Appendix: Emails with Mr Ewald Frank

After it was found that Mr Ewald Frank, leader of the Freie Volksmission (FVM), seemed to have published several inaccurate statements regarding the text of Matthew 28:19, and to have done so repeatedly over many years, contacting him directly to discuss the matter was the next logical step.

It is much to Mr Frank’s credit that he took the time to respond to my emails despite his no doubt busy schedule. I am most grateful for his taking the time to provide the image from his 1973 Nestle Aland. Unfortunately he has not at this time granted permission to reproduce the content of his emails on this website. This is a great pity, as what he had to say was very interesting for a number of reasons. In the absence of an actual quotation, i will summarize the content of his replies paying very careful attention to express his meaning with accuracy, sentence by sentence. My emails will be posted in full.

It is somewhat ironic that Mr Frank withheld permission to publish his emails due to concerns of being misquoted. As the request was to publish his emails in their entirety, that would obviously not have been possible. Now that summaries are all that can be placed online, that may raise suspicions of misquotation after all…..

I humbly ask that i be trusted as a Christian brother to honestly handle his words. It would be definitely preferable to me if all the emails could simply be made available. If there are any doubts, then you are encouraged to write Mr Frank yourself and see if you receive a similarly worded reply .

 

My 1st email

This was sent to the FVM through their contact form found here

To: ******@freie-volksmission.de 05/08/16
Name: man
Vorname: james
E-Mail:
Betreff: Kontaktformularübermittlung: Variant reading at Matthew 28:19
Nachricht:

Hopefully you are well as you see this message.

(A few days ago I sent this same message directly to this email address, but it occurred to me that it may have been filtered to your junk mail. Please forgive the second sending!)

Recently I have had a chance to look through a Bible that was produced by the Free Peoples Mission, and noticed an interesting textual variant noted for Matthew 28:19, on page 55 in the NT portion of course.

I was wondering if you might provide me with your source material for the variant, if you would have time to do so. It would be especially useful to have a scanned image/digital photograph of the Nestle Aland edition that is referred to, as my edition does not contain such a variant reading.

Also, since this is an edition of the Bible that your organization put together, would it be possible to see your sources for saying that the “oldest manuscripts” contain the reading “and baptize them into my name”?

The only possible source for the variant I have found from my own looking is a few quotations from the writings of Eusebius of Caesarea, and non of the oldest manuscripts that contain his writings are from before the 5th century – Codex Siniaticus predates that significantly, and it contains the usual reading of Matthew 28:19.

I thank you for reading, and hope to hear from you on this matter.

Yours faithfully in Christ Jesus our Lord,

 

Mr Frank’s 1st reply

On the 8th of August 2016 Mr Frank replied. There was attached the sought after Nestle Aland image.

I am greeted as a fellow member in Christ’s family.

Mr Frank apologized for his delay in replying (though it was only a few days since my first email was sent. He clearly values emails, and strives to keep timely responses.) He mentions a weekend meeting he had been overseeing at the Freie Volksmission home base in Krefeld, Germany. Over one thousand people had come to the meeting from diverse parts of the world.

The attached photograph of the NA was referred to, and i was directed to give particular attention to the “en to onomati mou” located in the apparatus. This, Mr Frank said, matches how baptisms in the book of Acts were carried out.

Mr Frank invites me to look at other, unnamed, biblically grounded publications on the subject, which are presumably made available by the FVM.

After expressing a desire to be able to assist in this matter, Mr Frank graciously signs off.

My 2nd email

Von: <>
Datum: Dienstag, 9. August 2016 um 01:15
An:
Betreff: RE: Matthew 28:19
Dear Mr Frank,

Please receive my thanks for sending along the photograph. Your time must certainly be at a premium, particularly on the weekends.

This weekend i also managed to look at a copy of the 21st edition of the NA, given to me by a local pastor, and it has the exact same textual data as yours, whatever edition that may be.

Consulting the apparatus information in the front of the book there is a section on how to read the various symbols used to indicate variants in the text.

