Trinity: Fact or fiction? – Part 1pan>
For a PDF download of this ministry’s notes click NOTES: Trinity: Fact or fiction
The Christian doctrine of the Trinity teaches the unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three persons in one Godhead. [1] The doctrine states that God is the Triune God, existing as three persons, but one being. [2]
Personhood in the Trinity does not match the common Western understanding of ‘person’ as used in the English language—it does not imply an “individual, self-actualized center of free will and conscious activity.” Each person is understood as having the one identical essence or nature, not merely similar natures. Since the beginning of the 3rd century the doctrine of the Trinity has been stated as “the one God exists in three Persons and one substance, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” [3]
The word ‘Trinity’ itself does not appear in the Bible but was coined by Tertullian (c.155-230) to encapsulate the teaching of Scripture regarding God’s three-in-one nature. The doctrine was formally defined in the 4th century Nicene Creed, where Jesus was declared to be: “God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father.”
Belief in the Trinity is a mark of all mainstream Christianity including Protestantism, Catholicism, and Orthodoxy. As such, the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church describes the Trinity as “the central dogma of Christian theology”. In contrast, heretical Nontrinitarian positions are held by many cults including the Jehovah’s Witnesses (Watchtower Society), Mormons (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints), [4] Unitarians [5] and Christadelphians.
Less common knowledge is that although most Pentecostals are Trinitarian, as early as 1914 there was a split in the Pentecostal movement along doctrinal lines regarding the Trinity. Contrasted with the orthodox doctrine of three distinct and eternal Persons in one divine essence Oneness Pentecostals teach that there is only one being, revealing himself in different ways. As a result, Oneness Pentecostals are regarded by orthodox Christians as subscribing to the heresy of Modalism which teaches that God displayed himself in three different ‘modes’ throughout the course of history (in the Old Testament as Father, in the Gospels as the Son, and after the Ascension as the Holy Spirit).
One of the main objections to the doctrine of the Trinity is the difficulty of comprehending how a being can be three and yet one. Yet Scripture says:
Isaiah 55:8-9 “For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways”, declares the Lord. “As the heavens are higher then the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts.
Thus any attempt to explain God’s nature must obviously fall short in some area. This is to be expected, and indeed it would be strange if it were not so. We cannot understand God’s eternal nature (no beginning or end) but we accept it on the basis of revelation in Scripture. Likewise the doctrine of the Trinity is not something we have manufactured, but an observed fact detailed in Scripture which we are trying to understand better.
As Christian apologist C.S. Lewis so aptly stated:
If Christianity were something we were making up, of course we could make it easier. But it is not. We cannot compete, in simplicity, with people who are inventing religions. How could we? We are dealing with Fact. Of course anyone can be simple if he has no facts to bother about. [6]
Even in the physical realm, many of the laws, which govern our universe, cannot be fully explained by our present theories. Inability to grasp or understand a concept does not invalidate its reality!
Isaiah tells us that God’s ways are “higher” than ours. You may ask, and rightly so, “How then can we know anything about God if it cannot be deduced by reason and logic?” Well - that is why we have divine revelation i.e. God has to reveal Himself to us.
But how does God reveal Himself? Hebrews 1:1-2 tells us that He revealed Himself through two primary means, namely: (1) the prophets and (2) Jesus. Their testimony is recorded in the Bible. Our argument therefore is based on God’s revelation, and not on the human god of reason and logic.
It is important to realize that the doctrine of the Trinity has not been given to the Church by speculative thought. It is not … in any sense derived from “PURE REASON”. This doctrine has come from the data of HISTORICAL REVELATION. In the process of history God has revealed Himself as one God, subsisting in three Persons. [7]
In Hebrew grammar, nouns and verbs have 4 different forms:
1) Male singular
2) Male plural
3) Female singular
4) Female plural
Thus, whereas in English we have one word for the verb “want”, in Hebrew there are 4 (rotse, rotsim, rotsa, rotsot) depending on who wants something, e.g.
|
Singular |
Plural |
Male |
Ani rotse (I want) |
Anakhnu rotsim (We want) |
Female |
Ani rotsa (I want) |
Anakhnu rotsot (We want) |
The male plural tense is indicated by the suffix “im”.
SINGULAR: Eloah, El – translated “God”
PLURAL: Elohim, Elim – based on context, translated as God, gods, angels.
