Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

Authored By  :
Published On :
Last Updated :

NOTE: This article or series has not been updated recently. As such, it may possibly contain some outdated information, and/or ideas and beliefs which I no longer embrace, or which have changed to some degree.



While I have used the common phrase the "Great Apostasy" to
refer to the three-hundred-year period that followed the age
of Christ and the First Apostles, we truly need to wonder if
this period of spiritual darkness really ended with the First
Council of Nicaea -- as Roman Catholics and their associated
churches seem to imply -- or if in fact it was actually made
worse; and even continues until this very day. Furthermore,
we must also ask ourselves if it was really the true Church,
that is, the one that was established by Jesus Christ and His
First Apostles, which arose to such great power and influence
during the Fourth Century, under the protection of the Roman
emperors, or if it was in fact something else; that is, an
impostor church which, contrary to the teachings of Christ,
seriously compromised with the world.

While Christianity, or perhaps more correctly stated, what
the so-called Fourth Century "Church Fathers" claimed to be
Christianity, became a legally recognized religion with the
313 AD signing of the Edict of Milan by emperors Constantine
and Lucinius, it was not until almost seventy years later,
in 380 AD, and during the reign of Emperor Theodosius, that
it came into full power as the only legitimate religion of
the entire Roman Empire. This development came about in the
following manner:

Through a series of military and political maneuvers -- which
you can study elsewhere -- Theodosius I was able to unite the
eastern and western portions of the Roman Empire for a time.
Following in the footsteps of his predecessors, Constantine I
and Lucinius, he promoted a brand of Christianity referred to
as "Nicene Christianity", or "Nicene Trinitarianism", within
the empire. In 380, shortly after arriving in Constantinople,
which was the eastern capital of the Roman Empire, he, along
with co-emperors Valentinian II and Gratian, who ruled in the
western half of the empire, issued an edict that decreed that
"Catholic Christianity", or "Nicene Christianity", which was
the faith of the bishops of Rome and Alexandria, was now the
only legitimate imperial religion. This decree in effect put
an end to state support for the traditional pagan religion
of the empire. This decree stated:

----- Begin Quote -----

It is our desire that all the various nations which are
subject to our Clemency and Moderation, should continue to
the profession of that religion which was delivered to the
Romans by the divine Apostle Peter, as it has been preserved
by faithful tradition and which is now professed by the
Pontiff Damasus and by Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, a man of
apostolic holiness. According to the apostolic teaching and
the doctrine of the Gospel, let us believe the one deity of
the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, in equal majesty and
in a holy Trinity. We authorize the followers of this law to
assume the title of Catholic Christians; but as for the
others, since, in our judgment they are foolish madmen, we
decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious name
of heretics, and shall not presume to give to their
conventicles the name of churches. They will suffer in the
first place the chastisement of the divine condemnation and
in the second the punishment of our authority which in
accordance with the will of Heaven shall decide to inflict.

----- End Quote -----

A year later, in 381 AD, Theodosius convoked an ecumenical
council at Constantinople, which he used to impose the new
"Nicene Orthodoxy" all across the empire. One result of this
council was that the Holy Ghost was officially established as
the third person of the so-called "Holy Trinity". From that
time until his death in 395 AD, Theodosius I worked to stamp
out both the remnants of Arianism, as well as all forms of
paganism, throughout the Roman Empire. Thus we witness the
ungodly marriage of the legal and military might of Rome to
a corrupt version of our Christian faith. In coming years
and centuries, this Roman church would use its might to kill
millions of people who refused to recognize it as the "one
true faith", and the so-called "Kingdom of God on Earth",
as it clearly viewed itself during the Byzantine period.

Exactly which church is this? What ecclesiastical power swept
across all of Europe and the Middle East as a result of the
compromise with the oppressive, iron-fisted Roman government?
Was it a church which preached God's Love and Salvation, or
was it one that relied upon persecution, oppression, torture,
war and death, in order to force the masses to adhere to its
erroneous, heretical doctrines?