Looking at that has led me to some confusion that perhaps you can help with…

The footnote on page 55 of the FVM Bible at Matthew 28:19 seems to say that the Nestle Aland supports a reading of “and baptizing them in My Name”.
But the Nestle Aland apparatus indicates that the phrase “en to onomati mou” should replace everything after the word “ethne” (peoples/nations), as shown by the symbols that bracket the text from before “baptizontes” until after “pnumatos”.

In that case, we would have a reading of “make disciples of all nations in My Name”.
This matches the quotes from the writings of Eusebius found in Patristic sources.

In addition to that, i am still not clear on which manuscripts are being referred to where the FVM Bible footnote states that “the oldest manuscripts say”.

It would be of great use to learn which manuscripts are being referenced, so please do forgive my persistence in asking you again.

Many thanks for replying – it is surely easy to ignore emails when you are busy, but you have chosen not to do so and that is appreciated.

Yours in Christ Alone,

 

Mr Frank’s 2nd reply

In this email, on the 10th of August 2016, i am again greeted as though a family member in Christ.

Mr Frank seeks to make it clear that he cannot possibly locate the source material for the “oldest manuscript” statement made in the FVM Bible, as his library contains too many books.

It is recommended that i use the internet and physical history books, and that there i am sure to find the answers.

Expressing a desire to be truthful, Mr Frank reminded me that we should place no particular value upon what the Nestle Aland or the writings of Eusebius might have to say. We have, he went on to say, more than enough evidence from various cited texts in the book of Acts and Romans to know how the early church understood Matthew 28:19. They had a God given understanding of what that text meant.

Mr Frank assures that he has done everything possible to aid in making this all clear to me, and that it is only within the power of the Lord Jesus to do more.

Mr Frank again signs off with a blessing.

 

My 3rd email

Von:
Datum: Donnerstag, 11. August 2016 um 23:59
An: Betreff:
RE: Matthew 28:19

Dear Mr Frank,

Thank you again for your continued response.

Please understand that it was not my intention to trouble you with discussion on the meaning of Matthew 28:19 or the other scriptures you referenced in your last reply.
You have published many works on that subject and we need not go into it again here I agree.

I also would not have thought to impose upon you to do research that you are correct in saying that it is my responsibility to do.

What brought me to write to you was the researching I had done already of the statements made in the previously referenced textual footnote at Matthew 28:19 on page 55 of the Bible produced by the free people’s mission.

I could find no support for saying that “the oldest manuscripts” include the text “and baptize them in my name”: the oldest complete copy of Matthew, codex sinaiticus, contains the usual text. As does every other ancient copy containing that verse.
The writings of Eusebius, though some were written before codex Sinaiticus, have no physical manuscripts dating from before that codex.

The reference to the Nestle aland text in the footnote also confused me. The footnote seemed to be saying the NA supported the reading of “baptize in my name”, but upon consulting that book, it does not in fact appear to do so.

Researching these things was the reason I felt it necessary to contact you: what I have found so far, without exception, disagrees with the footnote in the Bible, and it was hoped that you might be able to bring forth support for that footnote.

Please do not think of me as being impatient on this matter. I appreciate the many demands on your time and do not presume to rush you for answers.

If you do not wish to continue this communication I will respect your wishes of course.

I shall still remain thankful for your interaction so far.

Apologies for the length of this message.

respectfully

 

Mr Frank’s 3rd reply

15th August 2016

Greeting me once again as member of Christ’s Church in a familial sense, Mr Frank expresses gratitude over the fact of our communication. The necessity of his being needed by other people of God’s household explains the brevity of the current email.

Mr Frank explains quickly that the FVMB footnote is outside his area of responsibility, and implies that some other writer should be held accountable. He expresses great thankfulness for what the Bible says about the issue of baptism, stating that what is contained therein is sufficient for him in all ways.

As previously, a gracious signing off.

 

My 4th email

From: james man
Sent: 15 August 2016 18:48:37
To: E. Frank

Dear Mr Frank,

I do appreciate the demands on your time and will respect your desire to conclude our communication on this subject.

Please forgive my last, and slightly longer, message to you on this matter….

