Page 52 - Countering Trinitarian Arguments With Historical Reference

The Life of Jesus Critically Examined, By David Friedrich Strauss, page 302, states: "...and after his resurrection, according to the synoptists, [Gospels] he [Jesus] gave the disciples the command, Go ye, and teach all nations, baptizing them, etc. (Matt. xxviii. 19; Mark xvi. 15; Luke xxiv. 47); i.e. go to them with the offer of the Messiah's kingdom, even though they may not beforehand have become Jews. Not only, however, do the disciples, after the Pentecost, neglect to execute this command, but when a case is thrust on them which offers them an opportunity for compliance with it, they act as if they were altogether ignorant that such a (Trinitarian) direction had been given by Jesus (Acts x., xi)."
The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible Vol. 4, 1962. Page 711 Under “Trinity.” “Cf. the Trinitarian baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 (echoed in [the spurious non- inspired Apocryphal] Did. 7:1), which may have replaced the earlier [original Biblical] formula “into the name of the Lord Jesus” for purposes of the Gentile mission.”
Hagner, D. A. 1998. Word Biblical Commentary : Matthew 14-28 (electronic ed.). Logos Library System; Word Biblical Commentary. Vol. 33B (Mt 28:20). Word, Incorporated:
“The threefold name (at most only an incipient trinitarianism) in which the baptism was to be performed, on the other hand, seems clearly to be a liturgical expansion of the evangelist consonant with the practice of his day (thus Hubbard; cf. Did. 7.1). There is a good possibility that in its original form, as witnessed by the ante-Nicene Eusebian form, the text read "make disciples in my name" (see Conybeare). This shorter reading preserves the symmetrical rhythm of the passage, whereas the triadic formula fits awkwardly into the structure as one might expect if it were an interpolation (see H. B. Green; cf. Howard; Hill [IBS 8 (1986) 54-63], on the other hand, argues for a concentric design with the triadic formula at its center). It is Kosmala, however, who has argued most effectively for the shorter reading, pointing to the central importance of the "name of Jesus" in early Christian preaching, the early practice of baptism in the name of Jesus, and the singular "in his name" with reference to the hope of the Gentiles in Isa 42:4b, quoted by Matthew in 12:18-21. As Carson rightly notes of our passage: "There is no evidence we have Jesus' ipsissima verba [actual or exact words] here" (598). The narrative of Acts notes the use of the name only of "Jesus Christ" in baptism (Acts 2:38; 8:16 10:48; 19:5; cf. Rom 6:3; Gal 3:27) or simply "the Lord Jesus" (tou kuriou Iesou; Acts 8:16; 19:5). . . . Schaberg's theory that the triadic formula goes back to the triad in Dan 7 (Ancient of Days, one like a son of man, and angels) remains an improbable speculation.”
Shepherd of Hermas a non-inspired Catholic writing (dated around 120 AD), it notes,
"Before man bears the name of the Son of God, [Jesus] he is dead, but when he has received the seal [through baptism], he lays aside mortality and receives life." It also states, "They are such as have heard the word and were willing to be baptized in the name of the Lord."-I Hermas 1:76 see also III Hermas 9:239. Again we are faced with the historical fact it is obvious that the Catholic Church baptized in the Name of Jesus
51