Although Elohim is a plural, it is consistently used with singular verb forms and with adjectives and pronouns in the singular. In this case it is translated “God”. Consider Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Now look at the Hebrew, which reads right to left:
הָאָֽרֶץ |
וְאֵת |
הַשָּׁמַיִם |
אֵת |
אֱלֹהִים |
בָּרָא |
בְּרֵאשִׁית |
ha-aretz |
v'et |
ha-shamayim |
et |
elohim |
Bara |
Breshit |
the earth |
And |
the heavens |
|
Gods |
Created |
In the beginning |
|
|
|
|
Singular |
male singular |
|
Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, founder and director of Ariel Ministries writes:
Every time the word “God” is used in the OT it is almost always “Elohim” (plural) in the Hebrew, but used with a singular verb. This was obviously intentional as it is used with a plural verb when referring to heathen “gods”. If the plural form “Elohim” was the only form available for a reference to God, then the argument might be made that the writers had no other alternative but to use the word “Elohim” for both the one true God and the many false gods. However, the singular form for “Elohim” (Eloha or El) exists and is used in such passages as Deuteronomy 32:15-17 and Habakkuk 3:3. This singular form could easily have been used consistently. Yet it is only used 250 times, while the plural form is used 2500 times. The far greater use of the plural form again turns the argument in favour of plurality in the Godhead. [8]
The Shema has always been
KJV:
Hear, O Israel, the LORD our God is one LORD.
WEB:
Hear,
While on the surface, the English translation may appear anti-Trinitarian, the Hebrew rendering tells a different story. The word “LORD” represented in capitals in many English Bibles is a translation of the Hebrew “YHWH”. In Hebrew, vowels are seldom written; they are only spoken. YHWH, was considered to be the highest name of God, so much so that the Israelites never pronounced it in speech but substituted it with the word “Lord” (Adonai). This has left us unable to tell what the original rendering was, although it appears that Yahweh is probably the closest. The Latinisation of the Bible resulting from the Vulgate translation led to a rendering of JeHoVaH. This title, or name of God, is never used of other gods.
אֶחָֽד |
יְהוָה |
אֱלֹהֵינוּ |
יְהוָה |
יִשְׂרָאֵל |
שְׁמַע |
Echad |
YHWH |
Elohenu [11] |
YHWH |
Yisrael |
Shema |
is one |
Yahweh |
our Gods |
Yahweh |
|
Hear |
Unity |
|
Singular |
|
|
|
The literal translation is “Hear
However, when we examine the word ‘echad’ translated ‘one’, we discover an interesting meaning. This word ‘echad’ comes from a Hebrew root ‘achad’ which means “to unify” or “to collect together”, a “united one”. [12] It is used in preference to ‘yachid’ when a composite unity is indicated.
Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one (echad) flesh.
We see the idea of separate persons viewed as a unified ‘one’. The man and woman become “one flesh”. The word ‘one’ here implies a compound unity. It is in this sense that we can understand the “One of God” in Deuteronomy 6:4 [13] - He is clearly One God, yet He manifests Himself in more than one distinct personage.
On the contrast, the word ‘yachid’ literally means “only one” or “solitary one”. It is a word which suggests an indivisible one as opposed to the compound unity implied by the word ‘echad’. [14] If God was an indivisible unity, then ‘yachid’ would have been a far more appropriate word. In fact, Maimonides, a 12th century Hebrew Sage, noted the strength of ‘yachid’ and chose to use that word in place of ‘echad’. In his “Thirteen Articles of Faith” he renders Moses words as, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, The LORD is one (yachid).” However, the Shema does not use ‘yachid’ in reference to God. [15] ‘Yachid’ is used 12 times in the Scriptures but NOT ONCE is it used for Yahweh. [16]
Before the destruction of
KJV:
Then the LORD rained down burning sulphur on
World
English Bible: Then Yahweh rained on
Thus we simultaneously see Yahweh both on earth in physical manifestation (Jesus) and in heaven (the Father).
The English word deity is from the Latin ‘deus’, meaning ‘god’. There are many scriptures, which directly affirm the deity of Jesus. Let us look at one of the most well known prophecies about the Messiah.
Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And He will be called Wonderful Counselor, MIGHTY GOD (El Gibbor), Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Jesus is called ‘God’ in no uncertain terms. The Watchtower will claim that Jesus is the “Mighty God” but the Father is the “Almighty God”.
However in the Old Testament the Hebrew phrase “El Gibbor” was exclusively applied to Yahweh (Deut. 10:17; Ps. 24:8; Jer. 32:18). Thus, if “El Gibbor” (Mighty God) means less than the “Almighty God”, how is it that Jehovah (Yahweh) can be called “El Gibbor” in Isaiah 10:21? [17]
This next reference to Isaiah 7:14 shows that the one conceived of the virgin would be GOD WITH US.
