Watchtower & Trinity

In the late nineteenth century, Charles Taze Russell became the founder of the Watchtower movement, an organization better known as the Jehovah's Witnesses. Headquartered in Brooklyn, New York, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society distributes its literature in more than one hundred languages and has congregations in over two hundred lands according to their "2000 Worldwide Status Report."[1] In addition, this report boasts that their organization has over 91,000 congregations with 6 million peak witnesses and that they conduct an average of 4.7 million Bible studies with over 1.1 billion hours of preaching to their credit. Given their growing worldwide influence, this movement is of great concern to evangelical Christians, as Watchtower theology represents a radical departure from the historic Christian faith. These various unorthodox beliefs espoused by the Watchtower organization have qualified them to be categorized as a "non-Christian cult." A few of these peculiar doctrines are as follows: a denial of the deity of Christ and reducing him to mere human status as he was "certainly not the supreme Almighty in human flesh,"[2] a rejection of the personhood of the Holy Spirit by claiming "it is not a person, but God's active force,"[3] and a condemnation of the Biblical doctrine of salvation by grace through faith apart from works. According to TheWatchtower, in order for a person "to receive life…we must identify that organization and serve God as part of it."[4] Lastly, the denial of the physical bodily resurrection of Christ by claiming Jesus was "…raised from the grave, not a human…but a spirit."[5]

The publication then attempts to interpret the word "wisdom" in the eighth chapter of Proverbs as being a figure of speech for Jesus "as a spirit creature prior to his human existence."[27] The Watchtower's New World Translation Bible translates from Proverbs, "Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth."[28] According to the article, this correlates with Proverbs 8:30 since "As 'Wisdom' in his prehuman existence, Jesus…was 'by his [God's] side, a master craftsman."'[29]

Upon examination of the context of this passage, it is best to ascribe to it the usage of "personification" in its description of "wisdom" rather than viewing it as a direct reference to the person of Jesus Christ. Personification is often used in Scripture as a figure of speech or as a poetic expression in order to give humanlike qualities to abstract ideas or concepts. It should be noted that "personification" is used throughout the entire first nine chapters of Proverbs when describing the subject of wisdom. In addition, there is nothing in the content of the eighth chapter that would indicate that "wisdom" should be interpreted any differently than the other eight chapters. If the Watchtower were to be consistent in its literal interpretation of "wisdom" being as a reference to Jesus, then we must deduce that Jesus is literally a woman who "crieth upon the highest place of the city" (Proverbs 9:3 KJV) and that the Lord "layeth up sound wisdom (the woman Jesus) for the righteous" (Proverbs 2:7). Secondly, the statement in Proverbs, "The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way" (8:22 KJV) is describing wisdom's role in creation. The Hebrew word for possessed can mean "brought forth" or "created." As Ron Rhodes explains, "Proverbs 8:22,23 is speaking metaphorically of God's eternal wisdom and how it was "brought forth" to take part in the creation of the universe."[30] It should also be noted that Melchizidek used this same word in Genesis 14:19 showing God as the "possessor" or "creator" of the universe. Therefore, wisdom is an eternal attribute of God and it had a beginning only in the sense that it was on display during the beginning of God's creation.

Next, the Watchtower attempts to discredit the deity of Christ by asking the leading question, "Could God be Tempted?" Reflecting on the Lord's temptation in the desert, the article reasons that "the temptation of Jesus would make sense only if he (Jesus) was, not God, but a separate individual who had his own free will…such as an angel or a human."[31] Further, it is argued, that if Jesus is God, and scripture reveals God cannot sin, then it would have been impossible for Jesus to have been tempted. Therefore, Jesus must not be God.

The problem with this argument is that it abuses the ambiguity of the person of Jesus. The Jehovah's Witnesses fail to recognize that Jesus has two separate natures: his divine nature and his human nature. Consequently, whenever a question is asked regarding Jesus, it needs to be examined in light of his two separate natures. As Norman Geisler clarifies, "Did Christ get hungry? In his divine nature, no; in his human nature, yes…did he get tired? As God no; as human, yes…Could Jesus sin? The answer is the same: as God, no; as man, yes (but he didn't)…. While he never sinned, he was really tempted and it was possible for him to sin. Otherwise, his temptation would have been a charade."[32] The human nature of Jesus has all the attributes of humanity while having none of the attributes of divinity. TheWatchtower has proven itself guilty of theologically commingling Christ's divine nature along with his human nature. Jesus is the God-man who is fully God and fully man, one person with two separate natures. He does not have just one nature with a "milkshake" blending of humanity and divinity. Neither is Jesus half-man and half-God but rather he is one hundred percent man and one hundred percent God.

