[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Matthew 28:19-20
Go ye therefore,
and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:
and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.
Amen.

One of the nice aspects of dealing with cornfuseniks who have no pure Bible and really, really would prefer that others did not have a pure Bible as well (due to the authority represented in the Holy Bible, the King James Bible) is that they bring up issues that help us to see the purity and perfection of our Bible. And to understand more excellently the word of God. Before this little conversation I had never studied 'make disciples' as a concept and looking at the modern version mistranslation of Matthew 28:19 versus the proper Bible text has been interesting.

Originally Posted by againstheresies

no real answer yet…I guess I found one that stumped you.

Hmmm.. you simply ignored what I wrote above, so I could not take your approach too seriously. Others may have found your approach questionable on this forum as well, especially based on the earlier threads. However I am happy to stay on this topic a bit.

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

"Make disciples" is not only nonexistent in the text, but it distorts our duty.

A very crucial point. There is a type of translational tampering in all the modern versions.

First, there is in fact one scripture that talks of disciples being made, by Jesus and by John the Baptist, and as would be expected it uses two distinct words, a noun and a verb, for that purpose.

John 4:1
When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,

This English does reflect the Greek, since it has two distinct words. 'Make disciples' in Matthew 28:19 takes a dubious translational license by radically changing the Greek, which is a command to 'ye' to teach (some say 'disciple', some 'instruct', some 'convert' - we may get to that later) all nations, Jesus did not give a command about the people who would be taught (or made into students, disciples or anything else) which is the man-centered nose-counting approach. The real focus is on what Jesus calls us to do, to teach.

As one writer, not particularly sympathetic to the King James Bible yet with some savvy on this quetion, says:

http://voiceofthesheep.wordpress.com...-the-question/
To Disciple, Or Make Disciples…That is the Question

the modern translations at this verse seem to support the man-centered evangelism techniques that we see so prominent in the church today. Instead of going and instructing and teaching and discipling…we have Christians who go and try to make disciples….to make conversions.

Thus the literal versions, Young and Rotherdam, accurately follow the King James Bible in only using a verbal form in Matthew 28:19. The same correct understanding of simply a verbal form is in all the earlier English Bibles, I checked Coverdale, Tyndale, Geneva and Bishops. And the early translations to Latin and Aramaic simply reflected a verbal form, showing that this was the historic understanding of Matthew 28:19 in the first centuries, when Biblical Greek was a more natural language. And thus the English Latin-based (e.g Wycliffe and Rheims) and Aramaic versions do so as well, simply a verbal form. Also, even after the King James Bible, in the 1700's and 1800's Mace (1729) and Wesley (1790) and Webster (1833), despite a Bible-correction approach, did not make the error of improperly adding a noun. (Even the translations of Ignatius, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Diatessoran and other church writers generally reflect simply the verb.) The modernist error of "make disciples" in Matthew 28:19 appears to have come into the English understanding around the time of the decrepit Revision (1881) as well as Darby (1890 English edition) and is only in line with the later modernist retinkering of historic and clear grammatical understandings.

Originally Posted by againstheresies

No my friends the meaning of this passage is clearly to make disciples by Going, Baptizing, and Teaching.

Error begets error. This interpretation, that this is what is called a 'grouped clause with modal participles' -- the later parts all elements, perhaps sequential, of the initial -- seems to be relatively recent (especially A. T. Robertson) and is hotly contested even in the Greek-ish circles. The English grammar clearly does not indicate this, nor is it required and indicated in the Greek (this is discussed in depth on those biblical greek forums). And one basic mistake that makes this view difficult is the one covered above, the fact that there is not any command to 'make disciples' whatosever.

As a sidenote, the strongest defenders historically of the modal approach, with its implied sequential component, to interpreting Matthew 28:19 is by the proponents of infant baptism, since if you group baptism as the first action after a command to "make disciples" and the baptism is before the teaching, then ..wow, you can baptize infants.

Notice how 'against' has to contradict himself, by adding elements and changing around sequence, in his self-proclaimed 'good exegesis'.

Originally Posted by againstheresies

... So go about making disciples of Jesus Christ by taking the initiative to go to them, upon their confession of faith Baptize them into the Church, and continue to teach them the all the truth of God’s Word.

