Subject: Eusebius's quotation of Matt 28:19 (follow up)

From: "William L. Petersen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 11:11:17 -0400

A follow-up on Large's question, with the exact reference (at end of post):

>>On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, RONALD DAVID LARGE wrote:
>
>>>  	2) Conybeare wrote of Eusebius' citations of Matthew 28:19 (eighteen in
>>> all) in works between 300-336 A.D.,and invariably found them to be in the
>>> following form, "Go ye and make disciples of all nations, IN MY NAME,
>>> teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I have commanded you.".
>>> Is anyone intimate with the evidence here? Does Patristic research shed any
>>> light on this "variant" ?
>>> 
>>> Thoughts.... comments?
>>> Thanks in advance, and God bless...
>>> David Large
>>>
>
>
>George Howard--who is on this list--wrote an article on Matt 28:19 some
>years ago;  my recollection is that it appeared in JBL (I will check
>tomorrow in the office;  Prof. Howard may be able to answer directly...).
>Also: Howard's "Hebrew Matthew" (Shem-Tob's, actually...) has a *most*
>interesting end to Matt--which runs along the lines of Eusebius's.
>
>It seems clear on "internal" criteria (internal within the NT, that is...)
>that Matt 28:19 is a later addition, for otherwise the actions of Peter in
>Acts 10-11 and Paul's contratemps with the "pillars" in Jerusalem (James,
>Cephas, and John are named in Gal. 2:9;  Peter is, indirectly, under the
>same stricture in Gal. 2:8) are incomprehensible.
>
>--Petersen, Penn State Univ.
>

The article is HThR (not JBL), and the reference is:

G. Howard, "A Note on the Short Ending of Matthew," HThR 81 (1988), 117-120.

The pagination may be only partial, as I have drawn the reference from a
footnote in Howard's latest edition of Shem-Tob (p. 192, n. 30).

Howard also lists an article by F.C. Conybeare, "The Eusebian Form of the
Text Matt. 28, 19," in ZNW 2 (1901), 275-288.  Although often too
enthusiastic about his (MS) discoveries, Conybeare's knowledge of early
Chrisitan lit was unrivaled.

Years ago I did a thorough investigation of the Judaic-Christian, patristic
(pre-Eusebius), and Diatessaronic witnesses, on the hunch that such a
variant--which is quite clearly sympathetic to Judaic-Christians--should
show up somewhere else in this matrix of sources.  I drilled a dry hole, for
no evidence showed up.  I suspect that the orthodox corrupters did their
work *very* thoroughly...just as they did with the Gospel of the
Hebrews/Ebionites/Nazoraeans, and even Thomas....

--Petersen, Penn State Univ.