Of the many Watchtower heresies, two of the most foundational biblical doctrines which they vehemently attack are that of the Trinity and the deity of Christ. It is my purpose to examine the Jehovah's Witnesses' publication entitled, Should You Believe in the Trinity? In particular, I will analyze two sections, one of which is titled, "What Does the Bible Say About God and Jesus?" and the second section which is named, "Is God Always Superior to Jesus?" I will prove the Watchtower arguments to be without merit by showing that they are based on faulty premises and inaccurate Biblical interpretations.

"What Does the Bible Say About God and Jesus?"

The article begins its argument by asking this question: "If people were to read the Bible from cover to cover without any preconceived idea of a Trinity, would they arrive at such a concept on their own? Not at all." [6] It then declares that to an "impartial reader it is clear that God alone is the Almighty, the Creator, separate and distinct from anyone else and that Jesus, even in his prehuman existence, is also separate and distinct, a created being, subordinate to God."[7]

These opening criticisms are simply presuppositions in which conclusions are drawn before any objective scriptural evidence is examined. The writer assumes that all scholars and Bible students who believe in the Trinity must have preconceived ideas and are not drawing their conclusions from what Scripture actually conveys. On what basis of truth can the Watchtower make such a claim? It fails to give any evidence for such a radical statement. Secondly, while the Bible does conclude that God alone is the Almighty who is distinct from anyone else, the writer gives no evidence for his dogmatic claim that Jesus is not part of the eternal Godhead as the Second Person of the Trinity.

The publication under its sub-heading, "God is One, Not Three," begins by explaining that the Bible teaches monotheism. It quotes history professor, L.L. Paine as saying, "The Old Testament is strictly monotheistic. God is a personal being. The idea that a trinity is to be found there …is utterly without foundation."[8] The article then asks the question, "Was there any change from monotheism after Jesus came to earth?"[9] It concludes with a "no" answer and affirms that Jesus accepted and taught the Old Testament doctrine of monotheism which states, "Hear O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord" (Deuteronomy 6:4 KJV). Further, the writer states that the word "one" has no plural modifier to indicate that there is more than one individual. It is then noted that the "apostle Paul did not indicate any change in the nature of God either, even after Jesus came to earth."[10] The implication being that God is still "one" in nature or a monotheistic God. The article goes on to declare, "…throughout the Bible, God is spoken of as one person… as one undivided individual. As God states: 'I am Jehovah. That is my name; and to no one else shall I give my glory.' (Isaiah 42:8) 'I am Yahweh your God…You shall have no Gods except me'-Exodus 20:2 ,3, JB."[11] The writer then makes a closing argument that if God were actually three persons, then the God-inspired Bible writers would have made that abundantly clear in the Scripture. Instead, they claim that it is clearly demonstrated that God is one person.