From what you have said i can only understand that there is no evidence for the statements which have been at the center of our emails. (footnote at matt 28:19, p55 FVM bible)

It also appears that you are admitting this when you say that you are “NOT PERMITTED TO PUBLISH BY MR FRANK”. I’m not sure how else to understand your meaning…

Of course i would not say that you are responsible for anything, for example, one of your members happens to say in their personal capacity, but since this textual/manuscript claim is found in a bible produced by an organization that you are the visible leader of, it would seem reasonable for you to have some responsibility to what is said within it.

I might add that the same claim is also made in “The Bible – the Most Read Book on Earth” on page 24 in the German edition, page 22 for the English:

“The Critical history of the church has proven that the original version of the great commission in Mt 28:19 states as follows : “go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptising them into my name (onto onomati mou), Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever i have commanded you…” That is how it is recorded in the footnote of the “Novum Testamentum Graece et germanice” published by Nestle-Aland, 1973 edition.”

These claims (and others on that same page 22) have formed the subject of our emails and there has been no supporting evidence provided to substantiate them.
I have provided some evidence and reason questioning the statements, but these have not been interacted with.

This is a great pity, and i am sorry it has gone this way.

In light of this, i would beg your permission to reproduce the content of our email communication for a wider audience.
Having had the claims above mentioned to me by friends and family who follow your teaching, i feel an obligation to help them, in however small a way, to have a more accurate understanding in this regard.
Beyond these immediate relatives, it would also be instructive to include our conversation within an internet page covering the issue.

I would quote you in full without alteration or abridgement, and will strive sincerely to uphold a respectful and honest tone throughout. You will have first reading of anything in which i quote you, with an open offer for you to suggest changes or offer response.

And please understand that i do not do this to attack you personally. That is very far from my intentions and heart in the matter. It is my conviction that all of us who call on the name of Christ, who is the Truth (Ps 51:6 Jn 14:6 et al), have a duty to be truthful in all things, no matter how small and no matter if we disagree with what is said or who says it.
Thank you once again for choosing to respond to my emails. It is to your credit that you have not simply ignored them, as is so easily done when it comes to digital letter writing.

For this, and for you as an elder in general, you have my respect and Christian Love.

Yours faithfully

 

Mr Frank’s 4th reply

16th August 2016

Greeted once more as one sharing the same father, Ephesians 1:2 is paraphrased.

After assurance that my last email was looked at, i am asked to respect Mr Frank’s position as being only that of a preacher of the Word. Mr Frank states that it is not possible for him to communicate in this manner any longer.

In response to my request for permission to use our email conversation on paper or online, Mr Frank instructs me to only quote from his already published works, and not from our emails. He says that any one reading the quotations i might make of his words would not be able to know the context, and could therefore be left with a false impression.

Praying that God would bless me, Mr Frank signs off.

 

My 5th email

Re: FW: Matthew 28:19
James man
Fri 19/08/2016 00:30
To: E. Frank <e****@freie-volksmission.de>;
Dear Mr Frank,

Thank you for always responding, it is very appreciated.

I certainly do respect your position as a pastor of many people. That is why i sought your help with this question.
I’m sure you would agree that a pastor should teach the truth and be prepared to defend those things he has said if questioned?

It is a shame that you do not want others to read the contents of our emails, as i think it would be instructive in many ways.
I will do as you said, and not quote these emails, even in part, though i am legally permitted to do so according to “Fair use ” or, here in Canada, “Fair Dealing” laws.

Please note however that i wanted to avoid the partial quotation practice you referred to by showing the whole content of our discussion in entirety – by doing that, there would be no chance that someone would misunderstand your words.

You have called me Brother throughout this conversation, and i assure you that i would not betray your regard for me as a brother in Christ by stooping to that level of dishonesty. As one saved by Christ’s love and Mercy, i stand before Him in all things and cannot abide such practices.
It was hoped that this could be presented in a totally open and honest way….

In closing for this time, please accept my thanks for making the effort to write back, and especially for the photograph of your Nestle Aland.

In the spirit of openness, i will be sure to send you links to anything i personally write about this subject where your words are being referred to, either from our emails (though they will not be quoted) or from your printed materials. There will always be an open door for you to respond to anything said therein.
If you should choose to respond in that context, let it be understood that those emails will be published for the benefit of the discussion and its readers.

My thanks to you once again
May the Good Shepherd of our souls led you in truth, and give you peace.

