Search This Blog

Sunday, November 14, 2010

The Deity of Jesus: An Answer to Jehovah's Witnesses

THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST
AN ANSWER TO JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES
Introduction
The person and work of Jesus Christ, according to the Bible is the center of the gospel, salvation, Christianity and the Church. Therefore, the whole point of Christianity, whether it be the Christian doctrine, life, hope or character, is determined by who Jesus is and by what he does. Quoting the writing of James Danny, William Evans in his book The Great Doctrines of the Bible Writes:
From the beginning to the end, in all its various phrase and aspects and elements, the Christian faith and life is determined by the person and work of Christ. It owes its life and character at every point to Him. Its convictions are convictions about Him. Its hopes are hopes which he had inspired and which it is for him to fulfill. Its ideas are born of His teaching and His life. Its strength is the strength of His Spirit.[1]
Therefore, failing to know and believe the true being of Jesus Christ, the Lord is a serious danger. Without Him the whole universe is dead and chaos, the gospel is dead and powerless, the Christian belief and life are pointless, and the church is meaningless. Those who fail to hold the true Jesus of the Bible like Jehovah’s Witnesses are in a serious danger, and their faith is without Biblical support, because the Jesus they claim to follow is totally different from the one presented in the Bible.
The Relationship between Jehovah’s Witnesses and Arius
Jehovah’s Witnesses are commonly believed to be Arians. Therefore it is will be good to see how similar and different the two are. Are Jehovah’s Witnesses truly Arians?
The answer is both yes and no. Just as the Witnesses have a lot in common with Arius with regard to the person of Jesus, they also have a lot of difference on this same doctrine.  Arius of Alexandria, in the fourth century denied the full deity of Jesus Christ, and taught that Jesus had a beginning. He claimed that Jesus was the first creation of God. A council was called before Arius’ teaching could divide the church in 325 AD, and Arius was deposed. The Witnesses also believe this same heresy and therefore they are Arians with this regard.  Homer Duncan in his book Heart to Heart Talks with Jehovah’s Witnesses shows the relationship between Arius’ doctrine and the Witnesses teaching.
In recent years (beginning with C. T. Russell, 1870-1916) THE WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY of Brooklyn, New York, has been successful in reviving the Arian heresy… the WATCHTOWER teaches that since Jesus is a creature of God, he is not eternal and, therefore, is not equal with God.[2]
In this regard, the Witnesses are Arians.
However, the Witnesses and Arius of Alexandria are not completely similar nor are the Witnesses a continuation of the Arian heresy. Kim Lawrence James in his Thesis on the Witnesses’ doctrine of the person of Jesus Christ compares and contracts the belief of both the Witnesses and Arius throughout the thesis. Some of the differences can be easily identified from the thesis. For example both believe that Jesus was the first creation of God. However, Arius believes the Holy Spirit was a person and that He is the first creation of Jesus while Witnesses believe that Holy Spirit is the active power of God.[3] Both the Witnesses and Arius believe in the humanity of Jesus while he was on the earth. However, Arius believed that Jesus had to work towards his perfection as far as sinfulness is concerned, while the Witnesses believed that Jesus was perfect and that he was sinless.[4] In addition Arius believed that Jesus did not posses “human reasoning faculty” while the Witnesses believed every part of Jesus was human including his “reasoning faculty” while he was on earth.[5] Both the Witnesses and Arius believed that Jesus was rewarded with immortality by God. However, Arius believed Jesus was rewarded while on earth, while the witnesses believed that the reward taken place after the resurrection.[6] Therefore, the Jehovah’s Witnesses are Arians in some points and they are not in other points. In any ways, both of them openly deny the full deity of Jesus Christ.
According to the Witnesses doctrine Jesus Christ passed through different changes as far as His personality is concerned, but He was never a deity at any point. In their doctrine Jesus was first created by God the almighty and became an archangel; later he was born of virgin Marry and became a human being. After His death, His body was deposed by God and only His spirit resurrected from death. Now Jesus is the archangel Michael again and living as a spirit. In 1914, Jesus had returned to the world, and he is gradually taking full control of the whole world. The purpose of this paper is not only to show the false fullness of this doctrine, but to point the deity of Jesus at every point of the stages.
Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Doctrine on the Person of Christ
Jesus Before His Incarnation
Anthony Hoekemia in his book Jehovah’s Witnesses states three points about the Witnesses’ belief on the state of Jesus before His coming to earth as a man. 1. He was the first creature of Jehovah. 2. He was an angel, and 3. He was some type of god.[7] According to the Witnesses therefore, Jesus was some type of god created by the almighty God to be an angel. He is not the almighty God Himself, but He is just a mighty and smaller God.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Jesus is a created being. As Irvine Robertson, the author of What the Cults Believe points out, the Jehovah’s Witnesses believe in three stages of creation. Jesus was created first as the only begotten son and in such a way God became the Father. Next to Jesus, the angels were created, and finally the heavens and the earth were created.[8] Therefore, according to the Witnesses, except for God Himself everything and being (including Jesus Christ) is a creation.
To back their doctrine with some biblical verses, the Witnesses quote Col. 1:15 and Rev. 3:14 as their major support. For them both of these verses indicate the creation of Jesus before anything else because in Col 1:15 the Bible calls Jesus as the “firstborn over all creation,” and again in Rev 3:14 Jesus addresses Himself as “the beginning of the creation of God.”
These false teachers, in addition to the above doctrine, they identify Jesus as an angel. However, according to them, He is not a lay angel. As Hoekemia points out, “… during his pre-human state, the son was really an angle. Previous to the son’s coming to the earth as man He was not known as Jesus Christ, but as [the archangel] Michael.”[9] Since Jesus is an angel, the only difference between Jesus and the other angles is that of a degree, not of a kind.[10]
The verses they quote to prove their doctrine are really shallow and illogical. For them the angel Michael is Jesus because in Daniel 12:1 Michael is said to be a ruler of God’s people as the end the tribulation period. Since Jesus will reign at the end of the great tribulation, Michael and Jesus are the same. The NIV translates Daniel 12: 1 as “At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise.” The Jehovah’s Witnesses translate “will rise” as “began to reign as King”.[11] Since no one else other than Jesus will reign at the end of the great tribulation Jesus and Michael must be the same person.
According to this cult, not only is Jesus a creation and an angel, but also he is some type of God. Since the Bible clearly states the fact of Jesus’ Divinity, the Witnesses have to come up with some kind of explanation to save their doctrine from contradiction. In his book The Kingdom of Cults, Walter R. Martin shows the explanation they made base on John 1:1. The first verse of the Gospel of John has three sentences. (i.e “In the beginning was the word.”, “and the word was with God” and “and the word was God”). The word God is mentioned twice in this verse, i.e. in the second and the third sentences. In the original text (i.e. the Greek New Testament), the first one has a definite article. Therefore, the verse reads like “and the word was with [the] God.”  However the third sentence has neither a definite nor an indefinite article. (In fact the Greek language does not have an indefinite article). The omission of the definite article, according to them, shows the difference between the first one and the second. Therefore, the third phrase should be translated like “and the word was a god.”[12]  The logical conclusion is that Jesus must be a lesser God since there is only one almighty God.
Jesus During His Incarnation
Jehovah’s Witnesses have their own teaching about the being of Jesus during his humanity. Like that of the Evangelicals, they believe in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ.[13] However, it was the angle Michael who was conceived in the womb of Mary.[14] One thing that should be noticed here is that the whole being of the archangel Michael was not conceived since Jesus completely stopped being a spirit when He became a man. What was transferred into the womb of Mary was not the spirit of the angle but “the life, personality and life pattern of the angel”.[15] Their conclusion is, thus, the archangel Michael was born of a virgin at the incarnation as the Lord Jesus Christ.
The archangel, according to them, had only one nature when he became a baby boy – Jesus Christ at the incarnation. Therefore, the Evangelicals doctrine that Jesus was/is both Deity and human at the same time is totally unacceptable to them. He was not God-man when he was on the earth and after. He was man and man alone instead. In fact as Hoekemia says, they think that “he stopped being a spirit person [when he was born of Marry] and became a man – nothing more than a man.”[16]
Jesus at and after His Resurrection
In addition to the above, the witnesses err in their doctrine regarding the being of Jesus Christ at the time of His resurrection and the manner of His second coming.  As to the resurrection of Jesus, they openly deny the bodily resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. Quoting from one of the Witnesses’ books, Let God Be True, Josh McDowell and Don Stewart, the authors of The Deceivers put the whole philosophy of Jesus’ resurrection as a spirit being in a simple way, “so the king Jesus was to put to death in the flesh and was raised an invisible spirit creature.”[17] Hoekemia on the other hand records the reason behind this belief of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. According to the Witnesses, Jesus had to sacrifice His physical body permanently to atone the sin of Adam, and therefore, there is no room for the resurrection of His physical body. Thus God raised Him as a spirit[18].