By examining these arguments given by the Watchtower, it is evident that they have a faulty understanding of the Christian teaching of the Trinity. The argument given which implies that Trinitarians believe in something other than monotheism is without merit. The doctrine of the Trinity does not claim that there are "three Gods in one God" as Jehovah's Witnesses suggest. In addition, the Trinity is not the belief that there are "three persons in one person." These would be contradictory statements since it is impossible for God to be three in the same sense that He is one. Rather, the Trinity is the belief that God is one in nature and yet He is three in persons. God is one in essence or Being and within the unity of the one God there are three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. All three persons share the same nature and attributes. As apologist Norman Geisler explains, "By saying God has one essence and three persons it is meant that he has one 'What' and three 'Whos.' The three Whos (persons) each share the same What (essence). God is a unity of essence with a plurality of persons. Each person is different, yet they share a common nature."[12] The article's assertion that there is no concept of the Trinity in the Old Testament and that Deuteronomy 6:4 bears witness to this claim reveals the shallowness of the Watchtower interpretation. This Old Testament verse does not deny the Trinity, but rather it emphasizes the foundational doctrine that "God is one." It is important to understand that in the course of God's revelation of Himself to man, that He has done this through progressive revelation. To the Old Testament prophets, God established the truth of monotheism (the fact that there is only one true God). It is also crucial to allow Scripture to interpret Scripture in order to "pull out" the correct meaning of any particular passage. By interpreting Deuteronomy 6:4 in light of other passages (i.e. Matt. 28:19, 2 Cor. 13:14), we discover that this one God is triune in persons. The doctrine of the Trinity is not an invention by pagan thinkers as the Watchtower claims, but rather it is an honest conclusion about what Scripture actually reveals about the nature and personhood of God. While God did not reveal with full clarity the teaching of the Trinity until the New Testament, He did give various glimpses and shadows in the Old Testament of this doctrine. For example, in the Psalms we read, "The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool" (Psalm 110:1 KJV). This Psalm is a direct messianic reference to Jesus and it shows the plurality within the Godhead whereby God the Father grants God the Son the highest place of exaltation with royal and priestly honors. In addition, the psalmist writes, "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever…Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows (Psalm 45: 6,7KJV). In this passage, the words "Thy throne" reveal that it is a reference to the Messiah. Note that the Messiah is addressed as God and that it is "God, Your God" who anoints the Messiah. Hence, these verses show an interaction between God the Father and God the Son and reveal the plurality within the One God. In Genesis we also get a glimpse of what may be a reference to the composite unity of God. "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Gen. 1:26 KJV). So the Watchtower claim that there is no room for the doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament is without substance. In addition, the Hebrew word, "echod" (one), as used in Deuteronomy 6:4 can denote composite as well as solitary unity. As apologist Walter Martin explains, "…in many places throughout the Old Testament, and often it definitely denotes composite unity, which argues for the Trinity of the Deity (Jehovah). For example, …the Lord tells us that 'a man leave[s] his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh' (in Hebrew, boshur echod). Certainly this does not mean that in marriage a man and a wife become one person, but that they become one in the unity of their substance and are considered one in the eyes of God…. this is true unity; yet not solidarity, but composite unity."[13] The Watchtower's argument that the apostle Paul did not indicate any change in the nature of God crumbles when one understands that God has eternally been a triune deity and that He has enlightened man to this fact through progressive revelation of Himself. The publication then proceeds to hang itself by its argument that throughout the Bible, God is spoken of as only one Person. It attempts to support this doctrine by quoting Isaiah where it states, "I am Jehovah…and to no one else shall I give my own glory" (Isaiah 42:8 NWT). What the Watchtower fails to disclose is what Jesus requested of the Father in John's gospel: "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was" (John 17:5 KJV). This verse proves the very doctrine that the Watchtower so fervently tries to deny, the deity of Christ. Given that God will not share His glory with another, it is obvious that Jesus is making claims of deity by requesting that He be glorified with the glory that is God's alone. Thus, we witness a powerful proof text that both the Father and the Son are God, and hence a plurality within the oneness of God.

In another subsection entitled, "Not a Plural God," the article states that Jesus never referred to God as a deity of plural persons. Further, it claims that "nowhere in the Bible is anyone but Jehovah called 'Almighty'…neither Jesus or the holy spirit is ever called that, for Jehovah is supreme."[14]

The Watchtower fails to recognize that it was Jesus Himself who gave us one of the great Trinitarian formulas as He commanded us, "Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit…. lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" (Matthew 28:19,20 KJV). First, it is important to recognize that Jesus placed his name (the Son) and the Holy Spirit together on the same level as the Father, who is God. In addition, the word "name" in the above verse is singular, even though it is referring to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Thus, another clear indication that God is One in three Persons.

Did Jesus never claim to be the "Almighty" as the Watchtower claims? Isaiah 44:6 records God as stating, "I am the first, and I am the last: and beside me there is no God" (KJV). Clearly, the title "first and the last" is one of which only God can possess. Further, in Revelation the Lord God describes Himself in the following terms, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the ending…which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty" (Rev. 1:8 KJV). Finally, Jesus made a direct claim to these titles of God when he testified to the churches, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last" (Rev. 22:13 KJV). Consequently, Jesus did claim to be the "Almighty."

Secondly, Scripture very succinctly refers to the Holy Spirit as God. According to the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Holy Spirit is not the Third Person of the Godhead, but is God's "active force." To quote from the Watchtower publication, Aid to Bible Understanding, "Power might be likened to the stored energy in a battery, while 'force' could be compared to the current flowing from the battery. 'Force' then more accurately represents the …terms as relating to God's spirit…."[15] Scripture, however, reveals that the Holy Spirit is not a "force," but is a person who can be grieved (Ephesians 4:30), blasphemed (Matthew 12:32), and lied to (Acts 5:3). How can one grieve, blaspheme or lie to an "invisible force"? According to the book of Acts, Ananias and Sapphira were guilty of lying to the Holy Spirit. As Peter so clearly stated, "Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost…thou has not lied unto men, but unto God" (Acts 5:3,4 KJV).