 

There was no response to this last email.

 Summary

• Requests were made to Mr Ewald Frank of the Freie Volksmission, Krefeld, Germany, for supporting documentation/references regarding a footnote in a Bible produced by that organization.
• A digital photograph of two pages from a 1973 Greek/German Nestle Aland 25th edition showing Matthew 28:19 and apparatus was sent back in reply.
• Far from lending support to the claims made in the footnote, the Nestle Aland was found to provide evidence against the reading of Matthew 28:19 offered in the footnote.
• Having this pointed out to him, Mr Frank attempted to shift focus away from the question of manuscript evidence (external evidence) and on to exegetical evidence (internal evidence).
• He did this even though the whole point of the footnote in the FVMB is that it uses supposed manuscript evidence as support for its claims.
• All efforts to gain interaction on the understanding of the Nestle Aland failed, and, at one point, both the NA and Eusebius were dismissed as unimportant anyway.
• When pressed a little on the claim that the “oldest manuscripts” contain the preferred shorter reading, Mr Frank excused himself from providing any supporting references, even going so far as to lay responsibility for the footnote on someone else.
• Having said all he could, it was clearly stated that, in order to understand and accept the claims made in the footnote of the FVMB, a direct revelation would be needed on my part.
• Permission to quote from Mr Frank’s emails was denied
• In short, not one point of the questions made against the manuscript claims made by the FVM regarding Matthew 28:19 were responded to with any evidence.

It must of course be reiterated that Mr Frank is a busy man and may not have the time to spend on chasing up documentation requests. That is to be appreciated and understood. It must also be again mentioned that Mr Frank’s prompt, and kindly, replies despite his busy schedule impressed me and were very appreciated. His dedication to being available to anyone who might write to him is exemplary, and sets a high standard for all those in Christian ministry.

<—–Back to Conclusions

 Back to the Branham Pages

Conclusions

In the previous articles of this series we have taken a close look at several statements made in publications distributed by the FVM during the period 1998 – 2016.

Those statements sought to establish three main claims related to the text of Matthew 28:19:

• That the Nestle Aland Greek New Testament (1973 edition et al) supports the following reading at Matthew 28:19;

“Go therefore and teach all nations, (and) baptizing them into my name”

• The “oldest manuscripts” contain that reading

• Writings by church father Eusebius of Caesarea also support that reading.

 

To begin, we looked to the Nestle Aland (NA), as this seemed to be the main source for the information used in the FVM statements. Those statements had repeatedly quoted the NA as offering an alternative reading of “and baptize them into my name” at Matthew 28:19, always using “en to onomati mou” (in my name) as part of that claim. There was also a regularly occuring comment stating that the NA said “the oldest manuscripts” supported the reading.

To be sure that we were working from the same information the FVM had used, that organization was contacted to see if they might provide supporting documentation. A digital image from the Nestle Aland Greek/German interlinear (1973) used by the FVM author was kindly provided, and became the main reference in this part of the study.

While it turned out to be true that the NA noted a variant of “en to onomati mou”, there was no sign of “and baptize them into my name”. The apparatus used to indicate variants in the NA text explained instead that the reading “en to onomati mou” should, if accepted, replace all mention of baptism in Matthew 28:19.

The reading produced would be;

“Go therefore, teaching all the nations in my name”

There was also no sign in the NA apparatus of anything saying that “the oldest manuscripts” contained the reading “and baptize them into my name”. The only source mentioned in the NA for the variant “en to onomati mou” was Eusebius of Caesarea. The addition of the superscript “pt” next to his name in the apparatus indicated that only some of his references to Matthew 28:19 supported that variant.

It was also briefly noted that the FVM translation of “en to onomati mou” as meaning “in-to my name” was faulty. It is more correct to understand the Greek as meaning “in my name”.

From this simple examination of the NA itself, we could find nothing to confirm the claims made by the FVM

However, with the desire to view the FVM’s statements in the best possible light, we then went on to look at the actual oldest manuscripts of the NT and the writings of Eusebius, since it was possible that the FVM had found evidence there to support their preferred reading.

