Do you think it is better to retain the distinction between “matheteuo” and “didasko” as used by our Lord in the Great Commission or obscure it? Why or why not?

Matthew 28:19-20 (Elzevir)
19 πορευθεντες ουν μαθητευσατε παντα τα εθνη βαπτιζοντες αυτους εις το ονομα του πατρος και του υιου και του αγιου πνευματος 20 διδασκοντες αυτους τηρειν παντα οσα ενετειλαμην υμιν και ιδου εγω μεθ υμων ειμι πασας τας ημερας εως της συντελειας του αιωνος αμην

Matthew 28:19-20 (KJV)
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 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.

Matthew 28:19-20 (NKJV)
19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.

[PB1789]

I think that it should read "teach" rather than "make disciples".

Why---? Because it is up to The Holy Spirit to make disciples,,,not us.

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Matthew 28:19-20 (KJV)
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.

Originally Posted by PB1789

I think that it should read "teach" rather than "make disciples".
Why---? Because it is up to The Holy Spirit to make disciples,,,not us.

I think along the same lines, that this is the nature of the King James Bible wisdom on the verse.

As a little sidenote, note how Bible books end on a positive note, and often with an 'amen'. This is one of the many infallible proofs for the ending of Mark against the insipid idea that Mark ends with the woman afraid on verse 8.

Yesterday I was reading at the excellent William Grady book 'Final Authority' (1993) and he mentions that point in his chapter. A very, very solid book (yesterday I read the first 60 pages, now I am a bit more familiar with the material than when I first read it about a decade ago). Since it is a classic I would also use it as an example of the strength and pizazz of King James Bible writings in recent years long before the Riplinger surge (whatever one's view of the Gail Riplinger writings, some doofus opponents try to write as if the King James Bible defense was dormant and quiescent before her writings ). There are many other books and writings and speakers to reference, however William Grady's book has a classic sense, a good style, a type of breezy thoroughness. Perhaps my view is biased a bit as it was my 2nd KJB book; and the first wide-ranging one.

Oh, some King James Bibles have the following note on Matthew 28:19.

teach...: or, make disciples, or, Christians of all nations

However this is not in the 1611 online, a rare case in my experience, generally the footnotes in e.g. crosswalk.com are in the 1611 edition.
http://dewey.library.upenn.edu/sceti...ePosition=1255

So I would like to find out when that margin note was first placed. An early edition, or Scrivener, or something else ?

The King James Bible translates maqhteusate (5657) as "teach" and instruct in a few places. Here are the four usages.

Matthew 13:52
Then said he unto them,
Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven
is like unto a man that is an householder,
which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.

Matthew 27:57
When the even was come,
there came a rich man of Arimathaea, named Joseph,
who also himself was Jesus' disciple:

Matthew 28:19
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

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

Thus it is easy to see that "disciple" while in the range of meaning of the word would not work well at all (e.g. Acts 14:21) in some verses and is far from being a primary and necessary translation. The NT refers to disciples of Jesus, of John, and even of the Pharisees, an existing relationship, afaik we never see the phrase of "making disciples" and PB1789 gives a reasonable explanation as to why that would be particularly out-of-joint in Matthew 28:19.

Oh, there may also be the question of the missing verb to "make" disciples (ok, the verb doing double-duty as a verb and noun) however on that one I will happily defer to any Greek-savvy folks.

And it is possible that the Latin reflects the "teaching" concept more directly, as that is the simple translation of docete, and Jerome speaks similarly (through the Aquinas section, I haven't primary sourced this one) :

Jerome:
Observe the order of these injunctions. He bids the Apostles first to teach all nations, then to wash them with the sacrament of faith, and after faith and baptism then to teach them what things they ought to observe; “Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.”

Also in synch is the John Calvin commentary.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calc...ml#ii.li-p18.1

Note that some translators and commentators have convert or preach instead of teach.

There are many interesting early church writer references, I used to look them up to refute the really dumb assertion that the original Matthew 28:19 did not have "of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" from Conybeare and Ploughman and some moderns. In fact that phrase is very possibly the single best-attested phrase in the whole Bible in early church writings. And is virtually 100% in MS and version consistency.

Shalom,
Steven

Originally Posted by PB1789

I think that it should read "teach" rather than "make disciples".

Why---? Because it is up to The Holy Spirit to make disciples,,,not us.

It was Jesus who made the distinction. Perhaps He should have checked with the Holy Spirit?

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

[Brother Tim]

AgainstHeresies,
1. As always, Scripture interprets Scripture. Mark 16:15 says, "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." (emphasis mine)
Our duty is to "teach" (Matthew) / "preach" (Mark). We now have a clear message. "Make disciples" is not only nonexistent in the text, but it distorts our duty.

2. You said, "It was Jesus who made the distinction. Perhaps He should have checked with the Holy Spirit? " Not only is your humor unappreciated, for joking about the LORD Jesus or the Holy Spirit is tasteless at best and blasphemy at worst, but in frank reality it was the Holy Ghost who gave us the wording of which you complain.

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

AgainstHeresies,
1. As always, Scripture interprets Scripture. Mark 16:15 says, "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." (emphasis mine)
Our duty is to "teach" (Matthew) / "preach" (Mark). We now have a clear message. "Make disciples" is not only nonexistent in the text, but it distorts our duty.

2. You said, "It was Jesus who made the distinction. Perhaps He should have checked with the Holy Spirit? " Not only is your humor unappreciated, for joking about the LORD Jesus or the Holy Spirit is tasteless at best and blasphemy at worst, but in frank reality it was the Holy Ghost who gave us the wording of which you complain.

Okay. So your saying the Holy Spirit in Greek wanted it to be “Μαθητευσατε / διδασκοντε” and in English wanted it to be “teach / teach” because our going, baptizing, and teaching (the three participles modified by the Greek Word in the imperative form meaning “make disciples”) has nothing to do with making disciples?

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

(Note: Good exegesis may help in sermon preparation)

Of course God is the one who saves and sanctifies but He uses means to accomplish His purpose. 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.

Grace be with you all.

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by againstheresies

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

I think the reason for this is because most of us don't need any greek scholars (nicholatians?) to tell us how the Holy Bible should read. If we have questions about what the Scriptures say, we grab the good ol' book, and read the Word of our God for ourselves. But I'm sure this is not the answer you were hoping for. Have fun with the greek againstheresies, as for me and my house (KJB Believers), our authority on all matters of faith and practice is the King James Bible.

for Jesus' sake,
Stephen

[PB1789]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

AgainstHeresies,
1. As always, Scripture interprets Scripture. Mark 16:15 says, "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." (emphasis mine)
Our duty is to "teach" (Matthew) / "preach" (Mark). We now have a clear message. "Make disciples" is not only nonexistent in the text, but it distorts our duty.

2. You said, "It was Jesus who made the distinction. Perhaps He should have checked with the Holy Spirit? " Not only is your humor unappreciated, for joking about the LORD Jesus or the Holy Spirit is tasteless at best and blasphemy at worst, but in frank reality it was the Holy Ghost who gave us the wording of which you complain.

Brother Tim:--- Bingo! Ditto! Your reply shown above in #2 was "Nail-on-the-Head". It does seem somewhat odd that someone who calls himself "Againstheresies" could post that stuff... But, of course he uses the NK as his version here on an Authorized Version website...

[Biblestudent]

When it comes to better "translations", some thought came to my mind:

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. But if anyone thinks they know how a word ought to be translated better than the KJV translators, I guess no one says he is a better translator than the Holy Spirit.

(Just some thoughts.)