Matthew 1:22-23: “All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet, ‘The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel’ – which means GOD WITH US.”
Isaiah also prophesies about a coming messenger who will prepare the way for Yahweh.
The voice of one who calls out, “Prepare the way of Yahweh in the wilderness! Make a level highway in the desert for our God.” (Isaiah 40:3 - Young's Literal Translation)
This exact prophecy is used in the gospels about John the Baptist, who prepared the way for Jesus.
Matt
3:1-3 In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the
Most cults which propagate anti-Trinitarian teachings claim that the doctrine of the Trinity was introduced in the 4th century A.D. But the 1st century NT writings tell a different story. In the opening verse of his gospel John, the beloved disciple of Jesus, writes about the Word (Logos) who became flesh:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God… And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us… John 1:1,14 (KJV)
In the beginning the Word already existed. He was with God, and he was God… So the Word became human and lived here on earth among us… (John 1:1, 14, NLT)
This verse has so troubled the Watchtower that they have resorted to re-translating the verse to “the Word was a god” in their New World Translation. However, there is no indefinite article (‘a’) in Greek. Only the definite article (‘the’) is used. The word ‘a’ is inserted by translators to make sense in English.
When the Greeks wanted to express that there is an indefinite example of something they used “one (thing)” or “some (things).” These forms do not appear in this verse, making “a god” a very unlikely rendering. [18]
en |
arch |
hn |
o |
logoV |
kai |
o |
logoV |
hn |
proV |
ton |
qeon |
kai |
qeon |
hn |
o |
logoV |
en |
Arche |
en |
ho |
logos |
kai |
ho |
logos |
en |
pros |
tou |
Theos |
kai |
Theos |
en |
ho |
logos |
In |
Beginning |
was |
the |
Word |
and |
the |
Word |
was |
with |
the |
God |
and |
God |
was |
the |
Word |
As can be seen, the direct translation would be: “In beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and God was the Word.” The Watchtower try to make a case for their translation of “a god” in John 1:1 from the fact that the first usage of ‘theos’ (“the Word was with the God”) is preceded by a definite article (‘tou’) while the second usage (“God was the Word”) has no definite article. They then assert that only the Father is “the God”.
However Thomas called Jesus “the God” with the definite article. When Jesus appeared to him after His resurrection, we read: Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my GOD!” (John 20:28)
Και |
Απεκριθη |
Θωμας |
και |
ειπεν |
Αυτω |
Ο |
κυριος |
Μου |
και |
ο |
Θεος |
Μου |
Kai |
apokrinomai |
Thomas |
kai |
epo |
Autos |
Ho |
kurios |
Mou |
kai |
ho |
Theos |
mou |
And |
answered |
Thomas |
and |
said to |
Him |
The |
Lord |
of me |
and |
the |
God |
of me |
In the Greek, Thomas said to Jesus, “ho kurios mou, kai ho theos mou” i.e. “the Lord of me, and the God of me.” Thomas clearly addresses Jesus as the Lord and “the God”. This verse inescapably affirms that Jesus is “the God” even if this sort of distinction was intended. Note that Jesus did not rebuke Thomas for blasphemy. The Watchtower then clutch at straws by saying that Thomas was so stunned by Jesus’ appearance, that he swore. This is absurd because it would mean that Thomas, a devout apostle of Jesus, swore in front of Jesus (thereby violating Exodus 20:7 by using the Lord’s name in vain) without so much as receiving a reprimand from Jesus! In addition Thomas addressed Jesus directly: “Thomas said to Him” (nominative being used for the vocative).
Not according to Yahweh:
Isaiah 44:6, 8 This is what Yahweh, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, Yahweh of Armies, says: “I am the first, and I am the last; and besides me there is no God. … You are my witnesses. Is there a God besides me? Indeed, there is not. I don't know any other Rock.”
Isaiah 45:5, 22 “I am Yahweh, and there is none else. Besides me, there is no God. I will strengthen you, though you have not known me;… Look to me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other.”
Does John 1:1 teach us of 2 ‘gods’ (a greater and a lesser one) as the Watchtower teach, or 2 facets of the same God. Let’s see how the early Church Fathers addressed this same heresy.
Hippolytus (from
“If, then the Word was with God and was also God, what follows? Would one say that I speak of two Gods? I will not indeed speak of two Gods, but of one. I speak of two Persons, however, and of a third Economy - the grace of the Holy Spirit”.