As is now clearly evident, and as I likewise explain in some
of the aforementioned articles, what we in fact see in these
historic events, is the birth of a corrupt form of worldly,
organized Christianity, under the banner of what eventually
became known as the Roman Catholic Church. As a result of the
unholy marriage between the might of Rome and these misguided
power-hungry, so-called "Church Fathers", which was in direct
contradiction to the teachings of Jesus Christ and His first
Apostles, who all clearly taught us to remain separate from
the world, and to eschew worldly power and riches, the bishop
of Rome eventually received the title of "Pope", which finds
its origin in the Greek word "pappas". Furthermore, it should
be noted that the "Great Apostasy" never really ended, for it
is this Roman church which introduced such false doctrines as
the following to the world, and continues to defend them:

1. Immaculate Conception - Claims that Mary, the mother
of Jesus, was born without sin. This is utterly false.
See Romans 3:23, Psalm 51:5 and related verses.

2. Co-Redemptress/Mediatrix - This doctrine claims that
Mary, the mother of Jesus, is an equal co-redeemer, and
mediator, with Christ. This is utterly false. Please see
John 14:6, 1 Timothy 2:15, Act 4:12 and related verses.

3. Mary, the mother of God - Claims that Mary, the mother
of Jesus, is the mother of God. This doctrine is utterly
false, because God has no beginning or end, and Jesus is
the Son of God, and not the same as God the Father.

4. The Assumption - Claims that Mary, the mother of
Jesus, rose bodily to Heaven. This is utterly false.
There is no record of this event anywhere in the Bible.

5. Infallibility of the Pope - This is utterly false
because all men are born in sin with a corrupt, imperfect
nature, and make mistakes.

6. Transubstantiation - Claims that the eucharist bread
and wine is transformed into the actual Flesh and Blood
of Christ. This is utterly false, is not found in the
Bible, and basically teaches cannibalism, which is
prohibited in the Bible.

7. Water baptism is necessary for Salvation - This is
utterly false, as this series, and the Bible, clearly
reveal.

8. Doctrine of the Holy Trinity - This is utterly false,
as this series, other articles, and the Bible clearly
point out.

9. Salvation is possible without Christ - This is utterly
false, as this series, other articles, and the Bible,
clearly point out.

10. Praying to Mary and the Saints - This is an utterly
false practice. Please see 1 Timothy 2:15.

For his part, Eusebius was alarmed and upset by the dangerous
changes which were foolishly being made to the true Gospel of
Jesus Christ, and the writings of the Apostles and he clearly
expressed his displeasure with the direction that the Church
was taking. Sadly, in spite of the fact that he realized that
some of the Biblical text was being altered and manipulated,
such as Matthew 28:19, according to online sources, after he
was threatened with excommunication, Eusebius chose to submit
himself, and even contributed to the Nicene Creed. Eusebius
was, after all, a Trinitarian.

At this point, perhaps you may be wondering why we don't just
examine the original Gospel manuscripts that were written by
the First Apostles, so that we can resolve this controversial
issue, regarding Matthew 28:19, once and for all. Sadly, the
simple answer is that all of the original manuscripts ceased
to exist many centuries ago. In fact, even by Eusebius' time,
none, or probably very few of them, were still in existence.
We need to remember that over two hundred years had gone by
since the last Original Apostle had died. All that remained
for the most part were copies of copies of their writings,
and other fragments. This reality is due primarily to three
specific reasons. The first of these reasons is obviously the
passage of time. Physical documents, regardless of how well
they are composed and preserved, will eventually decay. The
second reason is the severe persecution which First Century
Christians suffered under the Jewish religious Elders. This
persecution began with the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ.

While the actual Crucifixion of Christ was carried out by
members of the Roman government, it is important to realize
that the Jewish Elders were the real instigators behind this
evil deed. They were intent on making sure that it happened,
no matter the cost to themselves. In fact, in their state of
delusion, they thought that they were saving themselves by
murdering Jesus. The complicity of the Jews in the murder of
our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is evident by verses such as
the following, where we see them plotting against Jesus:

"Then assembled together the CHIEF PRIESTS, AND THE SCRIBES,
and the ELDERS OF THE PEOPLE, unto the palace of the high
priest, who was called Caiaphas, And consulted that they
might TAKE JESUS BY SUBTILTY, AND KILL HIM. But they said,
Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the
people."
Matthew 26:3-5, KJV

"Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is
called the Passover. And the CHIEF PRIESTS AND SCRIBES
SOUGHT HOW THEY MIGHT KILL HIM; for they feared the people."
Luke 22:1-2, KJV