Since they deny the resurrection of Jesus’ physical body, Robert Morey, one of the famous Christian apologists, in his online presentation concludes, “the Jesus of Jehovah’s Witnesses is dead. He is not worthy of our love and he cannot save us.”[19] Indeed as Vincent Mccan, one of the literature contributors for the website of Spotlight Ministry said the body of Jesus was “dissolved into its constituent elements or atoms.”[20] The sad thing is that the Witnesses themselves are not very sure about this doctrine they themselves made. As quoted by McDowell and Stewart, Russell, the founder of this cult had written, “whether it was dissolved into gasses or whether it is still preserved somewhere as a grad memorial of God’s love, of Christ’s obedience, and of our redemption, no one knows.”[21] It seems that the Witnesses have a logical reason for their belief in the disappearance of the Lord’s body. P. E. Hewitte mentions the reason in his book of Russellism Exposed based on the writings of Russell and Rutherford, the fathers of the Witnesses. It “would have been insurmountable obstacle to the faith of the disciples”[22] if the Lord’s body had remained in the tomb. The truth that Jesus had appeared in a physical body to the disciples after the resurrection cannot be held against this doctrine according to the Witnesses because the physical body that had appeared the disciples was “a merely materialized flesh and blood to be seen and believed.”[23] This “merely materialized body didn’t stay with Jesus or go out of doors, but simply disappeared or dissolved into some elements from which he [Jesus] created them few moments before.”[24] Being amazed at this unbiblical Jesus of the witnesses and their doctrine McCann writes, it is:
Incredible that the Jehovah’s Witnesses arrived at these conclusions, especially when one considers the massive amount of Biblical evidence to show that Jesus was raised in His actual body … it is equally incredible that Jehovah’s Witnesses cannot point to a single scripture that supports their belief that Jehovah God disposed of Jesus’ body in some way.[25]
This dangerous doctrine of Jesus’ resurrection led the Witnesses even to another dangerous doctrine. For them Jesus Christ is no more a human being. He is or was the archangel Michael again instead. As Hoekemia said they think “the life which Christ enjoys is not human life, the life of a divine person with a human nature, but the angelic life – life as a spirit creature called Michael.”[26] So there is no “real continuity” between the human state of Jesus and His post-resurrection state, for he is not a human being anymore after his resurrection.[27]
Jesus and His Second Coming
At the second coming the being and state of Jesus won’t be changed according to the Witnesses’ Doctrine and therefore His coming will not be physical. In the doctrine they hold up, the very meaning of Christ’s return is perverted. For them
“… the ‘return’ or ‘second presence’ of Jesus Christ simply means that Christ, who had been sitting at the Father’s right hand in heaven since his accession, now ascends the throne of his kingdom at the Father’s right hand in heaven. The ‘return’ of Christ … exclusively heavenly transaction consisting merely in Christ’s exchanging an ordinary seat at the father’s right hand for a throne”.[28]
Therefore, Jesus will not come leaving the heaven at his second coming. In fact, as Walter R. Martin in his book, The Kingdome of Cults, Clarifies it, there is no way for Jesus to return physically since He had not physical body after His return.[29] “His coming will be quietly … and entirely unknown to the world … He will come invisibly … and will be revealed gradually … His church cannot see him with the natural eye … however, his coming in understood by the faithful …”[30]
According to the Witnesses the coming of Jesus is not a hope to occur in the future, but it has already occurred. As Kevin Quick pointed out, it is believed that Jesus returned to the earth in 1914, and his manner of coming was “secret” and “invisible.”[31] Before 1914, the Witnesses expected a visible return of the Lord. However, since Jesus did not visibly come on the year as they prophesized, they made up this explanation about the second coming of the Lord.[32] Now the coming can be recognized and seen only “through ‘the spiritual eyes’ of the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization.”[33]
The logical conclusion of the above paragraph is that the coming of the Lord is not a hope to be looked for by Christians. The Lord has already returned. He is ruling the whole world in His spirit, and everything is being submitted gradually. There is nothing to wait and hope for in the future as long as the Second Advent is concerned.[34] Therefore the Evangelicals belief of the second coming of Jesus is none other than false prophecy.
As it is clearly pointed out above, the Jesus of Jehovah’s Witnesses is totally unbiblical. He was not a God before His “pre-humanity” – but a lesser god created to be an angel Michael. He was born of a virgin indeed as the deceivers claim, but never had two natures – the nature of God and man. He was man and man alone instead. The Witnesses again believe that He was crucified to pay the wage of the sinners, and His spirit was raised up from death. But His physical body was either disposed or hidden by God. His coming is believed and accepted in their doctrine, but it is not a Christian hope any more. He has already come secretly.
Biblical Teaching on the Person of Jesus Christ
As pointed out above, the Jehovah’s Witnesses believed in a Jesus that is not deity but the archangel Michael, who became a mere man on earth, whose physical body deposed after his death. During his resurrection, only his spirit resurrected and Jesus became the archangel Michael one more again. Since he is a spirit, there is no such thing as physical second coming of Jesus. In fact, the second coming has already occurred in spirit. Now, the false fullness of this doctrine will be discussed in the next few pages.
Jesus before His Incarnation
With regard to his personhood before the incarnation of Jesus, the Witnesses teach that Jesus was a created being to be a lesser god, and He is identified as Archangel Michael. However, the Bible does not present Jesus as a created being but as the God who created everything.
First, Col 1:15 does not teach the creation of Jesus by God before the creation of the universe. It is true that the verse teach that Jesus is the “first born before all creation,” but “first born” does not mean first created. As Kim Lawrence James pointed out the Greek word used for first born (prwtotokos) can indicate either “priority” or “primacy of position.” Therefore, according to James, interpreting the verse as meaning that Jesus was the first to be created is not the only option.[35] However, the context reveals the primacy of Jesus is the only possible interpretation. What the text is teaching in that passage is the supremacy of Jesus over all creation because He brought forth all the creation into existence.
Jesus is identified with the angle Michael in the Witnesses’ doctrine, and the major verse they have is Dan 12:1. For them, Dan 12:1 teaches that Michael will be ruling at the end, and therefore he must be Jesus since no one else is supposed to rule other than Jesus. However, the only thing Dan 12:1 is saying is that the angel Michael will stand up to aid God’s people at the end of the world. It does not teach that Michael will rule.[36] In fact, as Kim James pointed out Michael is inferior to another powerful angel because in Dan 11:1 another angel stood by Michael to strengthen him.[37]
Again, in the Witnesses doctrine, Jesus is said to be a mighty god but not the Almighty God, and they find their biblical support in John 1:1. However, John 1:1 was a strong support for the deity of Christ. The Witnesses argument on this verse is that the third line of John 1:1 should be translated “and the word was a god” because the Greek text lucks definite article before the noun God.
First, it is impossible for the author of the Gospel of John to insert an article in front of God in the third line of John 1:1. The third line of the Greek text reads kai qeos hn o logos. In this Greek text the presence of a definite article (o) in front of (logos) indicates that logos is the subject of the sentence. Since hn is an intransitive verb, it cannot take a direct object but a predicate noun, and in this case the predicate noun is qeos. Now if there was a definite noun in front of qeos it would be impossible to tell which one is the subject and which one is the predicate noun. The grammar would not allow the insertion of a definite article in this situation or it would be a bad grammar. Walter Martin and Norman Klann in their book Jehovah of the Watchtower conclude that translating this text as “and the word was a god” “is both incorrect grammar and poor Greek since THEOS is the predicate nominative of was in the third sentence clause of the verse and must refer back to the subject, Word (LOGOS).”[38]
Second, there are many occasions in the New Testament passages where qeos without definite article rendered as God even in the New World Translation which is the Witnesses’ translation of the Bible. In this translation of the Bible the Witnesses contradict their own rule elsewhere in the New Testament.  Matt 5:9, 6:24, Luke 1:35, 78; John 1:6 … are a few examples where qeos without a definite article is rendered as God. After noticing this inconsistency Walter Martin and Norman Klann expose the truth behind the Witnesses translation. “The truth of the matter is this, that Jehovah’s Witnesses use and remove the articular emphasis whenever and wherever it suits their fancy regardless of grammatical laws to the contrary.”[39]
John 1:1 is a very strong verse that teaches the deity of Jesus Christ. Not only does it directly claim His deity, but it also shows that Jesus was with God from eternity past. The verses next to it also tell that He is not a creature, but the creator and originator of everything. Therefore before the incarnation Jesus was God.
Jesus during His Incarnation
During the incarnation, the Witnesses teach that Jesus became a perfect man. He lived as a man not as a God- man. It is true that Jesu lived as a perfect man while on earth, but the point of this paper is to prove that He was deity at the same time while He was on earth. In John 1:1 after claiming the deity of Jesus Christ, in that same chapter John tells that Jesus became a man (v. 14). Jesus did not cease to be a deity when He became a man but the Scripture tells that He was both man and God at the same time Col 1:19. In addition, Jesus Himself claimed to be one with God while He was on the earth (John 10:30).
Jesus after His Resurrection and His Second Coming
The Witnesses teaching on the person of Jesus after His resurrection is that Jesus’ body was deposed and His spirit was raised during the event of the resurrection. He became an angel one more again, and He returned as to the world as a spirit in 1914.
There are many reasons why Jesus remained deity after His resurrection and He will be the same forever. First, the Bible teaches that the Jesus of yesterday and today remains the same forever (Heb 13:8). Second, immutability is one of the essences of deity. If Jesus was deity before the incarnation, He is to remain deity forever. God cannot change. The resurrection and the coming back of Jesus do not change the nature of Jesus.
Conclusion: Jesus is Deity
The teaching of the Jehovah’s Witnesses is really confusing to a lot of people who do not know the Christian doctrine very well. Not only do they rob Jesus of His deity, but they give Him different nature and status at different stages. However, the Bible consistently teaches the deity of Jesus from eternity to eternity.
First, the Bible claims that Jesus is God. John 1:1 and Heb 1:8 directly call Jesus God, and God is always God. Second, the works Jesus did and His characters show that Jesus is God. He healed people, He raised dead people from death, and He forgave the sins of people. In addition, He used to know what people taught in their heart, He promised to be in the midst of people who gather together in his name. In short He is immutable, eternal, omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. Jesus is in fact deity.