Tertullian of Carthage in
“Now, if He too is God, for according to John, 'The Word was God,' then you have two Beings-One who commands that the thing to be made, and the other who creates. In what sense, however, you ought to understand Him to be another. I have already explained: on the ground of personality, not of substance. And in the way of distinction, not of division. I must everywhere hold only one substance, in three coherent and inseparable [persons]”
What
reputable scholars say about the JWs
Dr. Charles L. Feinberg of
“I can assure you that the rendering which the Jehovah's Witnesses give John 1:1 is not held by any reputable Greek scholar.”
Dr. James L. Boyer of
“I have never heard of, or read of any Greek Scholar who would have agreed to the interpretation of this verse insisted upon by the Jehovah's Witnesses...I have never encountered one of them who had any knowledge of the Greek language.”
Dr. William Barclay, a leading Greek scholar of the University of Glasgow, Scotland:
“The deliberate distortion of truth by this sect is seen in their New Testament translations. John 1:1 is translated: ‘...the Word was a god,’ a translation which is grammatically impossible...It is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest.”
Barclay and Dr. F. F. Bruce of the University of Manchester,
England are generally regarded as
“Much is made by Arian amateur grammarians of the omission of the definite article with ‘God’ in the phrase “And the Word was God.” Such an omission is common with nouns in a predicative construction...‘a god’ would be totally indefensible.”
Dr. J. J. Griesbach (whose Greek text - not the English part
- is used in the Emphatic Diaglott):
“So
numerous and clear are the arguments and testimonies of Scriptures in favor of
the true Deity of Christ, that I can hardly imagine how, upon the admission of
the Divine authority of Scripture, and with regard to fair rules of
interpretation, this doctrine can by any man be called in doubt. Especially the
passage, John 1:1-3, is so clear and so superior to all exception, that by no
daring efforts of either commentators or critics can it be snatched out of the
hands of the defenders of the truth.”
Dr. Samuel J.
Mikolaski of Zurich, Switzerland:
“This
anarthrous (used without the article) construction does not mean what the
indefinite article ‘a’ means in English. It is monstrous to translate the
phrase ‘the Word was a god.’”
Dr. Paul L. Kaufman of
“The
Jehovah's Witnesses people evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets of
Greek grammar in their mistranslation of John 1:1.”
Dr. Walter R. Martin, founder of the Christian Research Institute and author of ‘Kingdom of the Cults’:
“The
translation... ‘a god’ instead of ‘God’ is erroneous and unsupported by any
good Greek scholarship, ancient or contemporary and is a translation rejected
by all recognized scholars of the Greek language many of whom are not even
Christians, and cannot fairly be said to be biased in favor of the orthodox
contention.”
Dr. Bruce M. Metzger, professor of New Testament Language
and Literature at
“If
the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists.”
Dr. Eugene A. Nida, head of Translations Department,
American Bible Society: Responsible for the Good News Bible (the committee
worked under him):
“With regard to John 1:1, there is of course a complication simply because the New World Translation was apparently done by persons who did not take seriously the syntax of the Greek.”
British scholar H.H. Rowley:
“From
beginning to end this volume is a shining example of how the Bible should not
be translated.”
Dr. B. F. Westcott (whose Greek text - not the English part - is used in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation): In the 19th century Westcott and his colleague Hort, published an edition of the New Testament in Greek. This was the result of nearly 30 years ceaseless labour and is believed to be the most significant critical edition ever produced by British scholars. Westcott said:
“The
predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in IV.24. It is necessarily
without the article...No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form
of expression, which simply affirms the true deity of the Word...in the third
clause 'the Word' is declared to be ‘God’ and so included in the unity of the
Godhead.”
Dr. Ernest C. Colwell of the
“A
definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does
not have the article when it precedes the verb...this statement cannot be
regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in
the confession of Thomas. ‘My Lord and my God.’ - John 20:28”
Dr. J. Johnson of
“No
justification whatsoever for translating THEOS EN HO LOGOS as 'the Word was a
god.' There is no syntactical parallel to Acts 28:6 where there is a statement
in indirect discourse; John 1:1 is direct....I am neither a Christian nor a
Trinitarian.”
Dr. Julius Mantey, author of A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament is quoted on pages 1158-1159 of the Kingdom interlinear Translation.
“Well,
as a backdrop, I was disturbed because they (Watchtower) had misquoted me in
support of their translation.” [19]
He calls the New World Translation “a shocking mistranslation” and “obsolete and incorrect.”
“It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 ‘The Word was a god.’”
