JWs did kind of have the threefold baptismal Father, Son, and “spirit directed organisation”, although I think they’ve dropped that now?
Watchtower would never be so radical as to say so, but personally I doubt that the baptismal formula at the end of Matthew is original. Why? Because it’s not found elsewhere in connection with baptism in the NT. Throughout Acts baptism is simply into the name of Jesus, no mention of three. It’s the kind of addition that would be made as the church moved in a Trinitarian direction. The medieval Hebrew version of Matthew omits it. I don’t know how early the church fathers begin citing it. That would be interesting to know. And aqwabot123, I know this isn’t proof and you can provide a 2000 word refutation of the idea in 30 seconds. I’m saying it’s possibly an addition to the text, not definitely. There are no major variants that omit the phrase, as far as I know.