BIBLIOGRAPHY


Books
Duncan, Homer. Heart to Heart Talks with Jehovah’s Witnesses. Lubbock, TX: Missionary            Crusader Inc., 1972.
Evans, William. The Great Doctrines of the Bible. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.
Graham, Holt H. “Jehovah’s Witnesses”, Merit Student Encyclopedia, 1987 ed.
Gruss, Edmond C. We Left Jehovah’s Witnesses. Nutley, NJ. Presbyterian and reformed                            Publishing Company, 1975.
Hewitt, P. E. Russelism Exposed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1949.
Hoekemia, Anthony A. Jehovah’s Witnesses. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans      Publishing company, 1972.
James, Kim Lawrence. “The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Doctrine of the Person of Christ.”  PH. D.        thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1968.

Martin, Walter R. The kingdom of Cults. Minneapolis, MN: Bethany Fellowship, Inc., 1974.
Martin, Walter R. & Klann, Norman. Jehovah of the Watchtower: A Through Expose of the                       Important Anti-Biblical Teachings of Jehovah’s Witnesses. New York, NY: Biblical    Truth Publishing Society, Inc., 1953.
McDowell, John & Stewart, Don. Understanding Cults. San Bernardino, CA: Here’s Life             Publishers, Inc., 1982.
McDowell, John & Stewart, Don. The Deceivers. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers,                     1984.
Robertson, Irvine. What the Cults Believe. Chicago: Moody Press, 1981.
Schnell, William J. Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Errors Exposed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book             House, 1976.
Wellborn, Charles T. Religion in America. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co, 1975.

Articles


MaCGregor, Lorri. “Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Second Coming of Christ.” [on-line]. Accessed               7 Apr 2010. Available from http://www.ankerberg.org/Articles/_PDFArchives/apologetics/AP2W1001.pdf; Internet.

McCann, Vincent. “The Resurrection of Jesus: Raised Bodily or as a Spirit Creature?” [on-line].   Accessed 7 Apr 2010. Available from http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/jwjesusres.htm; Internet.
Morey, Robert. “Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Resurrection of Jesus.” [on-line]. Accessed 7 Apr. 2010. Available from http://www.jude3.net/JWRES.HTM.
Quick, Kevin. “The Resurrection of Jesus: Raised Bodily or as a Spirit Creature?” [on-line].                      Accessed 7 April 2010. Available from     http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/jwjesusres.htm; Internet.