…
the translators of the NWT are “diabolical deceivers”. [20]
“I have never read any New Testament so badly
translated as The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of The Greek Scriptures....
it is a distortion of the New Testament. The translators used what J.B. Rotherham
had translated in 1893, in modern speech, and changed the readings in scores of
passages to state what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe and teach. That is a
distortion not a translation.” [21]
In Genesis 2-3 we read that Adam and Eve saw and spoke directly to God. Genesis 18:1 relates that Abraham and Sarah were visited by Yahweh in human form. Jacob exclaims in Genesis 32:30:
“It is because I SAW GOD FACE TO FACE, and yet my life was spared.”
But John writes in his gospel:
NO ONE HAS EVER SEEN GOD … (John 1:18)
Does the Bible contradict itself here? NO! John was referring here to the Father. The appearances of Yahweh in the Old Testament were all appearances of the second person of the Godhead, namely Jesus. John goes on to explain this:
NIV:
No one has ever seen God, but God the only Son, who is at the Father’s side,
has made him known.
NASB:
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of
the Father, He has explained Him.
New International Reader’s Version: No one has ever seen God. But God, the one and only Son, is at the Father's side. He has shown us what God is like.
Some translations read, “the only begotten Son” (e.g. KJV). However, the earliest and best Greek manuscripts along with the quotations of the Church Fathers, support the reading the “only begotten God” (monogenēs theos). The term “only begotten” or as the NIV reads, “One and Only” is from the Greek word “monogenēs”, monos meaning “alone” or “only” and genos meaning “kind” or “type”. In other words “monogenēs” means “one of a kind” or “unique”. In Hebrews 11:17 Isaac is called Abraham's “only-begotten” (monogenē) and yet Abraham had another son (Ishmael). Thus, Isaac was the “unique son” through whom his “offspring will be reckoned.” Likewise in John 1:18, Jesus is the “unique God”, who explains or reveals God the Father.
Paul instructs the Ephesian elders (Acts 20:28) to:
“Be
shepherds of the
If God bought us with his OWN blood, surely this indicates that Jesus is God?
Historically Paul's letter to the Colossians was a pointed refutation against Gnosticism. Paul was very concerned about the heretical teachings that were creeping into the church. Jesus is the physical expression of the spiritual Father, He was FULLY God.
Colossians
1:19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell (live) in him
(Christ).
Colossians 2:9 For in Him (Christ) all the fullness of Deity (the state of being God) dwells (lives) in bodily form.
Paul specifically refutes the Gnostic teaching that asserted Jesus was not the supreme eternal God in flesh. The Gnostic Jesus was a “lesser god”, i.e. an emanation from the supreme God. According to Gnosticism, the supreme God was pure spirit. Hence, spirit is good and all matter or the material world was inherently evil, thus God or anything good cannot dwell in flesh. Therefore Jesus only “seemed” to posses a body. Bearing that in mind, we can understand why Paul, inspired by the Holy Spirit, chose this specific wording in this verse. The verse is clear - Jesus is fully God in human flesh. The Greek reads:
Οτι |
εν |
αυτω |
κατοικει |
παν |
το |
πληρωμα |
της |
θεοτητος |
Σωματικως |
Hoti |
en |
autō |
katoikei |
pas |
ho |
plērōma |
ho |
theotētos |
Sōmatikōs |
because |
in |
Him |
dwells |
all |
the |
fullness |
of the |
Deity |
bodily |
The word theotētos is derived from theos (God). Recognized Greek lexicographer, Joseph Thayer, defines theotētos as: “the state of being God”.
The Apostle John also deals with this Gnostic error (denying that Jesus came in flesh) in his gospel and epistles.
John
1:14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us…
1 John 4:2-3 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit who confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit who doesn't confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God, and this is the spirit of the Antichrist, of whom you have heard that it comes. Now it is in the world already.
Speaking of the second coming of Jesus, Paul writes to Titus:
Titus 2:13 … looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, (NASB)
The same phrase “God and Savior” is utilised by the Apostle Peter:
2 Peter 1:1 Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ: (NASB)
JWs will forcefully argue that in this verse there are 2 Persons being referred to: Jesus (‘Savior’) and the Father (“the great God”). This is because of the way their Bible (NWT ) mistranslates the verse:
Titus 2:13 … while we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus. (NWT)
2 Peter 1:1 … by the righteousness of our God and [the] Savior Jesus Christ. (NWT)
With no grammatical justification at all, the NWT inserts the article “the” preceding the word ‘Savior’. Contrary to the Greek which does not contain the article before ‘Savior’ which, as we will see, is highly significant to the meaning. The NWT does put brackets around the article ‘the’ admitting that it was not originally in the text.