Yet by his own expressed exegesis no confession of faith or teaching precedes baptism, baptism would be the first step.

I had a few more notes, however time is short and a few important issues I have tried to clarify a bit. The issues I discuss here are far more fundamental than 'teach, disciple, instruct' or another word, like the most dubious 'convert' on Matthew 28:19, although that would be interesting as well. It was fun looking into the truth of the matter, to learn about the mistranslation 'make disciples' in Matthew 28:19 in the modern versions (I would like to know more definitely the first proponent of the "make disciples" error, any help on that appreciated).

Originally Posted by Biblestudent

I don't know if there is anyone in this modern apostate times who can translate better a word that was translated by 47 best brains in 1611. I can assume that many (if not all) modern bible translators learned the original languages in seminary, while the KJV translators were all familiar of the languages even from childhood.

Amen. When you read the modern scholars, you can sense their difficulties, they are fractionist and fragmented and ultra-conjectural and unsure and they don't have the sense and heart and clarity of mind of the strong and dynamic scholars of earlier days, the King James Bible translators being the finest company ever assembled.

Note, as I often indicate, I personally claim no Greek expertise. I simply find that the modern correctors write on such a low level that it is not difficult to research their fallacious claims, such as the modal approach of 'against' above being simply declared by fiat against lots of solid argumentation and writing and interpretation. Or checking the historic understanding and usage of a simple linguistic connection of the Greek to the English (verb == verb). And I read carefully the various explanations given by modernists for going around the simplicity of the languages, ie. a straight and simple and direct translation, and generally they have no oomph, no power, no pizazz. And often, on issues like this one, they look to be little more than excuses for the errant alexandrian-based Westcott-Hort text or the errant modern translations. Or they assume a validity that is neither historical nor warranted.

Shalom,
Steven

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Another point of interest on the modern version mistranslation, again adding the noun.

Acts 14:21 (KJB)
And when they had preached the gospel to that city,
and had taught many,
they returned again to Lystra,
and to Iconium, and Antioch,

First, notice that you will find this footnote on some King James Bible.

* had taught many: Gr. had made many disciples

Yet this is not on the 1611 on the net, again it would be nice to know when this footnote began. Since there is no noun "disciples" in that sentence. And we know that making disciples is a dubious concept in NT consistency and inerrancy and doctrine.

1 Corinthians 1:12-13
Now this I say, that every one of you saith,
I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you?
or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

1 Corinthians 3:3-4
For ye are yet carnal:
for whereas there is among you envying,
and strife, and divisions,
are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
For while one saith, I am of Paul;
and another, I am of Apollos;
are ye not carnal?

Generally the modern versions make this error, essentially the same error they have in Matthew 28:19.

Acts 14:21 (Holman)
After they had evangelized that town and made many disciples,
they returned to Lystra, to Iconium, and to Antioch,

A modern version apologist could try to contend that the disciples are disciples of Jesus anyway. Yet if that were the sense (remember this is conjectural since the NT actually does not speak of "made ... disciples" in this verse) then it would have been very easy to simply places the words in the text -- e.g. "disciples unto Jesus". The simple, contextual explanation of Acts 14:21 in the modern versions is disciples of Paul and Barnabas, an error.

In fact, the modern versions have a second error, a textual corruption, that magnifies the translation error in Acts 14:21. We have available a separate in-depth discussion of :

Acts 9:25 (KJB)
Then the disciples took him by night,
and let him down by the wall in a basket.

Now notice the error, based on one of the thousands of alexandrian MS blunders, referring to Paul's disciples.

Acts 9:25 - Holman
but his disciples took him by night
and lowered him in a large basket through an opening in the wall.

These errors from the modern versions are used for various arguments given for the apostles having their own disciples. With the modern versions, error begets error.

"Use the modern versions, you don't know what you are missing".

Shalom,
Steven

Steven this passage is not “hotly contested even in the Greek-ish circles.” This is a very clear passage that would be better translated “make disciples” in verse 19 and teach in verse 20. Jerome’s influence on this passage carried over to the English versions.

At least you admit that you “have no Greek expertise” although that point is clearly evident from your line of reasoning. By the way quoting from someone who refers to their own writings as “bleatings of an amateur reformational credobaptistic theologian” hardly bolsters your argument.

