinitarian ever wrote a single Scripture.

“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:” Matthew 28:19. “…in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:” is called the Trinity formula and as it reads it supports a Trinitarian position. But many scholars say they were not Jesus’ words, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, rather simply stated it was “in my name.” (Jesus). Let us look at the evidence of many witnesses.

In the Encyclopedia – Religion and Ethics it says,



What Did Other Experts and Historians Say? (1Matthew 28:19)


Edmund Schlink in “The Doctrine of Baptism” page 28 says,



In Tyndale’s New Testament Commentaries, book 1 page 275, it says,



Wilhelm Bousset (3 September 1865 – 8 March 1920) was a German theologian and New Testament scholar. He was of Huguenot ancestry and a native of Lübeck. He was the author of Kyrios Christos; A History of the Belief in Christ from the Beginnings of Christianity.
In “Kyrios Christos” on page 295 Bousset wrote,



In the Catholic Encyclopedia, Book II, page 263, it says, “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.




In Hastings Dictionary of the Bible 1963, page 1015, it says, “The chief Trinitarian text in the New Testament is the Baptismal formula in Matthew 28:19 … This late post-resurrection saying, not found in any other gospel or anywhere else in the New Testament, has been viewed by some scholars as an interpolation into Matthew. It has also been pointed out that the idea of making disciples is continued in teaching them so that intervening reference to baptism with its Trinitarian formula was perhaps a later insertion into the saying.


Eusebius of Caesarea AD 260/265 – 339/340), also known as Eusebius Pamphili, was a Roman historian and Christian polemicist of Greek descent. He became the bishop of Caesarea Maritima about 314. He was a scholar of the Biblical canon and is regarded as an extremely well learned Christian of his time. (By the way, a polemicist is one who strongly argues his point).
Eusebius’s form of the (ancient text) “IN MY NAME” rather than in the name of the Trinity, has had certain advocates. It is doubtless that his position was that it is better to view the Trinitarian formula as DERIVED from early (Catholic) Christian.




The Jerusalem Bible, A scholarly work, states “It may be that the formula (Triune Matthew 28:19) so far as the fullness of the 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 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 …”


James Moffatt, DD (1870-1944) was a theologian and graduate of Glasgow University. In his New Testament translation he makes this statement in a footnote on page 64, “It may be that this (Trinitarian) formula, so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Catholic) Liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community. It will be remembered that Acts speaks of Baptizing “In the name of Jesus.”




Tom Harpur, former religion editor of the Toronto Star, and author of many Christian books, in his book “For Christ’s Sake,” page 103, informs us of these facts: “All but the most conservative scholars agree that at least the latter part of this command, (the Triune part of Matthew 28:19) was inserted later. The Trinitarian formula occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, and we know from the only evidence available, (the rest of the New Testament) that the earliest church did not baptize people using these words (in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost). Baptism was in the Name of Jesus alone.”


We need to examine these New Testament scriptures and see what all these witnesses have been telling us. We will examine all the aforementioned verses including Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15.

Acts 2:38 “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

Acts 8:16 “(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

Acts 10:43 “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.”

Acts 19:5 “When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.”

Galatians 3:27 “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”

Romans 6:3 “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?”

1 Corinthians 1:13-15 “Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.” In whose name was Paul alluding to? Jesus and Jesus alone.


These scriptures back up everything that this parade of witnesses has been saying. But let’s hear one more witness, a very intelligent authority from Rome. At the time of his statement he was known as: Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, later to be known as: Pope Benedict XVI. Ratzinger made this confession as to the origin of the chief Trinity text of Matthew 28:19: “The basic form of our (Matthew 28:19 Trinitarian) profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text (Matthew 28:19) came from the city of Rome. The Trinity baptism and text of Matthew 28:19 therefore did not originate from the original church that started in Jerusalem. It was rather as the evidence proves, a later invention of Roman Catholicism, completely fabricated. Very few know about these historical facts.”