Starting with Titus 2:13, let us read the verse in the Greek:
Του |
μεγαλου |
θεου |
και |
σωτηρος |
ημων |
ιησου |
χριστου |
Ho |
megas |
theos |
kai |
soter |
hemon |
Iesous |
Christos |
of the |
great |
God |
and |
Savior |
of us |
Jesus |
Christ |
If the definite article (‘the’) appeared before ‘Savior’ in the Greek text, then, and only then can we justify the “2 Persons” argument asserted by the JWs. But there is not.
Specifically though, these verses fall under an important Greek rule: Granville Sharp #1 . Also known as the TSKS rule (i.e. ‘The’-’Substantive’-’Kai’-’Substantive’).
"Sharp's rule states that when 2 singular personal nouns (such as God and Savior) of the same case (as we have here) are connected by ‘and’ (the Greek word is ‘kai’), and the modifying article ‘the’ (the Greek word is ‘ho’) appears only before the first noun, not before the second, both nouns must refer to the same person. In this passage, ‘God’ and ‘Savior’ are connected by ‘and’. Also, ‘the’ appears only before ‘God’. Therefore, ‘God’ and ‘Savior’ must refer to the same person—Jesus.
Thus, honest and unbiased scholarship requires that the words in these verses must be translated ‘our God and Savior, Jesus Christ’”
Even the context of the passage shows that Paul had one person -- not two -- in mind, for he speaks of “the glorious appearing” of that person. The Bible talks of only one such appearing--that of Jesus. And how could it be possible for the invisible God to appear other than as the visible Christ, who is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15)?
If JWs insist that these verses don’t refer to only Jesus, read to them, from their Bible (NWT) 2 Peter 1:11; 2:20, 3:18: … the entrance to the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1:11; NWT).
No one says that these verses are speaking of 2 Persons. And yet the Greek construction is exactly the same at Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. Notice, 2 Peter 1:1 compared to verse 11:
VERSE 1
Του |
θεου |
ημων |
και |
σωτηρος |
ιησου |
χριστου |
Ho |
theos |
hemon |
kai |
soter |
Iesous |
Christos |
of the |
God |
of us |
and |
Savior |
Jesus |
Christ |
VERSE 11
του |
κυριου |
Ημων |
και |
σωτηρος |
Ιησου |
χριστου |
Ho |
kurios |
Hemon |
kai |
soter |
Iesous |
Christos |
of the |
Lord |
of us |
and |
Savior |
Jesus |
Christ |
JWs who lack certified Greek scholarship will admit that “Lord and Savior” in verses 1:11, 2:20 and 3:18 are in reference to Jesus only. But these verses are the same Granville Sharp TSKS constructions as 2 Peter 1:1 and Titus 2:13!
Kenneth Wuest in his “Expanded Translation” brings out the Sharp constructions in a number of other instances. For example,
2
Thessalonians 1:12 reads, “in accordance with the grace of our God, even the
Lord Jesus Christ”.
1
Timothy 5:21: “I solemnly charge you in the presence of our God, even Jesus
Christ...”
2 Timothy 4:1: “I solemnly charge you as one who is living in the presence of our God, even Christ Jesus...”
The writer of Hebrews says much about the deity of Jesus.
Jesus is described as follows in Hebrews 1:3:
The
Son is the radiance of God’s glory, and the exact representation of his being,
sustaining all things by his powerful word. (NIV)
His
Son is the radiance of his glory, the very image of his substance… (WEB)
Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his person (Geneva Study Bible)
Hence, Jesus is “the precise reproduction in every respect” of the “essence, actual being, reality” of God. How can Jesus be an exact expression of the real being of the Father without Himself possessing true Deity?
χαρακτηρ |
υποστασεως |
charakter |
hupostasis |
exact copy |
Essence |
express image |
Person |
exact representation |
Substance |
|
Being |
Heb 1:5,8 For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father” … But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever…”
Προς |
δε |
τον |
Υιον |
|
ο |
Θρονος |
σου |
ο |
θεος |
Pros |
de |
ho |
Huios |
|
ho |
thronos |
sou |
ho |
theos |
Regarding |
but |
the |
Son |
[He says] |
the |
throne |
of you |
the |
God |
In Greek, “But regarding the Son [He says], “The throne of you, the God…” One again Jesus is called ‘the God’ in Greek, which again destroys the argument used by the Watchtower in their rendering of John 1:1.