I do wish all of you well and pray that you are guided more by truth than tradition and sound exegesis rather than emotion.

Have a great Lord’s Day.

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

As expected, a quick response from against that has no substance. This is rather common. Rather than real analysis, kick out a nothing post to look like you responded, to give an appearance sans substance.

Originally Posted by againstheresies

this passage is not “hotly contested even in the Greek-ish circles.”.

The context of that was your incorrect modal interpretation. You didn't even read properly my very clear writing, or if you did, you write deceptively.

Originally Posted by againstheresies

This is a very clear passage that would be better translated “make disciples” in verse 19

And the two posts above outlined quite nicely why this claim of yours is rubbish. I read the quick and weak defenses of "make disciples" and they boil down to "we translate that way because the verb is active and causative". Such a transformation in language needs an impelling reason. If somebody is told to "Instruct" .. that does not mean to make instructors, nor even to make students. And if a noun "disciples" was meant to be combined with a verb to make, the English and Greek could easily match up with a noun and a verb, as in John 4:1.

In fact afaik the earlier Greek experts did not even make this weak case that you call "very clear". This is a modernist confusion, rarely analyzed, and it beigins to appear in translations only at the time of the textual apostasy of the Revision. Error begets error.

Originally Posted by againstheresies

and teach in verse 20.

Finally you say something sensible.

Originally Posted by againstheresies

Jerome’s influence on this passage carried over to the English versions.

The Latin early versions, and the Aramaic, understood the Greek verb issue the same way as did all the English Reformation experts. The word-choice translation issue, which can only be addressed properly after the improper noun addition issue is addressed and discarded. likely drew from a lot of considerations. Which I was prepared to discuss if you gave an intelligent response. In general, in your one-dimensional claim, it looks like you are falling into a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. And you are totally unawares of the depth of Greek knowledge and understanding and precision of the Reformation translators, especially the King James Bible translators.

Originally Posted by againstheresies

At least you admit that you “have no Greek expertise” although that point is clearly evident from your line of reasoning.

Sometimes the lack of a Greek background of confusion makes reading through the scholastic muddles that much easier. You can see the modernist confusions so easily.

We notice that you addressed absolutely nothing about any point that I addressed, such as the dual error in the modern versions that brings forth the false doctrine of believer's disciples, or the historic truth of the clear and straight translation of Mathew 28:19, the related alexandrian corruption in Acts 9:25 that lays the doctrinal framework for the Matthew 28:19 translation error, how John 4:1 shows how a true "made disciples" verse is written, or the newness and controversy of your weak and dubious modal interpretation, the interpretation originally embraced and pushed by those defending infant baptism.

Originally Posted by againstheresies

By the way quoting from someone who refers to their own writings as “bleatings of an amateur reformational credobaptistic theologian” hardly bolsters your argument.

You don't like the word "bleatings" ? Complain to the author. Everything I quoted was sensible and strong, if you disagree you should try substance rather than a genetic fallacy attempt.

Thank you for showing the forum the superficial nature of anti-KJB attempts.

Shalom,
Steven

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by againstheresies

I do wish all of you well and pray that you are guided more by truth than tradition and sound exegesis rather than emotion.

Jude 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

Hebrews 10:23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised; )

I do believe that it is wise that we contend for this tradition that has been passed down to us by faithful Bible believing Christians. Satan's tactic has always been to cast doubt on the Word of God.

Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

againstheresies, We are guided by Truth and Spirit, which is the Word of God, King James AV 1611. I don't know what exegesis means (is that word even in the bible?). I believe in comparing spiritual things with spiritual things. Perhaps you should to? Anywho, what are your motives here? I personally believe you are trying to shed doubt on our faith in the preserved Word of our God. I don't think this is edifying, and even if you think you are right about your beloved greek, you should take a lesson from Romans 14 my brother. Perhaps you should spend more time winning souls for Christ instead of using greek to cast doubt in the hearts of the faithful.

Much Love in Christ Jesus,
Stephen

[Gord]

Originally Posted by stephanos

[B] I don't know what exegesis means (is that word even in the bible?). ...