After finding that the oldest papyrus manuscripts of the NT, dated to around 300AD or earlier, are all lacking the entirety of Matthew 28, and therefore could not be used as support for any reading at that location, we moved on to the next most ancient group of NT manuscripts, the Uncials.

The two oldest Uncial manuscripts are dated to the mid 300’s AD or earlier, and we found universal agreement throughout the whole Uncial family upon the reading;

“Go therefore, making disciples of all the nation, baptizing them into the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit,”.

The only variants within that text are minor and do not effect the meaning so far as we are concerned. Those variants are covered HERE.

Having then found the oldest manuscripts of the NT to offer no support for the claims made by the FVM, we moved on the last of our three sources, the writings of Eusebius of Caesarea.

It was thought that perhaps the FVM author had been referring to these documents as being the “oldest manuscripts” to include the reading “and baptizing them into my name”: perhaps manuscripts of Eusebius’ writings were actually older than any NT manuscript containing Matthew 28:19….

Through the somewhat lengthy investigation of Eusebius’ writings, we found that there was indeed some usage of a reading different to that found in the NT manuscript tradition:

“Go therefore, making disciples of all nations in my name,”

There was however not one single instance where baptism was included in this shorter version of Matthew 28:19. From the listing of all places where Eusebius references this verse, it was noted that he does use the normal, longer, reading in places where baptism is spoken of.

Because of this, and due to the complete lack of NT manuscript evidence against the longer reading, it was thought reasonable to conclude that the shorter reading came about due to Eusebius’ highly contextual, and biblically exemplified, usage of Matthew 28:19 as a ‘marker’ verse used to quickly draw together several similar texts at once under one memorable heading.

With regards to the age of the manuscripts containing Eusebius’ writings, it was found that the oldest is dated to 411AD, due to a date noted within it. This document, written in Syriac, is a complete copy of his writing entitled “Theophania”. The next oldest manuscript contains parts of his “Church History”, also in Syriac, and is dated to 462AD. All other manuscripts of Eusebius are dated 10th century and later.

With these last pieces of information it became clear that all three of the claims made by the FVM could not be readily supported from any of the sources referenced:

• The Nestle Aland 1973 25th edition does not support the reading “and baptizing them into my name”, for several reasons noted above.
• The oldest manuscripts, however we tried to understand that phrase, do not contain that reading in any place
• Eusebius never used that reading when writing about baptism.

 

Having found evidence contradictory to that of the FVM statements, and wanting to seek the help and advice of the organization that published these statements, the author of each work containing them, Mr Ewald Frank, was contacted via email.

The results of that conversation can be found in the appendix, next.

 

<—-back to Comparison #2

forward to Appendix: Emails—->

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comparison #2

Part of the claim made by the Freie VolksMission (FVM)regarding Matthew 28:19 include references to the reading “and baptize them into name” being found in the “oldest manuscripts”.

Those claims can be read on the Source Statements page (opens new tab/window).
There were three possible ways in which “the oldest manuscripts” could be understood;

• The absolute oldest physical manuscripts, the Papyri
• The oldest manuscripts that actually contain Matthew 28:19, the Uncials
• Manuscripts containing the writings of Eusebius, the only other source of the shorter reading mentioned

For the sake of completeness we have now looked through all of the documents that relate to these three categories, and can draw some conclusions from the results.

1:It is clear that the earliest manuscripts of the New Testament, known as the Papyri, do not contain the shorter reading of Matthew 28:19. None of them contain a single verse of Chapter 28 or, infact, anything from Chapters 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22 or 27.

We can then rule that group of manuscripts out as being “the oldest manuscripts” mentioned in the FVM literature.

2:The three earliest manuscripts from the second category, the Uncials, also do not contain the short reading of Matthew 28:19. They each contain the longer reading. And, although not shown in this study, every other Uncial manuscript also contains the longer reading in one form or another.

There is no Uncial containing the shorter reading.

This means that we can also rule out the second group of manuscripts as the one being referred to as “the oldest manuscripts” by the FVM.

3:The writings of Eusebius offer a reading different to the one unanimously found in categories 1 and 2 : “..making disciples of all nations in my name..”. In another article we will take a closer look at this side of the evidence. However, so far as the specific claims of the FVM are concerned, it cannot be said at all that Eusebius gives us a reading of

“..making disciples of all nations, baptizing them into my name..”