The doctrine of the Trinity can be summed up as follows: There is only one True God (Jeremiah 10:10; John 17:3); and there are three Persons revealed in Scripture who are God: God the Father (John 6:27; 1 Peter 1:2), God the Son (John 1:1; John 8:58; Col. 2:9), and God the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3,4; 2 Cor. 3:17). Further, all three members are distinct persons who are not each other. Jesus prayed to the Father (John 17) revealing that the Father is not the Son. Jesus also showed us that the Son is not the Spirit as he explained, "…whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him…" (Matthew 12:32 KJV). Finally, Jesus declared, "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, who the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things…" (John 14:26 KJV). This verse makes it clear that the Father is not the Holy Spirit.

Next, the booklet attempts to refute the Trinity doctrine by examining the Hebrew word "Elohim." This Hebrew noun is in a plural form which is "translated in the singular as 'God.' Do these plural forms indicate a Trinity? No, they do not…. It is either what grammarians call the plural of majesty, or it denotes the fullness of divine strength…. Elohim means, not 'persons,' but 'gods.' So those who argue that this word implies a Trinity make themselves polytheists, worshipers of more than one God."[16]

First, it should be noted that not all Trinitarians view the Hebrew noun "Elohim" as a proof for the doctrine of the Trinity. As mentioned earlier, the Trinity is clearly revealed in the New Testament Scriptures and is foreshadowed in various other Old Testament passages. Consequently, the doctrine of the Trinity does not stand or fall based on the interpretation of "Elohim" as the Watchtower would claim. Some would argue as apologist Walter Martin, "In Genesis 1:26 Jehovah…speaks in the plural: 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…. who but His Son and Holy Spirit who are equal in Substance could He address in such familiar terms? The same is true of Genesis 11:7, when God said at the Tower of Babel, 'Let us go down,' and also of Isaiah 6:8, 'Who will go for us?'…These instances of plurality…strongly suggest…a Tri-Unity in the One God."[17] Others, have noted that the usage of the plural pronoun "us" is demanded because of the plural Hebrew noun "Elohim." Therefore, they argue that these passages should not be used as a proof text for the Trinity. Lastly, some consider this plural usage to be a type of figure of speech known as a "majestic plural." As Norman Geisler expounds, "In this use, God is speaking to himself in such a manner as to indicate…his majestic power and wisdom…. The fact that the name 'God' is plural in Hebrew does not indicate that there is more than one God. Queen Victoria used a plural of majesty when referring only to herself. She once commented, 'we are not amused!…' The plural nature of the Hebrew word is designed to give a fuller, more majestic sense to God's name."[18] Again, the doctrine of the Trinity is not grounded on the word "Elohim," but on many other undeniably clear passages throughout Scripture.

In the next subsection entitled "Jesus a Separate Creation," the publication attempts to demonstrate that Jesus had a pre-human existence as a created being before coming to earth. Jesus was not the eternal Son of God, but rather he "was a created spirit being, just as angels were spirit beings created by God."[19] The Watchtower argues this point from Scripture since Jesus is referred to as the "first-born of every creature" (Colossians 1:15 KJV) and that he was "the beginning of the creation of God" (Revelation 3:14 KJV). According to the article, "Beginning [Greek, ar-khe ] cannot rightly be interpreted to mean Jesus was the 'beginner' of God's creation…the word ar-khe…always has the common meaning of beginning."[20] Consequently, Jesus was "the first one to be created…a creature…not coeternal with God."[21] More specifically, prior to His earthly life, Jesus was an "angel…in his prehuman spirit form."[22]

First, the articles' citation of Colossians 1:15 as a prooftext for Jesus being a created being is based on faulty interpretation. This verse refers to Jesus, "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature" (KJV). "Firstborn," they argue, means "first created" since… "the scriptures identified the Word (Jesus in his prehuman existence) as God's first creation, his firstborn Son."[23] To start, the Watchtower errs in its interpretation of the word "firstborn." As apologist Ron Rhodes explains, "…Greek scholars agree, the word (Greek: prototokos) means 'first in rank, pre-eminent one, heir…' Christ is firstborn in the sense that He is positionally pre-eminent over creation and supreme over all things."[24] Throughout Scripture, this term is shown to represent "rank" or "pre-eminence" rather than the actual birth order. For example, King David was called "firstborn" (Psalms 89:27) even though he was the youngest or lastborn son of Jesse. Christ is pre-eminent because He is God incarnate. As Colossians later points out, "For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Colossians 2:9 KJV). Secondly, in Revelation Jesus refers to himself as "the beginning of the creation of God" (Revelation 3:14 KJV). As mentioned earlier, the Watchtower interprets this to mean that Jesus was "created by God as the beginning of God's invisible creations."[25] It is important to note that the Greek word "arche" which is translated "beginning" can have varied meanings. As Ron Rhodes expounds, "the word is truly unique and also carries the important active meaning of 'one who begins,' 'origin,' 'source,' 'creator,' or 'first cause.' Evangelical scholars agree this is the intended meaning of the word in Revelation 3:14."[26] Further, the same word "arche" is used elsewhere of God Almighty as the "beginning and the end" (Revelation 21:6). Certainly, the Watchtower would not suggest that God the Father is also a created being. In addition, the interpretation of "arche" as "origin" or "source" parallels other passages such as John 1:3 and Hebrews 1:2 which recognize Jesus as the creator and source of all things. Consequently, Christ is the "beginner" or "source" of God's creation.