Much Love in Christ Jesus,
Stephen

Exegesis (from the Greek ἐξηγεῖσθαι 'to lead out') involves an extensive and critical interpretation of an authoritative text, especially of a holy scripture, such as of the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, the Talmud, the Midrash, the Qur'an, etc. Exegesis also is used to describe the elucidation of philosophical and legal texts.

One may encounter the terms exegesis and hermeneutics used interchangeably; however, there remains a distinction. An exegesis is the interpretation and understanding of a text on the basis of the text itself. A hermeneutic is a practical application of a certain method or theory of interpretation, often revolving around the contemporary relevance of the text in question.

An exegete is a practitioner of this art, and the adjectival form is exegetic. The plural of the word exegesis is exegeses.

The word exegesis can mean explanation, but as a technical term it means "to draw the meaning out of" a given text. Exegesis may be contrasted with eisegesis, which means to read one's own interpretation into a given text. In general, exegesis presumes an attempt to view the text objectively, while eisegesis implies more subjectivity.

Traditional exegesis requires the following: analysis of significant words in the text in regard to translation; examination of the general historical and cultural context, confirmation of the limits of the passage, and lastly, examination of the context within the text. [1]

Although the most widely-known exegeses concern themselves with Christian, Jewish and Islamic books, analyses also exist of books of other religions.

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Matthew 28:19-20
Go ye therefore,
and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:
and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.
Amen.

This research I find quite interesting, and am following up a bit more. Mostly I was curious to learn how such a mistranslation as "make disciples" can get entrenched among the modernists.

One thing that came to the fore is that a later modern (not original) King James Bible margin note helped bring forth the confusion. Apparently that footnote was placed in 1800's (way before Scrivener though) perhaps Matthew would know who added margin notes that actually 'stuck' in 18th century or 19th century King James Bible editions. Generally you have seen me very sympathetic to the King James Bible 1611 notes (not scripture, yet often showing great insight and skill and expertise). Based on this new example, that simpatico may dissolve when it comes to the after-1611 margin notes.

Now I have a few new tidbits to share. The first one will show that we are not the only ones to realize that 'make disciples' is a dubious, even unacceptable, translational license. Just a couple of years ago, in one Lutheran denomination a few dozen (seminary-trained folks, with all the Greek-isms) folks actually put out a public statement in some depth on precisely this point. They had to feel very strongly to actually highlight simply the one verse of ultra-dubious translation. Whether the overall motivation and understanding of the Committee with the signers to the emphatic letter is perfect or good or bad or mixed in all the details of why they are highlighting this verse is not really the main issue (your degree of 'sovereign grace' doctrinal priority will be one element in your degree of doctrinal agreement). Generally their ideas dovetail well with the King James Bible defenders on the forum. Mostly, first, I want to simply show their understanding of the verse grammatically and translationally. So I will simply post it here, with a little bold added.

Those interested will find the whole page of interest, please note this is an extract.

=================================================

http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?...ortcutID=24340
Clarifying the Mission of WELS

3) in only one place in Scripture does the Savior appear to give responsibility to his people for the results of the gospel’s work, telling his followers, “Go and make disciples of all nations . . .” (Matthew 28:19); and

4) the word in the original Greek that is translated as “make disciples” is “matheteusate,” a verb form used nowhere else in the New Testament; and

5) the precise meaning of that word, “matheteusate,” is open to debate and varied interpretation, even among faithful scholars in our own circles; and

6) according to the principle of letting Scripture interpret Scripture, it would be most proper for this voicing of the Savior’s Great Commission to be understood and translated in a manner consistent with other voicings of that commission as noted above (and as was done by Dr. Luther and by the King James Version, where“matheteusate” is translated as “teach”); and

7) instead, in the New International Version and several other modern translations (e.g. RSV, TEV, GWN), the word “matheteusate” is translated as “make disciples”—a translation that neither literally reflects the structure of the Greek nor is consistent with the rest of Scripture; and

8) while it may be possible for the translation “make disciples” to be rightly understood, it may also be argued that the translation invites misinterpretation, and may even open a door to a misunderstanding of the doctrine of conversion since it can appear to make man at least partly responsible for the conversion process; and

... most open to misunderstanding and misapplication .... a questionable translation

==================================================

Thanks .