There is not one place where Eusebius ever mentions baptism in connection with the shorter “in my name” reading. His focus when using the shorter version is always upon the Disciples taking the Gospel to the Nations and doing so because of Christ’s command, and with His authority and power accompanying them.

As seen in “the oldest manuscripts #3” and the listing of places where Eusebius refers to Matthew 28:19,  he also includes the longer reading in his writings. That is always in a context when he is specifically writing about baptism.

That focus upon the sending of the Gospel to the Nations outside of Israel, and the enabling power and authority that would allow it to succeed, the “how it would be done”, rather than on the baptismal element of the command, the “what would be done” is evident from reading Eusebius in context.

This leads us to see the Eusebian version of Matthew 28:19 as very likely being a “conflation” (or a “cento” more accurately), which is a mixing of quotes from different sources that apply to the point being made. Mark and Matthew do a very similar thing in their Gospels at Mark 1:3 and Matthew 27:9, where texts from two different Prophets are quoted but only the better known, or “Major”, Prophet is named.

In Eusebius’ case it is a mixing of Matthew 28:19, and Luke 24:47, with perhaps also reference to Acts 1:8 and Mark 16:15, with the concept common to them all being included in a general reference to the better known Great Commission of Matthew 28.

Again, there is much to be said on this subject in a future article.

4. With respect to the writings of Eusebius, it also cannot be said that these are the “oldest manuscripts”. Although the original writings were made between 300 – 339AD, those originals are long since destroyed. The oldest copy of a work by Eusebius now existing is dated to 411AD and contains only the “Theophania”. As seen from the dating of the Uncial manuscripts, both Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus predate that by at least 60 years.

 This group of manuscripts then must also be discounted as being the “oldest manuscripts” mentioned in the FVM publications.

The key point to keep in mind from examining the manuscript evidence for Matthew 28:19, or references to it in the works of Eusebuis, is that there is a complete lack of support for the claim that “the oldest manuscripts” contain the reading “and baptize them into my name”

Next, we will draw everything together from checking the Nestle Aland, the oldest manuscripts of the New Testament, and the writings of Eusebius, and compare them to the various statements made in the FVM publications.

 

 

<—-back to The Oldest Manuscripts #3

forward to Conclusions—–>

The Oldest Manuscripts #3

Recap

In numerous published statements the FVM has claimed that “the oldest manuscripts” and the writings of Eusebius contain the reading “Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them into my name” at Matthew 28:19.

After examining the oldest Biblical manuscripts which contain Matthew 28:19 and finding that they do not include that reading, we can now turn to the only other source offered as support .

 

Eusebius of Caesarea

Living between the years 260/270AD and 340AD, the man who became leader of the church at Caesarea, and was closely involved with the Arian controversy which precipitated the famous council of Nicea in 325AD, produced many writings, some of which have been preserved to the modern day.

Not all have been translated into English at this time, but many have and are available to view online.

From these writings, we know that Eusebius quoted or referred to Matthew 28:19 a number of times. In the information below there is a full listing of these references giving us the title of the work they appear in, along with the book and chapter number.

Notice that the references are given in three sections; Number 1 shows where Eusebius references Mt 28:19 and uses the shorter “in my name” reading; Number 2 shows where he references Mt 28:19 but only quotes so far as “the nations” or some other contraction; Number 3 shows references where Mt 28:19 is quoted in the longer form of “…baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”.

1. Eusebius’ short form (Demonstratio 3.6, 7(bis); 9.11; Hist. Eccl. III.5.2; Psalms 65.6; 67.34; 76.20 (59.9 not the same reading); Isaiah 18.2; 34.16 (v.l.); Theophania 4.16; 5.17; 5.46; 5.49; Oratio 16.8) is the only textual evidence for the short reading

2. Eusebius also alludes to this passage without using either ‘in my name’ or the full clause [Demonstratio 1.3, 4, 6; Psalms 46.4; 95.3; 144.9; Isaiah  41.10; Theophania 3.4; Theologia III.3

3. Eusebius quotes the long form in Contra Marcellum I.1.9; I.1.36; Theologia III. 5.22; EpCaesarea 3 (Socrates, Eccl.Hist 1.8); Psalms 117.1-4; and Theophania 4.8

source: email by Dr Peter M Head, here

Many of the above quotations are also mentioned in a well know article by Mr Conybeare written in 1901, though he is not quite so complete as Dr Head in his listing.