Another accusation the publication makes against Christ's deity is based on the ransom requirement. The Watchtower argues that since the fallen state of sin came through a man, the first Adam, then "the perfect human life of Jesus (the last Adam) was the 'corresponding ransom' required by divine justice-no more, no less…. If Jesus, however, were part of the Godhead, the ransom price would have been infinitely higher that what God's own law required."[33]

The article fails to recognize that Scripture explicitly declares who the Last Adam (Jesus) is. "The first man is of the earth, earthly: the second man is the Lord from heaven" (1 Corinthians 15:47 KJV). Secondly, Jesus is the perfect mediator between God and man since he is both fully God and fully man. Thirdly, man's sin debt is weighted to an infinite degree because his offenses are against an infinite and Holy God. Only the death of Christ, as God incarnate, is of infinite and sufficient value to pay the ransom price for the sins of all mankind.

Next, the booklet makes note that the New Testament refers to Jesus as the "only begotten" Son of God. According to the Watchtower, the Greek word "monogenes" which is translated "only begotten" is defined as "only born…i.e. an only child."[34] In the Watchtower publication, Aid to Bible Understanding this viewpoint is expounded upon: "by virtue of his being the sole direct creation of his Father, the firstborn Son was unique, different from all others of God's sons, all who were created by Jehovah through that firstborn Son." [35] The article then notes that Hebrews 11:17 speaks of Isaac as the "only begotten" son of Abraham. It states that "there can be no question that in Isaac's case, he was only-begotten in the normal sense…. Almighty God can rightly be called his Begetter, or Father…like Abraham begets as Son."[36]

First, it should be noted that the phrase "only begotten" does not suggest that Christ is a created being or an "only born." Rather, it means that he was "unique" or "one of a kind." As Walter Martin explains, "it should be noted…that the most authoritative lexicons and grammar books, not to mention numerous scholarly works, all render 'monogenes' as 'only or unique': 'the only member of a kin or kind'…" [37] Hence, Jesus is by 'kind' or 'nature' the 'unique' Son of God. In other words, Jesus is of the same substance, nature or essence as God Almighty. This refutes the Watchtower argument that Jesus was unique only in the sense that he was God's first created Son through whom Jehovah created all His other sons. Second, Isaac was neither the eldest son of Abraham nor was he the "only begotten" son in the sense of being Abraham's only son. Ishmael was born before Isaac and Abraham had other sons as well. Instead, Isaac was Abraham's "only begotten" in that he was Abraham's "unique" son.

The last part of this first section makes the claim that "nobody in the first century ever thought him (Jesus) as being God the Son…. So correctly, they addressed Jesus as the separate "Son of God."[38] The implication being that Jesus was only a created being and not the Second Person of the Trinity.

The Scripture clearly records that the early church believed Jesus to be God in human flesh. The apostle Paul in his letter to Titus writes, "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13 KJV). Later Paul confirms the deity of Christ by stating that "…the kindness and love of God our Savior toward men appeared…." (Titus 3:4 KJV). The apostle Peter begins his Second Epistle as "…to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Savior Jesus Christ" (II Peter 1:1 KJV). When the risen Christ appeared to Thomas, the skeptic not only believed that Jesus had risen from the dead but also that the resurrection had proven his deity. "And Thomas answered and said unto him (Jesus), My Lord and my God." (John 20:28 KJV). The Watchtower clearly contradicts Scripture by claiming that the early church did not acknowledge the deity of Christ. Secondly, when Jesus was tried by Caiaphas, he was asked if indeed he was the Son of God. After Jesus confirmed that he was the Son of God, the high priest proclaimed that Jesus had blasphemed. As apologist Anthony Hoekema notes, "Obviously the high priest understood the expression 'Son of God' as meaning full equality with the Father since he called Jesus' assumption of this title blasphemy."[39] In conclusion, the Jewish religious leaders as well as the Lord's disciples clearly understood that Jesus made claims to deity.

