Skip to main content

The Watch Tower’s Trinity Mash-Up

Image
By

 


In the Reasoning book p.407 the Watch Tower writes:

'Does the Bible agree with those who teach that the Father and the Son are not separate and distinct individuals?

'Matt. 26:39, RS: “Going a little farther he [Jesus Christ] fell on his face and prayed, ‘My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.’” (If the Father and the Son were not distinct individuals, such a prayer would have been meaningless. Jesus would have been praying to himself, and his will would of necessity have been the Father’s will.)

'John 8:17, 18, RS: “[Jesus answered the Jewish Pharisees:] In your law it is written that the testimony of two men is true; I bear witness to myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness to me.” (So, Jesus definitely spoke of himself as being an individual separate and distinct from the Father.)'

Is this what we believe when it is clear from Scripture they are separate and distinct persons?

Egregious Misrepresentation

The Watch Tower’s argument is a straw man argument from the start, refuting something Christians simply don’t believe. The thinking goes:

‘Christians believe both the Father and the Son are God.’

‘Therefore, Christians believe the Father and the Son are the same person.’

‘The Bible teaches the Father and Son are separate and distinct individuals, therefore Jesus can’t be God because, clearly, the Father is God.’

Their opening premise is incorrect. If you are going to refute someone else’s position and come out of it looking credible you must accurately represent that position in the first place. Christian do not believe the Father and the Son are one person, that would be the heresy of modalism, a belief that one God reveals himself to the world in different modes of being. This is not something to which Jehovah’s Witnesses need to address themselves. They need to address what we believe, not what the Watch Tower tells them we believe.

The Trinity

The doctrine of the Trinity may be summed like this:

(1) The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons

(2) each Person is fully God

(3) there is only one God.

The trouble with the Unitarian position is their insistence this doesn’t make sense. However, we are talking about God and it isn’t a question of what makes sense to our finite minds, but of what God has revealed about himself in the Bible. This was the challenge the early church faced when they realised Jesus was so much more than a prophet. It was the challenge the early church councils faced as they worked to refute doctrines that diminished Jesus’ status.

So, what does the Bible say?

The Father is certainly God (Philippians 1:2)

The Son is also God. Paul describes the saints as,’waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ.’ (Titus2:13) Of course, the New World Translation gives:

‘...we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of our Savior, Jesus Christ…’

Is Paul here referring to two persons, the Father and the Son, or is he referring to Jesus alone as, ‘our great God and Saviour’? There are several reasons for thinking the latter:

1. There is no definite article before the noun ‘Saviour’ giving us, ‘our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ.’ The New World Translation inserts the definite article giving us, ‘our great God and our Saviour,’ where it is not found in the Greek.

2. There is no reference in the New Testament to an epiphany of God the Father. Every reference to an epiphany refers to Jesus alone, e.g. John 1:1; 20:28 etc.

3. Context makes it refer to Christ since it goes on to talk about Christ’s suffering and death.

4. The term ‘God and Saviour’ was a stereotypical formula in the ancient world to refer to one single deity.

Paul is referring to Jesus as our great God.’ I am thankful to John Stott and his Bible Speaks Today commentary on Titus.

The Spirit is God. We looked at this in my last article, which I reproduce in part here:

'They point out the Holy Spirit is a parakletos, a helper. They fail to exegete the whole text in John 14, where Jesus promises his followers ‘another Helper.’ Another translates the Greek allos, Latin allus, meaning one besides what has been mentioned. You find many examples of this use in the New Testament, 157 in total. Here are three:

‘...if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.’ Mt.5:39

‘He told them another parable…’ t.13:14, 31, 33

‘Now some cried out one thing, some another…’ Acts 19:32; 21:34

Right cheek, another cheek besides what has been mentioned.

One parable, another parable besides what has been mentioned.

One thing cried out, another thing cried out besides what has been cried out.

One comforter, another comforter besides what has been mentioned.

John writes in his first letter, ‘My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.’ 1 John 2:1

‘Advocate’ in this passage translates parakletos. So, what is the parakletos of which the Holy Spirit is ‘another’ (allos)? Look at the John 14 text – in context.

Jesus begins by speaking of his departure ‘to prepare a place for you’ (v2) telling them, ‘Let not your hearts be troubled.’ (v1). Jesus is returning to the Father and charges them, ‘If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another comforter (parakletos), even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.’ (vv15-17)

Jesus is the parakletos who is going back to the Father, the Spirit is the parakletos who is being sent by the Father, the ‘other’ besides the first, another of the same kind. One comforter, another comforter besides what has been mentioned.'


A problem some have is in harbouring doubts about these sound biblical arguments when a JW appears to confidently deny and refute them. Have confidence in God’s Word and allow it to inform you, not the doubts and refutations of what are, after all, people who repeat parrot fashion what they are taught and told.

Are the members of the Trinity separate persons? Yes

Is Titus calling Jesus ‘our great God’? Yes

Is the Holy Spirit another of the same kind as Jesus? Yes

Three persons, each fully God, one God.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Obama's mother posthumously baptized into LDS Church - Salt Lake Tribune

By
In the wake of his remarkable success it seemed that the world and his wife wanted to claim President Obama as their own with even an Irish connection being dug up. Now the Mormons have got in on the act by posthumously baptising his mother. They have in the past upset the Jewish community, the Catholic Church and now the American President with this wacky and unbiblical practice but there is no indication that they will review it. And, of course, it is always someone else’s fault and they promise a thorough inquiry to uncover the real culprits. Maybe they should try looking in the mirror. President Barack Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, who died in 1995, was baptized posthumously into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints last year during her son's campaign, according to Salt Lake City-based researcher Helen Radkey. The ritual, known as “baptism for the dead,” was done June 4 in the Provo temple, and another LDS temple rite, known as the “endowment,” was...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mormon Christians? Whats in a Name?

By
The Mormon Church, disturbed by the continuing identifying of polygamus sects in the news with the name Mormon, recently issued a press statement aimed at "clarifying" issues. It is interesting to note that if you substitute the name "Christian" where they use the name "Mormon" it makes a very good argument for us against the claims of the Mormon Church. The full press release is reproduced below in italics with each paragraph rewritten in ordinary text to present it from a Christian perspective. SALT LAKE CITY 10 July 2008 On 26 June, Newsroom published a package of information featuring profiles of ordinary Latter-day Saints in Texas. With no other intention but to define themselves, these members provided a tangible depiction of what their faith is all about. They serve as the best distinction between the lifestyles and values of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and a Texas-based polygamous group that has recently attracted media attent...
70 comments
Read more

Is atheism an intolerant belief?

By
The Big Questions , Sunday 2 August 2009, third question. A growing number of Britons say they are certain there is no God - but how do they know? Professor John Adams of the North Yorkshire Humanist Association begins by asking theists what evidence they have for their beliefs. Paul Woolley of Theos continues by pointing out Richard Dawkins description of faith as a 'virus', and the appalling track record of atheism in the 20th Century, as spearheaded by Pol Pot and Stalin. Chloe Clifford-Frith of the Humanist and Secular Students Society contends that Stalin did not do the things he did because he was an atheist, but because he was evil. Paul Woolley rejoins that atheists are trying to have it both ways when they claim that religion is the cause of evil, but refuse to acknowledge the ideological impetus of atheism when it comes to many evil acts. Mao and Stalin both replaced God with the State - a 'religious' manoeuvre. Rev Alistair Rycroft of St Michael Le Belfrey Ch...
18 comments
Read more