The doctrine of the Trinity, which states that there is one true God who is made up eternally of three persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—is at best a confusing idea, and at worst it has caused some people to deny the rationality of Christianity, or to retreat from Christian orthodoxy to embrace a theological system which simplifies this doctrine by rejecting one aspect of it (e.g., the Jehovah's Witnesses, who reject the threeness of God and argue that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are distinct beings from the true God). This paper will be my effort to explain why belief in the Trinity is rational. Even if we cannot understand how one being can also manifest in three persons, it can still be rational to believe that such a being exists. The most contentious part of the doctrine is the idea that Jesus (a man) was also God, so I will spend considerable time developing scriptural arguments in support of this. At times I make reference to the Jehovah's Witnesses' translation of the Bible for the purpose of focusiung my discussion, since they are the most outspoken opponents to the idea of Jesus' divinity. I will add some things about the Holy Spirit, but my rationale is that if I can get Jesus into the godhead, then the Trinity is proven and including the Holy Spirit is fairly straightforward.In a concluding section, I will answer some specific objections to the divinity of Christ offered by the Jehovah's Witnesses. (In other words, I won't just offer evidence for Jesus' divinity; I'll also consider arguments against.) This is not meant to be a thoroughgoing refutation of the Witnesses' position, which is beyond the scope of this work, but it is the beginning of such a refutation.
What is the concern over believing in the Trinity? Here are two practical questions to highlight the importance of this doctrine. First, if Jesus is not God, then can he save you? Can a mere man offer himself as a sacrifice for all people in all times? Can any person offer himself or herself for another? Scripture teaches that only God can save us, and no mere human can provide atonement for the sins of another. In other words, if Jesus is not God, then he could not save anyone. Second, if Jesus and the Holy Spirit are not God, then should we worship them? Is it correct to worship anyone except God? Scripture teaches that worshipping created beings is not acceptable, but Jesus is worshipped throughout the New Testament, and even allowed people to worship him when he walked on the earth. Should we worship him also? I'll give some scriptural support for these later, but it should be clear why it is essential to the Christian faith that the Trinity be a reasonable doctrine.
The Trinity
As mentioned, the Trinity is the idea that God is one in essence and three in person (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). The term "Trinity" doesn't occur in scripture; it is a way of explaining (in one convenient term) what scripture systematically teaches. First, scripture teaches that God is one:
Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one! (Deut 6:4; NASB)
The Jewish belief was that (1) there was only one true God, and (2) the so-called gods of the pagan nations were mere idols. I won't expend space arguing for these, as they are the central tenets of Judaism and are supported by hundreds of passages in the Old Testament. The second claim, that God is three, is more contentious.
The idea of a plurality in the essence of God is implied in numerous places in the Old Testament, long before the three persons are clearly introduced. For example, note the use of the plural verb form in Gen 1:26:
Then God said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. (Gen 1:26; NASB)
Some have argued that the plurality of this verb expresses (1) a plurality of majesty, as when a monarch might say, "You may approach us," or (2) refers to God speaking of both himself and the angels. The problem with the first option is that there is not a single instance of a monarch using a plural verb to refer to himself throughout the Old Testament, though there are several occasions when God does it (see also Gen 3:22; 11:7; Isa 6:8). The so-called "plurality of majesty" is not a feature of the biblical writings. The problem with the second option is that angels did not participate in the creation of human beings, nor were humans created in the image of angels (which would follow if angels were included as part of "let Us make man in Our image"). The best explanation for the use of the plural verb form is that God has a plurality in his essence.
Another Old Testament passage which implies the Trinity is Ps 45:6-7:
Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated wickedness; Therefore God, Thy God, has anointed Thee With the oil of joy above Thy fellows (Ps 45:6-7; NASB).
Notice that the subject is God, with clear references to his kingdom and character, but then in verse 7 there is reference to his God. Two separate persons are referred to as God. How can God have a God? In the New Testament, the author of Hebrews quotes this passage and applies it to Christ (Heb 1:8), one of the strongest statements of Jesus' divinity in the New Testament, but it relies on an Old Testament passage which indicates a plurality in God's being.
In the New Testament we find explicit indications of the Trinity. Probably the best single formulation of this is in Matt 28:19:
Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. (Matt 28:19; NASB)
Christ commissions his followers to make disciples, baptizing them in the (singular) name of the (plurality) Father-Son-Spirit. The relation between these three persons awaits a more careful consideration, but the fact that these persons are drawn together in this manner and under the same singular designation of authority implies an essential relationship.