To keep this article from becoming too long, and unfocused, we will only look at the references in the first section above. These directly address the claims made in the FVM publications. In a future article, all of the quotes will be shown and the subject discussed more fully.

Checking Eusebius

Now that we know in which of his writings Eusebius refers to Matthew 28:19 and uses the reading “in my name”, we can take a look in each one, find out how old the manuscripts are, extract the relevant passages and then see what he was actually saying.

To make things clear, Figure 1 below shows a rough table displaying the full titles of which Eusebian texts we will be looking at, along with some extra information to give us an idea of the manuscript evidence for each one. Remember, these writings were penned between the years 290AD – 339AD, and, like the Biblical manuscripts we looked over previously, there are no original (IE. written by Eusebius himself) manuscripts  still existing, only copies.

Figure 1: Eusebian works with composition and MS dates

The Oldest Manuscripts #2

Recap

In the last article we took a look at the oldest manuscripts, called the Papyri, to see what they had to tell us about Matthew 28:19. We saw that, because they are very ancient and fragmentary, there are many verses, even whole chapters, missing. This includes the verse we are looking at, Matthew 28:19.

In order to find out what our earliest evidence for Matthew 28:19 is, we will now move on to look at the next source of ancient evidence, the Uncial manuscripts.

The Oldest Manuscripts #1

Recap

In addition to the claims made by the FVM that the Nestle Aland supports the reading of “and baptize them into my name” at Matthew 28:19, those same materials contain several other statements claiming that this reading is found in the New Testament manuscript tradition.

Those statements are seen in the images on the page Source Statements and Comment. Here, for ease of comparison, we will pull out and quote the relevant text by itself.

• The footnote from the FVMB: “The oldest manuscripts say…”
• Page 22 of the booklet “The Bible…”: “..the original version…”
• Page 52 of the booklet ““The Great Tragedy …”: “…the earliest hand-written manuscripts…”

When read in context there is no question that the author wishes us to believe that there is manuscript evidence for the reading “and baptize them into my name”, and that these manuscripts are the oldest of all manuscripts available.

We will now go through the MS (manuscript) evidence available, starting with the Papyri, to see if that is true.

 The Papyri

There is no doubt that of all the Biblical manuscripts currently known, the most ancient are what are called the Papyri.

These are documents written on the paper-like material made from the pressed fibers of the Papyrus plant which grew, and still grows today, throughout Africa and the Middle East.

Because they are made from this material, and because of their great age, the papyrus manuscripts of the New Testament have become delicate. Many of them have suffered almost complete destruction over the years, and are broken into small fragments.Some contain only a few verses, and there are no complete single copies of the New Testament written on papyrus that have survived to our days.

More can be learned about this very interesting subject on an introductory page at Wikipedia (add other links), but for our study we can focus for now on only those Papyri which contain text from the Gospel of Matthew.

Papyri of Matthew

As our main source we will be using information drawn from the book “The Early Text of the New Testament” edited by Charles Hill and Michael Kruger (review). This is a recently published (2012) collection of essays and data focused on the earliest manuscripts of the NT, all from before approximately 300AD. It has become recognized as a standard reference on the subject.

Since we are not allowed to post up images from the book itself for copyright reasons, we will instead use an online version hosted by Google Books:

This link opens the book in another window

Much of the chapter on Matthew is available to read on that link, and is recommended. However, opening at page 86/87 there are tables showing the earliest manuscripts which contain anything from Matthew’s Gospel. It is worth spending a few minutes becoming acquainted with the information given in those tables. As you do, take note of the date range given to each papyrus document. Note also which parts of Matthew’s Gospel are present in each document.