[1] William Evans, The Great Doctrines of the Bible (Chicago: Moody Press, 1974), 53.
[2] Homer Duncan, Heart to Heart Talks with Jehovah’s Witnesses (Lubbock: Missionary Crusader, 1972), 37.
[3] Kim Lawrence James, “The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Doctrine of the Person of Christ” (PH. D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 1968), 18.
[4] Ibid., 36.
[5] Ibid., 29.
[6] Ibid., 54.
[7] Antony Hoekemia, Jehovah’s Witnesses (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1972), 61-62.
[8] Irvine Robertson, What the Cults Believe (Chicago: Moody Press, 1981), 61-62.
[9] Hoekemia, Jehovah’s Witnesses, 61.
[10] Ibid., 61.
[11]James, “The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Doctrine of the Person of Christ” 24.
[12] Walter R. Martin, The Kingdom of Cults (Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship Inc., 1974), 75-77.
[13] Hoekemia, Jehovah’s Witnesses, 62.
[14] Ibid., 61-63.
[15] Ibid.
[16] Ibid.
[17] John McDowell and Don Stewart, The Deceivers (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, INC., 1982), 110.
[18]Hoekemia, Jehovah’s Witnesses, 65.
[19] Robert Morey, “Jehovah’s Witnesses and The Resurrection of Jesus” [on-line]; accessed 7 April 2010; available from http://www.jude3.net/JWRES.HTM; Internet.
[20] Vincent McCann, “The Resurrection of Jesus: Raised Bodily or as a Spirit Creature?” [on-line]; accessed 7 April 2010; available from http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/jwjesusres.htm; Internet.
[21] John McDowell and Don Stewart, The Deceivers, 110.
[22] P. E. Hewitt, Russelism Exposed (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1941), 25.
[23] John McDowell and Don Stewart, The Deceivers, 111.
[24] P. E. Hewitt, Russelism Exposed (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1941), 25.
[25] Vincent McCann, “The Resurrection of Jesus: Raised Bodily or as a Spirit Creature?” 
[26] Hoekemia, Jehovah’s Witnesses, 66.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Ibid., 91
[29] Walter R. Martin , The Kingdom of Cults, 87.
[30] P. E. Hewitt, Russelism Exposed, 28.
[31] Kevin Quick, “The Return of Christ” [on-line] accessed 7 April 2010; available from http://www.kevinquick.com/kkministries/books/reasoning/return.html; Internet.
[32] Lorri McGregore, “Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Second Coming of Christ” [on-line]; accessed 7 April 2010; available from http://www.ankerberg.org/Articles/_PDFArchives/apologetics/AP2W1001.pdf; Internet.
[33] Kevin Quick, “The Return of Christ”.
[34] Hoekemia, Jehovah’s Witnesses, 91.
[35] James, “The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Doctrine of the Person of Christ” 13.
[36] Ibid., 25.
[37] Ibid., 25-26.
[38] Walter R. Martin and Norman H. Klann, Jehovah of the Watchtower (New York: Biblical Truth Publishing Society, Inc., 1953), 49.
[39] Ibid., 51.