It troubles some people that Jesus refers to the Father as “my God”. However, Hebrews shows us that both the Father and the Son address each other as God.
Hebrews 1:8-9 But about the Son he (the Father) says, “Your throne, O God, will last forever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.
In the above passage Jesus is called ‘God’ by the Father and the Father refers to himself as “Your God”. All members of the Godhead thus refer to each other as God.
The Watchtower Society (i.e. JWs) teach that Jesus is the
archangel Michael and the Mormons believe that he is Satan’s brother. This is
curious, as Hebrews 1 has as its central theme the superiority of Jesus over
the angels.
1) He has a greater name i.e. Son of God (vs 4-5)
2) Angels are commanded to worship Him (vs 6)
3) The Father addresses Him as God (vs 8-9)
4) He is the Creator (vs 10-12)
5) He is immutable (vs 12 & Heb 13:8)
6) He is eternal (vs 12)
7) He is seated at God’s right hand and is the ruler of the coming age (vs 13)
Jesus himself claimed equality and ‘one-ness’ with the Father.
John 14:8-10 Philip said, “Lord show us the Father and that will be enough for us.” Jesus answered: “DON’T YOU KNOW ME, PHILIP EVEN AFTER I HAVE BEEN AMONG YOU SUCH A LONG TIME? ANYONE WHO HAS SEEN ME HAS SEEN THE FATHER, How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? DON’T YOU BELIEVE THAT I AM IN THE FATHER, AND THAT THE FATHER IS IN ME?”
When the Pharisees, Sadducees and teachers of the law kept on testing Jesus with questions, he finally responded with a question they couldn’t answer.
Matthew
22:41-46 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, “What do
you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?”
“The son of David,” they replied.
He said to them, “How is it then that David, speaking by the Spirit, calls him
‘Lord’? For he says, ‘The Lord said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I
put your enemies under your feet.”’
If then David calls him ‘Lord,’ how can he be his son?”
No one could say a word in reply, and from that day on no one dared to ask him
any more questions.
They were unable to answer as they didn’t realise that the Christ (Messiah) or “Son of David” would be one of the members of the Godhead. Jesus quoted from Psalm 110:1 where Yahweh (translated ‘LORD’ in the OT) is addressing Adonai (normally translated ‘Lord’ in the OT to differentiate it from the upper-case ‘LORD’ used for Yahweh).
A Psalm by David. Yahweh says to my Lord (Adonai), “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool for your feet.” (WEB)
The gospel writers refer to Jesus as both the “Son of Man” (showing his humanity” and the “Son of God” (showing his deity). Daniel had a Messianic vision of a “son of man” in the presence of God who is given authority.
Daniel 6:13-14 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.”
Jesus referred directly to this prophecy at his trial. The high priest understood this to be a blasphemous claim.
Matthew
26:63-66 … The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living
God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.”
“Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: In the future
you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and
coming on the clouds of heaven.”
Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “He has spoken blasphemy! Why
do we need any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy. What do
you think?”
“He is worthy of death,” they answered.
Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to
you, before Abraham was born, I am.”
Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went
out of the temple. (NAS)
Jesus said, “… before Abraham was born, I AM” [egō eimi]. What did he mean and why did the Jews try to stone him? This doesn’t seem to make grammatical sense - or does it? By saying, “I AM” he was showing that He is not bound by time (i.e. one of God’s unique attributes of being eternal). All time is present to Him. He could have said, “Before Abraham was born, I was” but Jesus’ choice of these words was no accident. Let’s examine what God said when Moses asked what His name was.
Exodus
3:13-14 Moses said to God, “Behold, when I come to the children of Israel, and
tell them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you;’ and they ask me, ‘What
is his name?’ What should I tell them?”
God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM,” and he said, “You shall tell the children
of
Thus “I AM” is the name, or rather the title that God chose to be known by. Furthermore the Hebrew for Yahweh sounds like and may be derived from the Hebrew for “I AM” [22] and God seems to associate the two in the rest of the passage in Exodus. In applying this title to Himself, Jesus was claiming equality with God. This explains the Jews attempt to stone Him; they thought He was being blasphemous.
In addition Jesus applied the divine title “I AM” (egō eimi) in the absolute (i.e. appearing at the end of the clause) to Himself on 7 occasions. Only in John 8:58 is it correctly translated as “I am”. In other cases the same phrase is rendered as “I am [he]” or “It is I”. Egō eimi was a frequent title used of Yahweh alone (e.g. Deut. 32:39; Is. 43:10; 41:4; cf. LXX).