What I must concede is that the aforementioned passages do not prove the Trinity. They allow for the Trinity, and in fact, the Trinity provides a simple explanation for what would otherwise be difficult interpretational problems in these verses. But the Trinity is not explicated in these verses. What is the source of the doctrine?
The Trinity is formed in connection with two simple observations: (1) the Bible teaches that there is only one true God, and (2) the Bible teaches that Jesus is God, the Father is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. The Trinity is a way of making sense of things that the Bible explicitly teaches. The church adopted this doctrine because it was the only way to explain the Bible's teaching that Jesus Christ is God. Some Jehovah's Witnesses have suggested that the doctrine is contradictory or irrational. How can one being be three? How can three persons be one? These are contradictions. But the Trinity is not arguing either of these. The doctrine states that God is one in essence (or being) and three in person. This is not a contradiction.
A contradiction is a logical impossibility, and nothing less. In any one instance, a thing cannot be A and not-A—that would be a contradiction. For example, I cannot be both here and not here at the same time. But a thing can be both A and B without contradiction. I can be both (A) here and (B) sleepy. The Trinity is not arguing that God is one in essence and three in essence. That would be a contradiction. The doctrine of the Trinity states that God is one in essence and three in person. Or, as per our definition, God is one in A and three in B. We don't need to understand how God can be one in essence and three in person to recognize that there is no contradiction involved. If we claimed that God was one in essence and three in essence, or one in person and three in person, we would then have a contradiction—but that's not the claim being made. As I can best explain it, "essence" relates to the nature and attributes of God, and "person" refers to the works and revelation of God.1
So the doctrine of the Trinity is not a contradiction, and is therefore completely logical (rational) as a belief. Jehovah's Witnesses often confuse a contradiction with something that is merely confusing. There is nothing irrrational in believing something that is difficult to understand. (I believe in gravity and I have no idea how it works, nor, do I suspect, does anyone truly understand it.) It is clear that any complete understanding of God's nature and purposes is impossible for us to have:
"For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways," declares the Lord. "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts" (Isa. 55:8-9).
In simple formulation, we say that God is one in essence and three in person. More descriptively we can say that the Father is God, Jesus is God, and the Spirit is God, but the Father is not the Son or Spirit, the Son is not the Father or Spirit, and the Spirit is not the Father or Son. In other words, each person of the Trinity is God (where "God" refers to the essence), but is distinct from each other person (with personhood designated by Father, Son, and Spirit). This is confusing, but it is not contradictory, and holding to this belief is completely reasonable and demonstrably biblical.
Arguments for the Divinity of Christ
As I mentioned, the doctrine of the Trinity rests on the idea that the Father is God, Jesus is God, and the Spirit is God. I won't spend any time discussing whether the Father is God; I think that everyone is prepared to acknowledge that the Bible teaches this (see, for example, Matt 6:26 in connection with 6:30). A bigger question is whether the Bible teaches that Jesus is God. There are, in fact, so many passages of scripture which necessitate that Jesus be God that the early church began worshipping Jesus before ever working out the doctrine of the Trinity. Some later disputes with a group known as the Arians (the leader's name was Arius) forced the church to work through the scriptural evidence and weigh both sides of the argument. The doctrine of the Trinity resulted. Here are some of the evidences the church weighed.
First, it was noted that God set a precedent in Old Testament times for appearing to humans in physical form. In the Old Testament, God often appears as an angel. One example of God's ability to manifest himself in physical form is depicted in Genesis 31:
Then the angel of God said to me in the dream, "Jacob," and I said, "Here I am." And he said, "Lift up, now, your eyes and see that all the male goats which are mating are striped, speckled, and mottled; for I have seen all that Laban has been doing to you. I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar, where you made a vow to Me; now arise, leave this land, and return to the land of your birth" (Gen. 31:11-13).
Note that what is originally identified as the angel of God is later seen to be God himself. God can and does reveal himself in physical form.2 This allows for the possibility of something like the incarnation (God taking on human flesh in the person of Jesus Christ).
If we can assume one of the tenets of theism, that God created all things, and that God can appear in physical form, we would have a primary evidence for Jesus being God if we can show that Christ, who appeared in physical form, created all things. This is precisely what the Bible argues.