Shalom,
Steven

[Debau]

Dude,
If I could dig in the Scripture like you dig out info on the 'net, I'd be a "scholar".!!! I might even learn some Greek, or Geek perhaps!

Good job Steven.

[chette777]

Quoting Gord:

One may encounter the terms exegesis and hermeneutics used interchangeably; however, there remains a distinction. An exegesis is the interpretation and understanding of a text on the basis of the text itself. A hermeneutic is a practical application of a certain method or theory of interpretation, often revolving around the contemporary relevance of the text in question.

The word exegesis can mean explanation, but as a technical term it means "to draw the meaning out of" a given text. Exegesis may be contrasted with eisegesis, which means to read one's own interpretation into a given text. In general, exegesis presumes an attempt to view the text objectively, while eisegesis implies more subjectivity.

Traditional exegesis requires the following: analysis of significant words in the text in regard to translation; examination of the general historical and cultural context, confirmation of the limits of the passage, and lastly, examination of the context within the text.

Gord,

Great discription of Exegesis.

All these discriptions are used in rightly dividing the word of truth that is the correct method of interpretation. Correct Exegesis leads to correct doctrines. some Christians in this post even have a tendency to eisegsis. many say they beleive the the KJV Bible but fails to obey or partially obeys 2Tim2:15 beleif and obediance go together.

I have encountered it in Church after church, and among many who claim to be Chrisitans, it is part the last days apostasy where men claim to beleive the word but dont obey it. they have a tendancy to obey what scriptures they want and disregard other scriputres. Part of this last days is apostasy is better translation movements, but a greater part is men who are saved who disobey the Words of God

Another part of the Apostasy is to blend scriptures, mix up the different Gospels in the NT and make them all one Gospel. Others replace Israel with the church and endorse the Law over Liberty.

We have the best translation even for Matthew 29:18, 19. Teach that is the key but we must also be apt to teach and to have teachable hearts ourselves. anther sign of the Apsotasy in the church is the lack of teachable hearts. Peolple will follow other men and exort them above the clear teaching of the Holy Ghost, who is the one who teaches us the word of God in the first place. another sign is people fail to test the spirits to see if they are of God. Just because they call themselves Christian doesn't mean they are sent of God to teach or make better translations of an already perfect word of God.

becareful and testing when going to the links some are posting here they are ecumenical links to some of the Kingdom builders and covenant theologian sites.

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Originally Posted by Debau

Dude, If I could dig in the Scripture like you dig out info on the 'net, I'd be a "scholar".!!! I might even learn some Greek, or Geek perhaps! Good job Steven.

Thanks .. I think. .

There are a lot of problems in 'make disciples of all the nations' and kudos to those Lutheran folks for speaking up.

Incidentally the KJB margin note has to be before 1815, because by that time (yes, before the Revision) the note had been put in and some folks had started to follow the margin note rather than the text. And some saw the difficulties. Here is one from 1815, I am only taking out one paragraph, which begins in the context of a confession of faith with baptism. Notice also the connection mentioned between infant baptism and the early proponents of the translation corruption.

http://books.google.com/books?id=2awPAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA184
A Body of Divinity: Wherein the Doctrines of the Christian Religion are Explained and Defended Vol IV - Thomas Ridgeley - Notes by James P. Wilson (1815)

This is agreeable to the words of institution, in Matt 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them, and in Mark xvi. 15. Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creatures he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. I am sensible that some, who have defended infant-baptism, or rather attempted to answer an objection taken from this, and such like scriptures against it, have endeavoured to prove the Greek word signifies, make persons disciples; and accordingly it is a metaphor taken from the practice of a person's being put under the care of one who qualified to instruct him, whose disciple he is said to be, in order to his being taught by him ; and therefore they suppose, that we are made disciples by baptism, and afterwards to be taught to observe all things whatsoever Christ hath commanded; and this is taken notice of in the marginal reading of our Bibles ; which supposes that the word may be rendered, make disciples of all nations : But, I cannot think this sense of the word so defensible, or agreeable to the design of our Saviour, as that of our translation, viz. Go teach all nations ; which agrees with the words of the other evangelist, Go preach the gospel to every creature :

Shalom,
Steven