To help display this information more clearly, we have made the following chart that shows each chapter of Matthew and which, if any, ancient papyrus manuscripts contain text from that chapter. Chapters obviously run along the bottom axis, and the side axis shows how many manuscripts contain something from each particular chapter. Each colored bar represents an individual manuscript, the name of which is written atop. As an example, we can look at chapter 21 on the bottom axis and know that there are 2 different manuscripts which contain something from that chapter, P45 and P104:

Figure 1: Pre ~300AD MSS and the parts of Matthew they contain

As is seen in Figure 1, the earliest MS evidence for Matthew’s Gospel contains just over half the 28 chapters that make up the whole book. Chapter 28, as seen on the far right hand side, is not included.

In Figure 2 below, the same information is shown in more detail. This time we can see the papyrus manuscript evidence for each verse of Matthew’s Gospel. Green boxes indicate that this verse is represented in the early (pre-300/350AD) manuscripts. White boxes tell us that those verses are not represented. Beginning at the top left corner you will see a number “1”. This represents Matthew chapter 1, verse 1 – Matthew 1:1. Counting along from left to right, each box is the next verse in the chapter. The box labelled “2” represents Matthew 2:1, and so on. When the end of one row is reached, drop down to the next row and again start from the left hand side of that row:

Figure 2: Pre~300AD MS evidence for each verse in Matthew

 

 Summary

Having now taken a quick look at the very earliest manuscripts that contain text from the Gospel of Matthew, we can say the following:

• The earliest manuscripts do not contain anything from numerous chapters of Matthew.
• Chapter 28 is completely missing
• Therefore, the earliest and consequently oldest, hand-written manuscripts of Matthews Gospel do not contain the reading “and baptize them into my name”.
• The earliest manuscripts cannot be used to support any reading at Matthew 28:19.

 

Next Step

Now that we have looked at the earliest Papyrus manuscripts, and see that they do not contain the reading “and baptize them into my name”, we will move on to look at the oldest manuscripts that do contain Matthew 28:19. After that, we will then look at the only other source mentioned in the NA or the writings of the FVM – Eusebius of Caesarea.

It is possible that the FVM author was referring to either of these two other groups of manuscripts as being the “oldest manuscripts” to contain that reading, so we should check with those too.

 

<—-Back to Comparison #1                                      Next, The Oldest Manuscripts #2—>

Comparison #1

Recap

The FVM has published several statements claiming that the Nestle Aland supports a reading of “Go ye therefore and teach all nation, and baptize them into my name” at Matthew 28:19.

In the article previous to this one we have looked at two different editions of the NA,  including the personal copy of Mr Ewald Frank, leader of the FVM, to see if this claim is justified.

Now, for the sake of clarity,  we will quickly summarize both the claims and then the evidence actually found in the NA.

The FVMB

(This is a preliminary article subject to revision. any comments are welcomed)

The Freie Volksmission (Free People’s Mission) based in Krefeld Germany has produced it’s own edition of the Bible, based on a German translation prepared by Hermann Menge.

Source: Knappertsbusch Stiftung

Checking the Nestle Aland

Recap

As seen in the previous article on Source Statements, FVM literature refers to the Nestle Aland Greek text as support for its claim regarding the reading at Matthew 28:19b:

• There is the vague reference to the Nestle Aland (NA) found in the FVM’s Bible (FVMB), which provides no page or edition number, and also
• the reference in the booklet “The Bible…” which mentioned a 1973 Greek/German edition.

In both of the above statements, it is said that the NA gives support to the reading of “Go you therefore, and teach all nations, (and) baptize them into my name.”

We will now turn to images of the Nestle Aland Greek text itself to see what we find there.

Nestle Aland images

In a recent email conversation centered on the FVMB footnote, Mr Frank very kindly sent me an image of Matthew 28:12-20 taken of the NA he has available to him in his office at Krefeld, Germany:

Figure 1: NA Greek/German showing Mt28:12-20

Source Statements with Comment

While looking through a copy of the German language Bible produced by the Freie Volksmission (FVM), on page 55 i noticed a footnote referenced to Matthew 28:19b:

Figure 1: Footnote from Mt 28:19, page 55, FVMB

The German text of the footnote reads, in English:

 The oldest manuscripts say:

>>…and baptize them into my Name

–en to onomati mou<< (Footnote in Nestle-

Aland Novum Testamentum)