All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. John 1:3
For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created by Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. Col. 1:16-17
The word translated "all" in John 1:3 and Col 1:16 is the neuter plural form of the Greek word pas, which refers to the totality of all persons and things. In other words, Christ created all things that were created. The word "other," which the Jehovah's Witnesses' translation inserts before the word "things," does not appear in the original Greek. The text clearly states that Christ created all things, and could not therefore be part of that creation. Creation is attributable only to God, and not to the agency of any other being:
"Listen to Me, O Jacob, even Israel whom I called; I am He, I am the first, I am also the last. Surely My hand founded the earth, And My right hand spread out the heavens; when I call to them, they stand together." Isa. 48:12-13
And yet the creation it is also attributable to Christ, as the earlier verses show. If God alone is the Creator, and Christ is identified as the Creator, then it follows that Jesus Christ must be God.
Before continuing with the attributes of divinity which Christ possessed, I want to examine his own words, and the words of his friends and contemporaries, to consider direct scriptural claims to his divinity.
a. Christ claimed to be equal with God
Christ placed himself on equal par with God in speaking of His essence and nature, though he willingly submitted to his Father's authority.
For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God. John 5:18
For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, in order that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him. John 5:22-23
And so they were saying to Him, "Where is Your Father?" Jesus answered, "You know neither Me, nor My Father; if you knew Me, you would know My Father also." John 8:19
The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God." John 10:33
Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how do you say, 'Show us the Father'?" John 14:9
Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed?" John 20:28-29a
The Jehovah's Witnesses' translation interprets John 10:33 as saying, "...but for blasphemy, even because you, although being a man, make yourself a god." This is an inappropriate translation, for the simple reason that claiming to be "a god" was not blasphemous; only claiming to be God himself was blasphemy, and deserved a death penalty. These men clearly understood Christ to be making a claim of divinity.
The Jehovah's Witnesses' translation interprets John 14:9 as "He that has seen me has seen the Father also." The word "also" does not appear in the Greek; it was supplied to remove the force of Jesus' statement of identity with the divine essence of the Father. Clearly, Jesus could not make a claim like this without committing blasphemy, unless he truly was God.
Thomas (in John 20:28-29) acknowledged him as God without Christ correcting his statement. Christ, with his reverence for the Father, could not have permitted this if it was not appropriate.
In addition, Christ made some direct claims about His divinity. A prominent example is found in John 8:
Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I AM." John 8:58
And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM"; and He said, "Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'" Exod. 3:14
The title claimed by Christ here in John 8:58 is clearly the name God gives for himself in Exod 3:14. If it is not clear to us, then at least it was clear to those who listened to Christ, since immediately afterward they attempted to stone him for his blasphemy (John 8:59).
The Jehovah's Witnesses' translation has rendered the Greek "I AM" as "I have been." This is a blatant mistake, since the identical two words in the Greek can be found in all these verses: John 4:26; 8:12; 8:24,28; 10:9; 11:25. In every other instance they are translated "I am." Greek scholars without exception agree that Christ's declaration at John 8:58 is to be translated "I AM." Consider the following verse earlier in the same gospel, which refers to Christ's preexistence:
John bore witness of Him, and cried out, saying, "This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.'" John 1:15
This verse, as well as John 1:30, uses the verb "to be," just as in John 8:58. The difference is that John 1:15 and 1:30 use the imprefect tense (literally, he was), while John 8:58 uses the present (I am). While John 1:15 is a simple statement of preexistence, John 8:58 is a claim to something much greater. It includes the idea of preexistence, but surpasses it, which is proven by the change in tense. It is the concept of being eternal and unchanging. Jesus is not merely claiming to be older than Abraham; he is claiming to be the I AM of Exodus 3:14. This is the reason why the Jews try to kill him after he says this. (It was not blasphemy to claim to be older than Abraham; it is only blasphemy to claim to be God.) To suggest that Jesus would use this form of expression without considering its connection to Exodus 3:14 is absurd. He could have easily used another word to convey preexistence. Instead, Jesus perfectly quotes the Greek translation of Exodus 3:14, where God begins His name, "I AM..." Dr. Leon Morris, a reknowned Greek scholar and expert on the book of John, writes in his commentary:
"I am" must have the fullest significance it can bear. It is, as we have already had occasion to notice (see on vv. 24, 28) in the style of deity. It is not easy to render into Greek the Hebrew underlying passages like Exod. 3:14. The [Greek translation of the OT] did so with the use of the form we have here. It is an emphatic form of speech and one that would not normally be employed in ordinary speech. Thus to use it is recognizably to adopt the divine style. In passages like vv. 24, 28 this is fairly plain, but in the present passage it is unmistakable. When Jesus is exerting His existence in the time of Abraham there is no other way of understanding it. It should also be observed that He says "I am," not "I was." It is eternity of being and not simply being which has lasted through several centuries that the expression indicates.3
Thus, John 8:58 is a clear self-identification of Christ with the essence of God.