Θαρσειτε |
εγω |
ειμι |
μη |
φοβεισθε |
tharseo |
ego |
eimi |
me |
phobeo |
be of good cheer |
I |
am |
be not |
afraid |
For they all saw Him and were terrified. But immediately He spoke with them and said to them, “Take courage; it is I [egō eimi], do not be afraid.”
The Greek reads: “Be of good cheer, I AM, be not afraid”)
“Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I AM He [egō eimi] , you will die in your sins”
Again ‘he’ is not in the Greek.
εαν γαρ |
μη |
πιστευσητε |
οτι |
εγω |
ειμι |
Αποθανεισθε |
Εν |
ταις |
αμαρτιαις |
υμων |
Ean gar |
me |
pisteuo |
hoti |
ego |
eimi |
apothnesko |
en |
ho |
hamartia |
humon |
For if |
not |
believe |
that |
I |
am |
you will die |
in |
the |
sins |
of you |
In fact, in Isaiah 43:10, Yahweh asserts the same:
“You are My witness, declares the LORD, And My servants whom I have chosen, So that you may know and believe Me And understand that I AM He [egō eimi; cf, LXX] . Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me” (43:10).
In the Septuagint (LXX), ‘He’ is not there. Thus: “declares the LORD . . . that you may . . . believe . . . that I AM.” The full force of Jesus’ assertion is striking. He did not say, “If you do not believe that “I am He” or “I am the one I claimed to be” as most translations read (i.e. there is no supplied predicate). Jesus clearly asserts here that salvation rests on believing that He is the eternal God.
So Jesus said, “when you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I AM He [egō eimi]...”
As with John 8:24, ‘He’ is supplied by the translators and hence not in the Greek text. Jesus speaks of his death (and resurrection) leading to the realisation of his deity.
οταν |
υψωσητε |
του |
υιον |
του |
ανθρωπου |
τοτε |
γνωσεσθε |
οτι |
εγω |
Ειμι |
hotan |
Hupsoo |
ho |
huios |
ho |
anthropos |
tote |
ginosko |
hoti |
ego |
eimi |
when |
(you) lift up |
the |
Son |
(of) the |
man |
then |
you will know |
that |
I |
am |
“I don’t speak concerning all of you. I know whom I have chosen. But that the Scripture may be fulfilled, ‘He who eats bread with me has lifted up his heel against me.’ From now on, I tell you before it happens, that when it happens, you may believe that I am he.” [egō eimi]
Once again ‘he’ is not in the Greek. Jesus speaks of his foreknowledge leading to the realisation of his deity.
Ινα |
πιστευσητε |
οταν |
γενηται |
οτι |
εγω |
ειμι |
hina |
pisteuo |
hotan |
ginomai |
hoti |
ego |
eimi |
that |
you should be believing |
when |
it happens |
that |
I |
Am |
They answered Him, “Jesus the Nazarene.” He said to them, “I AM he [egō eimi]” So when they He said to them, “I AM He, [egō eimi]” they drew back and fell on the to the ground…
Jesus answered, “I told you that I AM he [egō eimi]…”
In verses 5, 6 and 8 ‘he’ is not in the Greek. It’s interesting to note that when Jesus said “I am” that they fell to the ground.
λεγει |
αυτοις |
εγω |
ειμι |
lego |
Autos |
ego |
eimi |
He said |
to them |
I |
am |
[2] Wikipedia - Trinity https://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity
[3] Ibid
[4] Mormons view the Godhead as three separate beings who are one in purpose rather than essence.
[5] one deity/one person
[6] “Mere Christianity: The Three – Personal God”
[7] Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary: Trinity
[8]
“JEWISHNESS AND THE TRINITY” by Dr.
[9] Ibid
[11] Elohenu
comes from “Elohim” (Gods) with “ENU” being the plural possessive
pronoun-suffix denoting things which belong to us.
[13] Ibid
[14] Ibid
[15] “JEWISHNESS
AND THE TRINITY” by Dr.
[16] SOURCE: www.letusreason.org/Onenes13.htm
[17] SOURCE: “The Deity of Jesus Christ” https://www.christiandefense.org/jw_deity.htm
[18] R. K. McGregor Wright, Ph.D. I. “How to Witness to Jehovah’s Witnesses About The Deity of Christ” https://www.donie.biz/HTM/JAHOVA.HTM
[19] These words were excerpted from the tape, “Martin and Julius Mantey on The New World Translation”.
[20] Julius Mantey in discussion with Walter Martin
[21] Julius Mantey, Depth Exploration in The New Testament (N.Y.: Vantage Pres, 1980), pp.136-137