"Is God Always Superior to Jesus?"

The Watchtower begins this second section by attempting to show the Father's superiority to Jesus and by claiming that Jesus is to be distinguished from God. The first claim that Jesus is a creature and not the eternal creator is based on the passage where Jesus prays, "And this is eternal life, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou has sent" (John 17:3 KJV). It then argues that since the Father is referred to as "the only true God" and that He is distinguished from Jesus, whom the Father sent, that therefore Jesus must not be the "true God."

First, the article fails to take the entire passage in its proper context. The very next request that Jesus makes in his prayer is, "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was" (John 17:5 KJV). Since God has earlier revealed, "…and my glory will I not give to another" (Isaiah 42:8 KJV), Jesus is certainly expressing his own nature of deity. Ex-Jehovah's Witness David Reed makes an interesting point, "If Jesus' reference to the Father as 'the only true God' were meant to exclude the Son from deity, then the same principle of interpretation would have to apply to Jude 4, where Jesus Christ is called 'our only Owner and Lord.' This would have to exclude the Father from Lordship and Ownership."[40] Since the Holy Spirit is also called "Lord" in 2 Corinthians 3:17, Reed concludes, "Obviously, then, neither use of the word 'only' is exclusive with reference to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit."[41]

The booklet also claims that the apostle Paul distinguished between Jesus and God as "distinctly separate" when he wrote, "to us there is but one God, the Father…and one Lord Jesus Christ" (I Corinthians 8:6 KJV). The logic of this argument reasons that if the "one God" is the Father, then Jesus must not be God.

There is an inconsistency in the rationality of this argument. If Jesus is excluded from being the "one God," then according to the same logic, the Father must also be excluded from being "Lord." As David Reed explains, "the Jehovah's Witness does not want to reach this conclusion, because he always speaks of Jehovah as 'Lord'…. He cannot make the first half of the verse exclude Jesus from being God, without making the second half exclude the Father from being Lord. The fact is that Scripture uses the terms God and Lord virtually interchangeably."[42]

Finally, the article attempts to demonstrate that Jesus was a separate being from God by examining the biblical story of the rich young ruler. In this passage, the young man addressed Jesus as "Good Teacher" when asking him a question about how he could gain eternal life. Jesus then questioned the young man, "Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God" (Mark 10:18 KJV). According to the Watchtower argument, "Jesus was saying that no one is as good as God is, not even Jesus himself."[43]

Again, this passage is taken out of context in order to prove a particular doctrine of the Watchtower. Jesus was not denying his divinity, but rather he was asking the rich young ruler to consider the significance of his own statement when he referred to Jesus as "Good Teacher." Given what Scripture declares regarding man, "There is none righteous, no, not one…" (Romans 3:10 KJV), then the rich young ruler is unknowingly declaring Jesus to be God. As Norman Geisler explains, "Thus Jesus was forcing him to a very uncomfortable dilemma. Either Jesus was good and God, or else He was bad and man."[44] Further, the very fact that Jesus did proceed to answer the young man's question on the subject of 'goodness' is an indirect assertion of his role as the "good teacher" or of his deity.

In the next subsection entitled, "God's Submissive Servant," the booklet insists that since Jesus held the role of a servant of God, then logically he was not equal to God in his nature. For example, Jesus stated, "The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise" (John 5:19 KJV).

Contrary to the Watchtower claim that this verse denies the deity of Christ, it actually affirms it. This statement actually reveals that any endeavor by the Son separate from the Father is inconceivable because of the divine unity of the Father and of the Son. As one in unity of nature with the Father, Jesus acts in perfect harmony with the Father.

Next, the article attempts to deny Christ's divinity through a surface interpretation of John 6:38. Jesus stated, "For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me" (KJV). The Watchtower implication is that Jesus must not be God since his will is different from the will of the Father.

First, it should be noted that this statement is not dealing with the nature of Christ or his essence. Instead, it is pointing to the "functional" subjection that Christ has to the Father. While Christ is equal to the Father in "nature," he has a "subjective" role to the Father, as he is the one who is sent into the world to implement the plan of salvation for mankind. Secondly, in his human nature Jesus is not equal to the Father, while in his divine nature Jesus is equivalent to the Father. Consequently, Jesus had to align his human will with the divine will of the Father in order to fulfill his "subjective role" as Saviour of the world.