"And therefore did the JEWS PERSECUTE JESUS, AND SOUGHT TO
SLAY HIM, because he had done these things on the sabbath
day. But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto,
and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him,
because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also
that God was his Father, making himself equal with God."
John 5:16-18, KJV

"After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would
not walk in Jewry, because the JEWS SOUGHT TO KILL HIM . . .
Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth
the law? WHY GO YE ABOUT TO KILL ME? The people answered and
said, Thou hast a devil: who GOETH ABOUT TO KILL THEE? . . .
Then said some of them of Jerusalem, IS NOT THIS HE, WHOM
THEY SEEK TO KILL?"
John 7:1, 19-20, 25, KJV

"I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but YE SEEK TO KILL ME,
because my word hath no place in you. I speak that which I
have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen
with your father. They answered and said unto him, Abraham
is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's
children, ye would do the works of Abraham. But now YE SEEK
TO KILL ME, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have
heard of God: this did not Abraham. Ye do the deeds of your
father. Then said they to him, We be not born of
fornication; we have one Father, even God. Jesus said unto
them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I
proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself,
but he sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? even
because ye cannot hear my word. Ye are of your father the
devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a
murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth,
because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he
speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of
it." John 8:37-44, KJV

"Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me?
knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have
power to release thee? Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no
power at all against me, except it were given thee from
above: therefore HE THAT DELIVERED ME UNTO THEE HATH THE
GREATER SIN. And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release
him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man
go, thou art not Caesar's friend: whosoever maketh himself a
king speaketh against Caesar."
John 19:10-12, KJV

". . . My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were
of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should
not be DELIVERED TO THE JEWS: but now is my kingdom not from
hence."
John 18:36b, KJV

"And when they had brought them, they set them before the
council: and the high priest asked them, Saying, Did not we
straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name?
and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine,
and intend to bring this man's blood upon us. Then Peter and
the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God
rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus,
WHOM YE SLEW AND HANGED ON A TREE."
Acts 5:27-30, KJV

Not only did the Jewish religious leaders murder Jesus, but
as we also learn from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles,
and also from the Epistles, they then proceeded to persecute
and kill the Apostles and Disciples as well. Furthermore, as
I explain in other articles, we know that the Jewish Elders
sent spies to infiltrate and divide the First Century Church,
and also falsified and distributed many documents, in order
to try to sow doctrinal confusion amongst the brethren. It's
for this reason that the Apostles issued so many warnings
regarding false doctrines, as we saw earlier.

The third main reason why the original manuscripts no longer
exist, is because Rome eventually tired of both the Jews, and
the Christians, and a wave of persecution began against both.
In the case of Jewish rebellion, Rome's solution was rather
brutal, direct and swift; and that was the total destruction
of Jerusalem in the year 70 AD. However, in the case of the
Christians, Roman persecution against them didn't reach its
height until the opening years of the Fourth Century, during
the reign of Emperor Diocletian.

In his Fourth Century work entitled "Historia Ecclesiae" in
Greek, or "Church History" in English, which chronicles the
development of the early Christian Church from the time of
Jesus Christ and the First Apostles in the First Century, up
until his own time, in books seven and eight, Eusebius makes
mention of the terrible destruction of Christian literature
which was occurring at the time. In Book Eight of this ten-
book work, he writes the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

"I saw with mine own eyes the houses of prayer thrown down
and razzed to their foundations, and the inspired and sacred
Scriptures consigned to the fire in the open market place"
H.E. viii 2

----- End Quote -----

This destruction of the holy manuscripts must have occurred
throughout the Roman Empire, in an attempt to wipe out the
Christian faith. In that same work, Eusebius also points to
the utter destruction of Jerusalem by Roman general, Titus,
who was the son of the then reigning emperor, Vespasian, as
being God's judgment against the Jews, due to their hand in
killing Jesus. He writes:

----- Begin Quote -----

". . . that from that time seditions and wars and mischievous
plots followed each other in quick succession, and never
ceased in the city and in all Judea until finally the siege
of Vespasian overwhelmed them. Thus the divine vengeance
overtook the Jews for the crimes which they dared to commit
against Christ."