Saturday, November 13, 2010

The Holy Trinity

THE DOCTINE OF TRINITY
 IS IT BIBLICAL?
As much as the doctrine of the Holy Trinity is Biblical and very important both in the teachings of the Orthodox Church and the Christian life, it is at the same time one of the most debated and denied truth. There are a number of reasons as to why this doctrine is a stumbling block to many and hard to surrender. First, the word “Trinity” itself is not found in the Bible. In fact this term was first used in the third century. Second, there isn’t a single passage in the Bible that gives a detailed teaching of this doctrine. There are an overwhelming number of pieces everywhere in the Bible that refer to the nature of God as one in three persons. However, there isn’t a single passage that leads to such a conclusion by itself. Third the doctrine is hard to understand. The nature of God is amazingly unique. There is nothing like God. “To Whom, then will you compare God? What image will you compare him to?” (Isa 40:18).  It is hard to easily understand such a unique being and believe in such a doctrine.
Now the question is: Is this doctrine Biblical or is it a man made fabrication? It is true that the term “Trinity” is not in the Bible but is the concept Biblical? It is true that there is not a single biblical book, a passage or even a single verse is dedicated to explain this difficult doctrine. But does the whole counsel of the Bible (Genesis to Revelation) teach this doctrine? And again it is true that there is no such being that is one in essence but three in persons. But is the God of the Bible such a being – one in nature and three in persons as presented in the Trinitarian doctrine?  As long as the Bible teaches such a doctrine, it does not matter whether the term is used in the Bible or not; it does not matter whether the doctrine is summarized in a passage or not; and it doesn’t matter whether it is easy or not for people to understand the teaching. Therefore this paper focuses on proving the biblicality of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity.
One of the main reasons why people debate and argue on this doctrine is because they don’t really know what the doctrine is teaching. As James R. White said in his book The Forgotten Trinity; recovering the heart of Christian belief, “The Single greatest reason people struggle with the doctrine of the Trinity is miscommunication. It is very rare that anyone actually argues or debates about the real doctrine of the Trinity”.[1] Therefore it would be appropriate to summarize the “real doctrine of the Trinity” in few points first and then prove if these points are supported in the bible.
Even though the doctrine is very complex and huge, the whole doctrine can easily be summarized in three basic propositions. The purpose of this paper would be then proving the biblicality of these propositions.
1.      There is one and only one God.
The Trinitarians are monotheists even though unfairly accused of being polytheists. The real doctrine however claims the existence of only one God. God’s oneness is not only in “singularity” but also in nature. There is none like God; He is very unique. Since he is one and only one He is neither dividable nor divisible.[2]
2.      There exist three persons in this one and only one God.
Unlike the other monotheists like Judaism and Islam, Trinitarian monotheists’ belief teaches that there exist three persons in the one indivisible and undividable God. Here, it is very important to understand the difference between the oneness of God and the triples of the persons in Him. The oneness of God is in being, or in other words there is one being that is God. But there are triple persons in this being. It might be necessary to identify the difference between a “being” and a “person” to understand this proposition.
“Being” refers to the “essence” or the “substance” that makes God, God. There is only one being who is God in nature or in His essence. “Person” on the other hand refers to “intellect” or “self”. In other words anyone who has his own emotion, self consciousness, will, and knowledge is a person.[3]  Person does not necessarily require having a physical body. For example, angles are spirits and therefore they don’t have a physical body. However, since they have emotion, their own will and knowledge, and are self conscious, they have a personality. Again personality does not necessarily refer to life though personality requires life. For example plants have life but they don’t have a personality since they don’t have emotion, a will or knowledge and aren’t self conscious.  Therefore, personality shows emotion, will, knowledge, and self consciousness.
 Now, there are three individual persons in the being of one God who are self conscious of themselves, who have their own will, emotion and knowledge.  There is only one being who is God in nature or essence. However, three persons who are distinct from each other and conscious of their self share this one being or exist in this one being of God. In his book James White quotes the words of Hank Hanegraff explain this truth in simple words,  “When speaking of the Trinity, we need to realize that we are talking about one what and three who’s.”[4] Therefore it should be noted that the oneness of God and the triples of his personality do not contradict both logically or mathematically.
3.      Each of these three persons is God.
The other point in the teaching of this doctrine is the divinity of each of these persons.   Each of these persons in the one God is God. However, the three persons don’t make three (G)gods. This might sound confusing to many; however it is not contradictory because again they are three persons who share the one being that is God.
Before presenting the Biblical evidences for the truthfulness of this doctrine, it is helpful to identify what the true doctrine of the Trinity does not teach. The real doctrine of the Trinity does not teach henotheism. God is one but that does not mean He is the one God that should be worshiped among from other gods. But it means God is the only true God, others like idols are not god at all. The real doctrine of the Trinity does not teach polytheism: a belief in worship of multiple gods nor does it claim tritheism a doctrine that teaches the presence of three different beings who are Gods. Trinitarians believe in the existence of only one being who is God. The true doctrine of the Trinity again does not teach Unitarianism or modalism a doctrine that teaches the oneness of the personality of God who appears in three different names and modes at different time. However, the true doctrine of the Trinity believes that within the one and only one God there exist three distinct and self conscious personalities who are each God.
Now the question will be whether it is Biblical or not. Does the Bible support all the three propositions stated above? If the Bible supports all the above claims then there is no other option. But if the Bible contradicts from any of the above claims them the Trinitarians need to study the word and redefine the doctrine again.
A.    Is there one and only one God according to the Bible?
Both the Old and New Testament teach the oneness of God. In the Old Testament the Israelites were told to understand that their God is only one and that they should love him with all their being. “Hear, O Israel: The Lord your God is one Lord; and you shall love the Lord you God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Deut. 6:4-5 RSV).  To a believing heart this verse by itself should be enough to prove the oneness of God. However the Old Testament gives numerous verses that teach the oneness of God. In Deut 32:39 God Himself says there is no other than Him “See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no God beside me”. In many occasions and at different scenes God says the same thing to teach Israelites that He is the only one God. “God dogmatically stated on many occasions that He alone is God and that there was no other gods before Him; there are no Gods besides Him now; and there will be no new ones in the future.”[5]  The following verses teach not only God’s “singularity” but also they teach that He alone is God. No one else is God (Isa 37:19, 43:10, 44: 6-8, 45:21-22).  Therefore, from Genesis to the book of Malachi, the Old Testament claims the oneness of God.
The belief in the oneness of God was not limited only to Old Testament; however the New Testament equally and uniformly affirms the oneness of God.
For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth-as indeed there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords’- yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord,  Jesus Christ, through whom are all  things and through whom we exist (1Cor 8:5-6).
Here even though Paul used two of God’s name, God and the Lord, he didn’t present God as two Gods or Lords. The same one God is the same one Lord. Again in 1Tim 2:5 Paul affirms the singularity of God - “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”.
Both the Old and the New Testaments hold similar teaching as far as the oneness of God is concerned. Nowhere in the Bible was the singularity of God questioned. Not only does the Bible testify the oneness of God, even the devil knows and believes in it (Jam 2:9).
Therefore the true doctrine of the Trinity teaches Monotheism, and the Bible has no place either for polytheism or for tritheism. There is one and only one God, and this only one being of God is the only true God ever there is, and very unique.
B.     Are there three distinct personalities in the only one God?