b. Claims of the Apostles
The writers of the New Testament books had various statements to make concerning Christ's deity. I will list only a few, bypassing John 1:1 because it so clearly teaches the divinity of Christ that the Jehovah's Witnesses were forced to completely mistranslate it in order to remove its force. I can easily show why "the word was a god" is a mistranslation of the Greek (not to mention an impossible thing for a Jew like John to write), but I would have to appeal to the Greek in order to make my point, and that is difficult to do effectively on a web page. So I will perhaps leave that for a later work, and I'll focus on passages that the Witnesses can't change as easily.
1 CORINTHIANS 8:5-6
For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him. 1 Cor. 8:5-6
This verse designates the difference between the Father and Jesus, but more critically, it explains the shared identity between the Father and Son (we exist for the Father and through the Son, which itself is a careful explanation of the difference between the first two persons of the Trinity), and it rejects all the idols of the world in favor of one true God and Lord, but then says that the one God is the Father and the one Lord is Jesus. If Jesus is not divine, then it would follow that the Father is not the Lord. But Jesus himself reminds us that there is only one Lord, and that is God:
Jesus answered, "The foremost is, ‘Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is one Lord.'" Mark 12:29
If God is Lord, and there is only one Lord, then Jesus must be God, or else Paul's statement in 1 Cor 8:6, "there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ," would be in error. If Jesus and the Father share one essence, then it is correct to say of each of them that they are God and Lord. Frankly, it is difficult to understand how a Jehovah's Witness could say that Jesus was the Lord "by whom are all things, and we exist through him," and still argue that he was not God. These are not characteristics of a created being.
PHILIPPIANS 2:6-11
...who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore also God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Phil. 2:6-11
This passage is one of the strongest explanations of how God became a human in the person of Jesus Christ. Paul writes that Jesus "existed in the form of God," but emptied himself to be made in the likeness of men. The position described here, and the contrast which takes place in the emptying, only makes sense if Jesus is God.
The word translated "a thing to be grasped" (harpagmos) originally meant the act of grasping, but in later Greek came to refer to the thing that was grasped. It is this understanding which forms the basis for the NASB's rendering of harpagmos. The Jehovah's Witnesses' translation of Phil 2:6 attempts to cover this up: "who, although he was existing in God's form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God." This translation would imply that Christ never considered trying to "seize" an equality with God. Greek experts disagree with this reading, saying that "the lack of an object makes this impossible; instead of [this word] one would expect a verb which does not require an object."4 It is also nonsensical to say that anyone could "seize" equality with God (as if that would be a possible thing to grasp if it were not already true). Paul already admits that Christ existed in the form of God, which IS EQUALITY. Jesus did not have to try to get equality; Paul could not have expressed his essential equality in any more clear terms. Instead, we are to understand that Jesus did not regard equality with God as a gain to be utilized.
The initial statement, that Christ existed in the form of God, means that Christ was God in very essence. Contrast this with the later statement "and being found in appearance as a man," which implies an external identification compared with the earlier statement of sharing God's very form. The context stresses the strong contrast between the grasping of equality with God (v.6) and the emptying of himself (v.7). If Christ was not relinquishing his divine right in verse 6, then the contrast with verse 7 is meaningless. Paul is saying that Christ did not consider his equality with God the Father something to be held onto, in the face of a greatly needed redemption on behalf of sinful humankind.
1 TIMOTHY 3:16
And by common confession great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, was vindicated in the Spirit, beheld by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory. 1 Tim. 3:16
Certainly the concept of God manifested in the flesh is a great mystery, to the point where many, disdaining the mystery of the infinite God, would attempt to ignore the greatest miracle ever performed. The verb translated "was manifested" means "to reveal" or "to make known." This verse clearly states that God was revealed in the flesh as Jesus Christ.