In the subsection entitled, "God Superior at All Times," the publication argues that Jesus asserts his Father's superiority when he stated, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor" (Luke 4:18 KJV). According to the writer, "Anointing is the giving of authority or a commission by a superior to someone who does not already have authority…. God…anointed Jesus, giving him authority that he did not previously have."[45]

It should be noted that the word "anointed" could mean to "consecrate" as in a particular office. In his incarnation, Jesus was dependent on the Holy Spirit to give him prophetic power in his role or office as Messiah. As the God-man, Jesus voluntarily set aside usage of his divine attributes (i.e. omniscience, omnipotence) in order to walk in the limitations of mankind. In addition, Christ did not lose his divine attributes as God since the Lord is eternal and cannot change (i.e. Malachi 3:6). However, Jesus did access usage of his divine attributes on occasion in order to accomplish a specific purpose (i.e. the Transfiguration). Further, at the age of twelve, Jesus was found in the temple sitting in the midst of the teachers while listening and asking questions. As Luke reveals, "And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers" (Luke 2:47 KJV). When found by his parents, Jesus stated that he was going about his Father's business thereby showing that he was already acting in his own divine authority even before the Holy Spirit descended upon him at his baptism. Consequently, the argument that the anointing is given to only those without authority is without merit.

The Jehovah's Witnesses also argue that Jesus cannot be God since he referred to the Father as his God. As Jesus neared his death he cried, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Mark 15:34 KJV). As the writer concludes, "Surely, that cry, 'My God,' was not from someone who considered himself to be God."[46]

Again, the Watchtower confuses the two natures of Christ. It is true that in Jesus' divine nature, he is fully God and would never refer to the father as "My God." However, in his humanity, Jesus could properly address the Father as his "God."

Finally, the argument is given that since Jesus died and was in the tomb for parts of three days, "then Habakkuk 1:12 is wrong when it says 'O my God, my Holy One, you do not die.' But the Bible says Jesus did die and was unconscious in the tomb."[47] The conclusion being that Jesus is not God since God Almighty cannot die.

First, the Watchtower errs when it states that Jesus was unconscious in the tomb for three days. Jesus said on the cross, "Father into thy hands I commend my spirit" (Luke 23:46 KJV) shortly after he told the thief on the cross that same day he would be with him in paradise (Luke 23:43). While Jesus' physical body was dead for three days, his soul went immediately to be with the Father in heaven. Secondly, it would be impossible for Jesus to die spiritually since he is the eternal Second Person of the Trinity. While Jesus was dying physically on the cross for our sins, he was simultaneously holding this contingent universe together. As the apostle Paul explains regarding Christ, "And he is before all things, and by him all things consist (Colossians 1:17 KJV).

The next subject area contends that since Jesus had limited knowledge, he could not be God given the Scripture reveals that God is all-knowing. As Jesus stated, "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father" (Mark 13:32 KJV).

On the surface, this appears to be a contradiction since the Bible declares both the Father and Christ to be omniscient. As the apostle Paul writes, "…of the Father, and of Christ; In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" (Colossians 2:2,3 KJV). However, the article again fails to distinguish between Christ's two separate natures. In Jesus' divine nature, he knew all things, but in his human nature he had limited knowledge. This also explains the passage which reveals that "Jesus increased in wisdom…" (Luke 2:52 KJV). As God, Jesus could not have grown in knowledge since his attribute of omniscience (infinite knowledge) could have no increase. However, in his finite human nature, Jesus did grow in knowledge and wisdom.

The publication then proceeds to explain that in Christ's post resurrected state, "he continues to be in a subordinate, secondary position…. In the everlasting future in heaven, Jesus will continue to be a separate, subordinate servant of God."[48] It then quotes with the following passage, "Then cometh the end, when he [Jesus] shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father…then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all" (1 Corinthians 15:24, 28 KJV). Consequently, the writer argues, "we behold a figure both separate from and subordinate to God."[49]

It is important to note that Christ's "functional subjection" to the Father does not place Jesus on a lower level in terms of his deity or nature. Jesus voluntarily took an added human nature in order to fulfill the role as mediator between man and God. As the God-man, Jesus subjected himself to a life of perfect obedience to the Father, thereby fulfilling his role as the sinless Lamb of God who could redeem mankind. In his post-resurrected state, Jesus continues and will forevermore possess both human and divine natures. "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5 KJV). As Ron Rhodes explains, "Because Christ still possesses His human nature, then, Christ is still in submission to the Father…. Christ in His divine nature is fully equal to the Father, though relationally (or functionally) He is subordinate or submissive."[50] Consequently, the Watchtower is guilty of twisting Scripture by asserting that "subjection" to the Father is equal to "inequality" with God.