Now the second point these paper seeks to prove based on the Bible is the existence of three personalities in the one being of God. However, the first question that would come to the students of the Bible is the possibility of three personalities in one being. In the entire universe, the world has never seen any being that has three distinct personalities. This fact can make many to question the logicality and truthfulness of the doctrine but in the Bible God is one being with three personalities in Him.
            Even though the Bible does not explicitly teach the presence of three different personalities in the being of God, there are references as to the possibility of “multi-personality” in the one God and how many and who they are.
Before answering the how many personalities there are and who they are, it is worthy to study and see how the Bible indicates the possibility of multi personality in God. The first indication is found on the Hebrew word used to point out the oneness of God. In the Shema (i.e. Deut 6:4), the Israelites were taught that the Lord their God is one. The Hebrew language has about nine words that can mean or can be translated as one.[6] Yahid and ehad are two of them.[7] Yahid is used in the Hebrew language to indicate “an absolute or solitary oneness”[8] This word is uniformly used in this sense throughout the OT to indicate absolute or solitary oneness. For example, God told Abraham “Take your son, your only son Isaac whom you love…” Gen 22:2. Here the Hebrew word used for “only” is yahid. This same word is used again in verse 12 and 16 with the same meaning. Other reference to this word can be found in Ps 68:6.
Ehad on the other hand refers to a oneness by the unification of more than one things. Robert Morey defines ehad as a word that “refers to a compound oneness in which a number of things together are described as ‘one’”.[9] For example, in Gen 1:5 Moses calls the first day, that was a compound of an evening and a morning, one day or ehad yom. The same word is used where God said “Therefore shall a man leaves his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh” in Gen 2:24. Here ehad is used to teach the unity of a husband and a wife even thought they are two different individuals.  Again this same word is used in Gen 11:6 where God mentioned the unity of the people who were determined to build a city and a tower for themselves. Here God says “the people is one”, but it is obvious that the oneness there does not refer to the absolute or solitary oneness, and the Hebrew word used there is ehad. Other references of this word can be found in Gen 34:16, 22; 2 Chron 30:12, Ezra 2:64, and the meaning is uniformly the same.
In the shema where the oneness of God is declared, the word used for one is ehad. This not only allows for the possibility of different personalities in the one being of God, but also the word indicates the presence of a compound unity. “The Hebrew word for one in the Shema is ehadh, which is derived from a verb form having the meaning of to unify. …the unity of God is not that of a simple monad, but is a oneness which allows for and contains a plurality”[10] Therefore the very text that affirms the oneness of God also affirms the presence of plurality in the only one being of God. Therefore it would be wrong to claim solitary or absolute oneness of God.
            Again in the Old Testament we find different indicators that teach plurality in the one God. Among them are the plural divine name (Elohim) and the first person plural pronouns God used about himself in a number of places in the Bible. Even though these evidences are strong for the Trinitarians, they are strongly debated by the anti-Trinitarians. Actually they believe that these indicators are examples of pluralis majesticus (plural majesty) which is the use of a plural word to imply the majesty of a king or a high ranking authority.[11] However, these are good evidences for the plurality in the being of God.
            Elohim is a divine name in the Hebrew and it is translated as God in a number of places in the English Bible. One thing very remarkable about this name is that it is a plural name (el is the singular form). However, most often it takes a singular verb as in Gen 1:1 where it says “In the beginning God (Elohim) created (a singular verb in the Hebrew text) the heavens and the earth”. The fact that the plural name is used with a singular verb in this kind of verses lead many to believe that this is none other than plural majesty.[12]  In fact not only the Unitarians but also many Trinitarian theologians like Millard J. Erickson think it indicates plural majesty. Allan Coppedge on the other hand believe that plurality in God can be seen in the use of Elohim from the fact that sometimes Elohim “speaks with a plural of deliberation” using plural verbs as if one of the persons in God is talking to the others. (Gen 1:16; 3:22; Gen 11:6-7).[13]
            In addition to the use of Elohim in the OT, God Himself uses first person plural pronouns and verbs in certain passages in the OT.
            “Then God said let us make man in our image, in our likeness…” Gen 1:26
            “And God said ‘the man has now become like one of us…’” Gen 3:22
            “The Lord said… Come let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.” Gen 11:7
            “Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, ‘Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?’” Isa 6:8.
All these verses not only suggest plurality in God but also show that the persons talk to each other. However this evidence is turned down by the “anti-Trinitarians” again as an example of plural majesty. Robert Morey, however, dismisses the presence of plural majesty in Hebrew language of the ancient times. According to him and the sources he quotes in his book, the idea of plural majesty was invented by a Jewish scholar to silence the Trinitarians claim, and this invention was exposed in the ninetieth century during the debates between Trinitarians and Unitarians.[14] However, this deception is being used until the present time.
What is astounding is that, one hundred years later, the anti-Trinitarians are still using this hoax to dodge the significance of the use of plural pronounce in reference to God. They seem to be totally ignorant of the fact that it is a recent grammatical invention and, thus, cannot be read back into ancient times or texts.[15]
Therefore the fact that there was no such thing as plural majesty in the ancient times, the divine name Elohim and God’s use of first person plural in referring to himself makes it clear that there is plurality in the being of God.
If there is plurality in the being of God, then how many and who or what are they, would be another question that needs to be answered. The bible does not explicitly answer this question saying there are this much persons or things. However, both the Old and New Testament does not teach the presence of anything or any person other than the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit in God. The Father is presented as one who has personality in the Bible (Duet 32:6; Isa 63:15-16, 64:8; Mal. 2;10; Matt 6:9, Ps 2:7). “The Father knows (Matt. 6:8, 32), speaks (Matt 3:17), sees (Matt. 6:4,6), loves or hates (1John 3;1), wills (Matt. 3;17), gives or does not give (Matt. 7:11), reveals or hides (Matt 11:25), is or is not pleased (Mark 1:11), forgives or does not forgive (Matt 6:15-16), sends (1 John 4;14), etc”[16]  The Son is also presented as one who has personality. In the New Testament, he talked to people (Matt 5:1), expressed emotion (John 11:35), healed people (Matt 8:1-4)… he did everything that a person does. The personhood of Holy Spirit is also affirmed in the Bible. First, he was referred to as “he” (John 16:8, 13, 14), “him” (John 16:7). He is not referred as an “it” anywhere in the Bible. Second, he does things that only a person can do.  He comforts, and convicts people (John 16: 7-10), He teaches, guides and speaks (John 16: 12-15), He grieves over sins against Him (Eph 4:30). Therefore, the Holy Spirit has personality. These three were not only mentioned as having personality but also grouped and quoted together in a number of passages in the Bible (Matt 28:19, 2 Cor 13:14; 2The 2:13-14). 
While the personhood of the Father, the Son and Holy Spirit is obvious, it is very important to realize that they are distinct from each other. The Father is neither the Son nor the Holy Spirit, the Son is neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is neither the Farther nor the Son. All of them were presented as distinct persons at the time Jesus Christ was baptized. Referring to the Son the Father said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased” Matt 3:17.  The Son was being baptized by John the Baptist when that voice of God came down from the Father. The Holy Spirit descended down like a dove at the same time (Matt 3:16-17). There is no way for the three persons to be one same person here. In addition, the fact that the Father is not the Son is indicated in John 1:1 where it says “… and the word was with God”. Jesus cannot be the Holy Spirit because in John 14:16 the Son calls Him “another Counselor” indicating that the Holy Spirit is different from the Son. In this same verse, Jesus indicated that the Father and the Holy Spirit are not the same by mentioning that the Father is the one who sends the Holy Spirit. Therefore, according to the Bible, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are three different persons not one.
C.     Is each of the personalities in the being of God, God?