TITUS 2:13
...looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus. Titus 2:13
The proclamation of Christ's divinity here is very clear. As will be demonstrated later, only God can save and is worthy of the title "great God." The claim that Christ is God is therefore entailed by this.
The Jehovah's Witnesses' translation attempts to insert "the" before "Savior," to make the Greek say, "of the great God and of the savior of us, Christ Jesus," as if the insertion of "the" made this verse in some way clearer. The opposite is true; the object of this and the following verse is Christ only (not the Father), and in any case there is no ground for inserting "the" before "Savior," or interpreting this differently than the NASB (quoted above). The single article before God and Savior argues strongly for taking them together, in the Greek. All dependable translations agree with this. The basis for this is the Granville Sharp Rule, which is over a century old:
When the copulative kai [i.e., "and"] connects two nouns of the same case, if the article ho [i.e., "the"] or any of its cases precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle; i.e., it denotes a farther description of the first named person. 5
Note that the phrase "God our Savior" appears throughout the book of Titus (e.g., 1:3; 2:10; 3:4), and Christ Jesus is also identified as "our Savior" (e.g., 1:4; 3:6). Trying to separate God from Christ (both of which are called "our Savior") is completely unintuitive to Paul's argument, as he assumes their unity.
HEBREWS 1:8, 10
But of the Son He says, "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, and the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom. . . And Thou, Lord, in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of Thy hands." Heb. 1:8,10
Christ is addressed here as God, and the king of an eternal throne. Verse 9 (not quoted here) makes clear the paradox that God (the Father) is addressing God (the Son). The Jehovah's Witnesses' translation wants to make a transition at verse 10, so that the creation of heaven and earth is not attributed to Christ, who is the subject of verses 8-12, and instead render this, "Your throne is God forever and ever." How can God be a throne? There is no basis for this, and Christ's role in creation can be firmly established from other scripture (quoted earlier). This is a quote from Psalm 45:6 (also mentioned earlier), and the Hebrew clearly argues for the vocative ("Your throne, O God, is forever and ever") and not the predicate nominative ("Your throne is God").
1 JOHN 5:20
And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding, in order that we might know Him who is true, and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life. 1 John 5:20
The subject of this verse is Jesus Christ, the one whom we know and are in, the one who is true. The final sentence therefore refers to Christ as the true God. The words added to the Jehovah's Witnesses' translation "by means of his son Jesus Christ" are not appropriate; nothing here allows for an addition of these words in the Greek. The construction for the first phrase ("in the true one") is identical with the phrase which follows—"in His Son"—which is emphatic. (It doesn't express "means.") Again, the simple translation is a clear equation of Jesus with God.
1 PETER 2:4, 7-8
And coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected by men, but choice and precious in the sight of God . . . This precious value, then, is for you who believe. But for those who disbelieve, "The stone which the builders rejected, this became the very corner stone," and, "A stone of stumbling and a rock of offense"; for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed. 1 Pet. 2:4, 7-8
Peter is in this passage referring to Christ as "a stone of stumbling" and "a rock of offense." This is made explicit in verse 4, since the rock was rejected by men but chosen by God. The rock clearly refers to Jesus Christ. The passage Peter is quoting from is Isaiah 8:14—but Isaiah clearly indicates that God is the stumbling stone. In applying Isa 8:14 to Jesus, Peter understood that Jesus and God were one.
"It is the Lord of hosts whom you should regard as holy. And He shall be your fear, And He shall be your dread. Then He shall become a sanctuary; but to both the houses of Israel, a stone to strike and a rock to stumble over, and a snare and a trap for the inhabitants of Jerusalem." Isa. 8:13-14
c. The Alpha and the Omega (the First and the Last)
"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." Rev. 1:8
This is clearly God speaking here, as John has quoted him. The title "Alpha and Omega" is appropriate for one who has named himself "I AM," the eternally existent, almighty and unchanging God. Alpha and Omega, the first and last
letters in the Greek alphabet, are images of God's self-existent eternality. God has no beginning—he IS the beginning. In Rev 21:6-7 we see God again making this claim:
And He said to me, "It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. He who overcomes shall inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son." Rev. 21:6-7
At other times in Revelation the terms "first" and "last" are used to express the same idea regarding God's eternal, self-existent nature:
And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as a dead man. And He laid His right hand upon me, saying, "Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades. Rev. 1:17-18
"Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel And his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts:'I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me. Isa. 44:6
Here we find the divine title of First and Last, but it is included with another characteristic of the speaker—He died and returned to life again. In other words, God (the First and the Last) is claiming an experience that only applies to Jesus Christ. Revelation 2:8 reinforces this:
"And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write: The First and the Last, who was dead, and has come to life, says this..." Rev. 2:8
The speaker is Jesus Christ, since God the Father never died and was subsequently resurrected. And since only God can claim to the title we read of in Rev. 2:8 and Isa. 44:6, we are left with the undeniable conclusion that Jesus is God. (Or else there are two firsts and two lasts!) A final section of Scripture should remove all doubt:
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end." Rev 22:13
Who is making this claim? It obviously is God, but the speaker further identifies himself three verses later:
"I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star." Rev. 22:16
Christ demonstrates attributes that can only be possessed by God. Scriptures will be given to both support that they are singularly possessed by God and also that they are possessed by Christ. The conclusion that Christ is God is a logical consequence.