----- End Quote -----

In light of the fact that so many original texts, as written
by the Apostles, or at least copies of those manuscripts were
destroyed by Diocletian, assuming that the original texts had
actually perished long before that time, you may be wondering
how it is that we even possess our English Bible today. Where
did it originate, and who is responsible for its compilation?
In partial response to this important question, in the 1880
Variorum Bible, noted British Bible scholar, and also Regius
Professor of Divinity at the University of Cambridge, William
Barclay Swete, likewise mentions in the Bible helps section,
entitled "Aids To The Student", that Emperor Diocletian was
behind the vast destruction of religious texts at that time.
He also explains that it was a result of some of those texts
nevertheless surviving, as well as through other means, that
we have been blessed with our Bible today. Professor Swete
wrote in part:

----- Begin Quote -----

"Diocletian in 303 AD ordered all the sacred books to be
burnt . . . but enough survived to transmit the text."

"The text of the New Testament rest upon the combined
testimony of the streams of documentary evidence - extant
Mss. of the Greek original, ancient versions, and 'patristic'
quotations, i.e. passages cited by a succession of ancient
Christian writers known as 'The Fathers'."

"The autographs of the New Testament Scriptures were probably
lost within a few years after they were written. No early
Christian writer appeals to them as still existing . . . men
could not anticipate their importance to posterity."

"So extensive are the quotations of the New Testament in the
Greek and Latin Christian writers of the first five centuries
that it would have been possible, in the event of all the
MSS. of the Cannon having perished, to recover nearly the
whole of the text from this source alone . . ."

----- End Quote -----

It was probably later copies of those surviving Greek texts,
which were then used by noted Dutch scholar and theologian,
Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, who in 1516, with the help
of printer, and fellow Reformer, John Froben, published the
very first non-Latin Vulgate version of the Bible.

As a matter of historical fact, the Latin Vulgate Bible was
the creation of the Roman Catholic Church. The Reformers did
not trust the Latin Vulgate Bible, and viewed it as being a
corrupt version of the Holy Scriptures, because it was based
upon several corrupt texts known as the Codex Sinaiticus, the
Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Alexandrinus. For example, in
the Codex Vaticanus, next to the verse Hebrews 1:3, there is
a marginal note, written in the Greek language, apparently by
one of the scribes, which states "Fool and knave, can't you
leave the old reading alone and not alter it!". There is also
considerable controversy surrounding the Codex Sinaiticus and
one Constantin von Tischendorf, who at the behest of the Tsar
(or Czar), Alexander II of Russia, made several visits over a
period of years to the Monastery of Saint Catherine, in order
to search for old manuscripts. This monastery is located at
the base of Mount Sinai in Egypt. One highly debated story
tells of how Tischendorf found parts of the Codex Sinaiticus
thrown in a trash bin, demonstrating that it was viewed as
worthless garbage.

The Latin Vulgate Bible was based in large part upon the work
of Fourth Century priest and apologist, Jerome, who in 382 AD
was commissioned by Pope Damasus I to revise the older Latin
translations. Rather than use the Septuagint -- or LXX which
was a popular Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible which was
made by Jews prior to the time of Jesus -- as the foundation
for his translation of the Old Testament, Jerome chose to use
the Masoretic Text, which is the Hebrew text of the Tanakh or
Jewish Bible. It should also be noted that, as with the other
codices, over the centuries, there has been some controversy
surrounding the accuracy of the Septuagint. At any rate, it's
also important to mention that Jerome began his work shortly
after Roman Catholicism was declared by Theodosius I to be
the official religion of the Roman Empire. It is no surprise
then that the Latin Vulgate version of the Bible was compiled
in such a way so as to support the false doctrines of the
Roman Catholic Church; which casts even more doubt upon the
true form of Matthew 28:19.

Desiderius Erasmus, on the other hand, compiled his Greek New
Testament from six or seven partial New Testament manuscripts
which were available to him at the time. Erasmus' translation
has become known as the "Textus Receptus", or the "Received
Text". It's upon this Sixteenth Century text that the beloved
Authorized King James Version of the Bible is based. If you
are interested in taking a more in-depth look at the history
behind the Authorized King James Version of the Bible, please
consider reading my two-part article entitled "History Of The
Authorized King James Bible", as well as the article "The
Book Of Enoch: Truth Or Heresy?".