The presence of only three persons in the being of God is not affirmed only from the fact that the Father, the Son and the Holy Sprite each have personality, but also from the fact that they each are God. Existing in the being of God, all the three equally share the whole of God, and therefore they each are equally God.
The Father is God. The Godhood of the Father is not debated much. It sounds like all the Bible believers agree in the Godhood of the Father. However, the divinity of the Father is clearly stated in the Bible. For example, in referring to the Father, Jesus calls Him God (Matt 6:30; 19:23-26, Mark 12:17, 24-27). In these verses, Jesus interchangeably uses God and the Father. [17]
The Son is God. With regard to the son there is a lot of debate as to His deity. However, the bible is clear on His status as God. He was directly called God (John 1:1-3, 20:28; Heb 1:8).  He is everything that God is (Phil 2:6; Col 1:15-17; Heb 1:3).  He does only what God can do (Mark 2:1-12), and He claims to be equal with God (John 5:19, 21, 23, 26; 10:30).
The Holy Spirit is God. There are not much direct references to the deity of the Holy Spirit, but the fact that He is deity is undeniable. For example God and Holy Spirit are interchangeably used in 1st Corinthians where Paul teaches that the body of Christians is the temple of God. While he teaches that the Christians’ body is the temple of God in 1Cor 3:16-17, he also teaches that it is the temple of the Holy Spirit in 1Cor 6:19-20.[18] In Acts 5, Peter indicated that lying to the Holy Spirit is none other than lying to God (Act 5:3-4). In Heb 3:7-11 the author of Hebrew quotes what God said in Ps 95:7-11, and attributed it to the Holy Spirit’s speech.
After all the evidences that refer to the teaching of Trinity, there is no other option other than believing in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. It is true that the word “Trinity” is not in the Bible, and there is not a single passage that teaches the doctrine explicitly. However the whole Bible teaches and refers to the doctrine of God. It is the Bible that teaches the oneness and singularity of God in contrary to Polytheism.  It is the Bible that teaches the presence-of and possibility of multi-persons existence in the being of God, contrary to Unitarianism and Modalism. It is the Bible that teaches the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are distinct personalities, and that each one of them is God in contrary to subordination. The doctrine of the Trinity is not an invention, but a doctrine that the Bible “compels” its readers to believe without giving other options to believe otherwise.