The publication brings this section to a close by making the bold assertion that "…Jesus is not God and never claimed to be."[51] Scripture, however, does reveal that Jesus made claims to deity in a variety of ways. First, he claimed to be Yahweh God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush. "And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM :…Thus shalt thou say…I AM hath sent me unto you" (Exodus 3:14 KJV). Later, Jesus boldly declared to the Jewish leaders… "Before Abraham was, I am" (John 8:58 KJV). These leaders clearly understood that Jesus was claiming to be God as they subsequently tried to stone him for blasphemy. In John 10:30, Jesus claimed to be God when he told a gathering of Jews, "I and my Father are one" (KJV). Again, the Jews tried to stone him "because… thou a man, makest thyself God" (John 10:33 KJV). Jesus also laid claims to deity in John 14:6 when he stated, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (KJV). Theologian Merrill Tenney comments, "He did not say He knew the way, the truth, and the life, nor that He taught them… He declared Himself to be the final key to all mysteries."[52] In Revelation 22:13, Jesus claimed the same title as Jehovah when he said, "I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and last" (KJV). Further, Jesus claimed the prerogatives of God by claiming to have the authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:5), to judge the nations (Matthew 25:31,32), and to raise the dead (John 5:21). Lastly, Scripture clearly states that only God is to be worshipped (i.e. Acts 10:25; Revelation 22:9), yet Jesus not only accepted worship from his disciples, but he also encouraged them to worship him. (i.e. Matthew 2:11, Matthew 14:33, John 9:38). Therefore by accepting the disciples worship, Jesus acknowledged that he is God.

Conclusion

By examining Scripture, we find overwhelming evidence for the doctrine of the Trinity. God is one in essence or nature and three in Persons. In addition, Jesus, the Second Person of the Godhead, is one Person who has two natures, a divine nature and an added human nature. As one triune Being, God has revealed Himself perfectly in the Person of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. The confusion the Jehovah's Witnesses have of the doctrine of the Trinity is not based on the clear teaching of Scripture, but rather it is spawned by the dishonest teachings and interpretations of the Watchtower. The apostle Paul warns us to beware of false teachers such as the Watchtower Society. "For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock…. speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them" (Acts 29, 30 KJV).

Conclusion

[1] "2000 Jehovah's Witnesses Worldwide Status Report" (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 2000), [Online], available: <http://www.watchtower.org/statistics/worldwide_report_statistics.htm.> [10 May 2001].

[2] Let God Be True (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1946), 18.

[3] The Truth That Leads to Eternal Life (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1968), 24.

[4] The Watchtower, 15 February, 1983, 12.

[5] Let God Be True, 276.

[6] Should You Believe in the Trinity? (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1989), 12.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid., 13.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Norman L. Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1999), 732.

[13] Walter Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1982), 120.

[14] Trinity, 13.

[15] Aid to Bible Understanding (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1971), 1544.

[16]Trinity, 13.

[17]Martin, 111.

[18] Norman L. Geisler and Ron Rhodes, When Cultists Ask (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997), 20, 21.

[19]Trinity, 14.

[20] Ibid.

[21] New Heavens and A New Earth (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1953), 24.

[22] Ibid.

[23] Insight on the Scriptures, vol. 2 (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1988), 52.

[24] Ron Rhodes,Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Jehovah's Witnesses (Eugene: Harvest House, 1993), 130.

[25] Trinity, 14.

[26] Rhodes, 123.

[27] Trinity, 14.

[28] New World Translation (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1984), 845.

[29] Trinity, 14.

[30] Rhodes, 129.

[31] Trinity, 15.

[32] Geisler, 737.

[33] Trinity, 15.

[34] Trinity, 16.

[35] Aid to Bible Understanding, 918.

[36] Trinity, 16.

[37] Martin, 167.

[38] Trinity, 16.

[39] Anthony A. Hoekema, The Four Major Cults (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1963), 338.

[40] David A. Reed, Jehovah's Witnesses Answered Verse by Verse (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1986), 82.

[41] Ibid.

[42] Ibid, 96.

[43] Trinity, 17.

[44] Geisler, 350.

[45] Trinity, 18.

[46] Ibid.

[47] Ibid.

[48] Ibid, 19.

[49] Ibid.

[50] Rhodes, 142, 43.

[51] Trinity, 20.

[52] Merill C. Tenney, John: The Gospel of Belief (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1948), 215.