But returning to the controversy surrounding Matthew 28:19,
personally, I have to agree with Eusebius, and lean towards
the belief that the verse may in fact contain spurious text
for several reasons. From my own studies of the Bible during
the past forty years, it is quite evident to me that Jesus
even speaking in this manner, by referring to the "trinity",
is totally out of sync with all of the other things that we
find Him saying in the Gospels. Nowhere else does the Lord
say "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost". What He does say numerous times is exactly what
Eusebius writes in his version of the verse; that is, "in my
name". In fact, a number of years ago, I created a KJV verse
list which emphasizes this exact phrase. Please consider the
following:

"And whoso shall receive one such little child IN MY NAME
receiveth me."
Matthew 18:5, KJV

"For where two or three are gathered together IN MY NAME,
there am I in the midst of them."
Matthew 18:20, KJV

"But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which
shall do a miracle IN MY NAME, that can lightly speak evil
of me."
Mark 9:39, KJV

"For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink IN MY
NAME, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he
shall not lose his reward."
Mark 9:41, KJV

"And these signs shall follow them that believe; IN MY NAME
shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new
tongues;"
Mark 16:17, KJV

"And said unto them, Whosoever shall receive this child IN
MY NAME receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me
receiveth him that sent me: for he that is least among you
all, the same shall be great."
Luke 9:48, KJV

"And whatsoever ye shall ask IN MY NAME, that will I do,
that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask
any thing IN MY NAME, I will do it."
John 14:13-14, KJV

"But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father
will send IN MY NAME, he shall teach you all things, and
bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said
unto you."
John 14:26, KJV

"Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained
you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your
fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the
Father IN MY NAME, he may give it you."
John 15:16, KJV

"And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I
say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father IN MY NAME,
he will give it you. Hitherto have ye asked nothing IN MY
NAME: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be full.
These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the
time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in
proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father. At
that day ye shall ask IN MY NAME: and I say not unto you,
that I will pray the Father for you:"
John 16:23-26, KJV

So why would Jesus say "In my name" so many times, and then
just suddenly turn around and say something so different? It
just doesn't make sense, and clearly points to manipulation,
and corruption, of the Scriptures by someone with an agenda.
The triune phrase sticks out as something unusual, which is
totally out of place, and which does not flow with the rest
of Jesus' comments in the Gospels.

This is not the only reason why I embrace Eusebius' version
of Matthew 28:19. Consider this question: If it is true that
following His Resurrection, Jesus commanded His Apostles to
baptize "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of
the Holy Ghost", and if the Apostles truly respected Jesus'
Power, and the Authority of His word, why did they not do as
He had supposedly told them to do? As Jesus clearly states
in Luke 6:46:

"And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which
I say?"
Luke 6:46, KJV

In other words, just as we don't find the triune phrase being
used anywhere else in the four Gospels, neither do we find it
being mentioned or used one single time in the Book of Acts,
or anywhere in the Epistles, or in the Apocalypse. The triune
phrase is only found this one time in Matthew 28:19, and that
makes it extremely suspect in my view, and points to it being
spurious text. The fact of the matter is that the 1st Century
Apostles, who had personally known the Lord, knew that He had
explicitly told them on many occasions to do things in His
Name, and to ask for things in His Name; and so that is what
they did. In answer to Luke 6:46 above, they in fact did do
the things that He commanded them to do. They obeyed Jesus to
the letter. They were fully aware of the Power that resides
in the Name of Jesus Christ, as we can clearly see by the
following verses:

"Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a
name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus
every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in
earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue
should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of
God the Father."
Philippians 2:9-11, KJV

"Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none
other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be
saved."
Acts 4:12, KJV

"But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is
the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have
life through his name."
John 20:31, KJV

"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men,
the man Christ Jesus;"
1 Timothy 2:5, KJV

In looking at the Book of Acts, we find many examples where
the First Century Apostles always utilized the phrase "in the
name of Jesus", or close derivatives thereof, and never once
used the triune phrase "in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost". If there's any truth at all to
the claim that Jesus Christ stated Mt. 28:19 as the baptismal
regenerationists and the Trinitarians like to insist, would
that not mean that the Apostles were in direct disobedience
to the Lord's order? The only reason why they would not use
this phrase, is because Jesus never once told them to use it.
So I lean strongly towards the belief that the triune phrase
was inserted into Matthew 28:19 long after all of the First
Apostles were dead.

Please go to part seven for the continuation of this series.

⇒ Go To The Next Part . . .

Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

---

---

Please avail yourself of other areas of the Bill's Bible Basics website. There are many treasures for you to discover.