Bibliography


Bickersteth, Edward Henery. The Trinity. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1980.

Brown, David. The Divine Trinity. La Salle: Open Court Publishing Company, 1985.

Clark, Gordon H. The Trinity. Jefferson: The Trinity Foundation, 1990.
Coppedge, Allan. The God Who is Triune. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2007.
Edgar, Brian. The Message of the Trinity. Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 2004.
Erickson, Millard J. God in Three Persons: A Contemporary Interpretation of the Trinity. Grand
 Rapids: Baker Books, 1996.

Erickson, Millard J. Making Sense of the Trinity. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000.
Franks, R.S. The Doctrine of Trinity. London: Gerald duckworth and co. ltd. 1953.
Letham, Robert. The Holy Trinity: In Scripture, History, Theology and Worship. Phillipsburg:
             P&R Publiahing, 2004.

McGrath, Alister E. Understanding the Trinity. Grand Rapids: Academie Books, 1988.

Morey, Robert. The Trinity: evidence and Issues. Grand Rapids:World Publishing, 1996.

Placher, William C. The Triune God: An Essay in Postliberal Theology. Louisville:Westminister
 John Knox Press, 1989.

Strauss, Lehman. The Godhead: Devotional Studies on the Three Persons of the Trinity.
  Neptune: Loizeaux Brothers, 1990.

Tavard, George H. The Vision of the Trinity. Lanham: University Press of America, 1981.

Thieme, R. B, JR. The Trinity. Houston: R.B. Theime, Jr., Bible Ministries, 2003.

Toon, Peter. Our Triune God: A Biblical Portrayal of the Trinity, Wheaton: Victor books, 1996.

White, James R. The Forgotten Trinity: Recovering the Heart of Christian Belief. Mineapolis:
Bethany House Publishing, 1998.






[1] James R. White, The Forgotten Trinity: Recovering the Heat of Christian Belief (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1998), 23.
[2]  James R. White, The Forgotten Trinity: Recovering the Heat of Christian Belief (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1998), 27.

[3] Robert Morey, The Trinity: Evidence and Issues (Michigan: World Publishing 1996), 168.
[4] James R. White, The Forgotten Trinity: Recovering the Heat of Christian Belief (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1998), 27.
[5] Robert Morey, The Trinity: Evidence and Issues (Michigan: World Publishing 1996), 63.

[6] Robert Morey, The Trinity: Evidence and Issues (Michigan: World Publishing 1996), 63.

[7] Millard J. Erickson, Making Sense of the Trinity: Three Crucial Questions (Grand Rapids: Baker Books 2000), 33
[8] Robert Morey, The Trinity: Evidence and Issues (Michigan: World Publishing 1996), 88.
[9] Robert Morey, The Trinity: Evidence and Issues (Michigan: World Publishing 1996), 88.
[10] Peter Toon, Our Triune God: A Biblical Portrayal of the Trinity (Wheaton: Victor Books 1996), 98.
[11]Robert Morey, The Trinity: Evidence and Issues (Michigan: World Publishing 1996), 94.
[12]Allan Coppedge, The God Who is Triune (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press 2007), 71
[13]Allan Coppedge, The God Who is Triune (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press 2007), 71-72
[14]Robert Morey, The Trinity: Evidence and Issues (Michigan: World Publishing 1996), 95.
[15]Robert Morey, The Trinity: Evidence and Issues (Michigan: World Publishing 1996), 95.
[16]Robert Morey, The Trinity: Evidence and Issues (Michigan: World Publishing 1996), 263
[17]Millard J. Erickson, Making Sense of the Trinity: Three Crucial Questions (Grand Rapids: Baker Books 2000), 33
[18] Millard J. Erickson, Making Sense of the Trinity: Three Crucial Questions (Grand Rapids: Baker Books 2000), 27