a. Christ claimed to be the truth (and only God is the truth)
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me." John 14:6
Christ didn't just claim to bring the truth; He claimed to be the truth. And God is the God of truth:
Into Thy hand I commit my spirit; Thou hast ransomed me, O Lord, God of truth. Ps. 31:5
In addition, Christ demanded belief in himself equal to their belief in God, placing his truth on the highest level.
"Let not your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me." John 14:1
b. Christ forgives sins (and only God can forgive sins)
And Jesus seeing their faith said to the paralytic, "My son, your sins are forgiven." But there were some of the scribes sitting there and reasoning in their hearts, "Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?" Mark 2:5-7
Even the scribes recognized the blasphemy of Christ's remarks; only God has the ability to forgive a man of his sins. This is to be held distinct from merely forgiving someone a sinful wrong against you; the sin itself can only be forgiven by God.
"I, even I, am the one who wipes out your transgressions for My own sake; and I will not remember your sins." Isa. 43:25
c. Christ's words would last forever (and only God's words last forever)
Considering that Christ called himself the truth, he has not only made a statement about his person but also about the totality of all that he says. If he merely speaks God's words (like the Old Testament prophets), then only those words which are God's will stand forever. But Christ claims that his own words would last forever:
"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away." Mark 13:31
This is a bold statement unless, as has been maintained, Christ is God.
Forever, O Lord, Thy word is settled in heaven. Ps. 119:89
The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever. Isa. 40:8
d. Christ is the Redeemer (and only God is the Redeemer)
Paul says that Christ redeemed us from our sins:
...looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus; who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds. Titus 2:13-14
And yet God claims to be the Redeemer:
"For your husband is your Maker, whose name is the Lord of hosts; and your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel, who is called the God of all the earth. Isa. 54:5
If Christ is God, we have no difficulty here.
e. Christ is the Savior (and the only Savior is God)
Christ is repeatedly called humankind's Savior.
...and they were saying to the woman, "It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves and know that this One is indeed the Savior of the world." John 4:42
For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. Phil. 3:20
And yet only God can save us:
Yet I have been the Lord your God since the land of Egypt; and you were not to know any god except Me, for there is no savior besides Me. Hos. 13:4
If Christ is not God, then either he is not a savior, or Hos. 13:4 is false. Created beings certainly cannot save:
Do not trust in princes, in mortal man, in whom there is no salvation. Ps. 146:3
Claiming that Christ was God's agent in effecting salvation is a dubious position, since verses like Phil. 3:20-21 do not accredit the act of saving to anyone but Christ. Hos. 13:4 makes it clear that only God can be accredited with salvation. As I mentioned in the section "What is at stake?", if Jesus is not God then he really can't be our savior. By identifying him as our savior, the New Testament understands that he is God.
f. Christ is all-powerful (only God is all-powerful)
Christ claims to have been given all power:
And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth." Matt. 28:18
"And to Him was given dominion, glory and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and men of every language might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion which will not pass away; and His kingdom is one which will not be destroyed. Dan. 7:14
"The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into His hand. John 3:35
But Christ cannot possess all power and authority, unless he is God. Only God is all powerful.
"Thine, O Lord, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the victory and the majesty, indeed everything that is in the heavens and the earth; Thine is the dominion, O Lord, and Thou dost exalt Thyself as head over all. Both riches and honor come from Thee, and Thou dost rule over all, and in Thy hand is power and might; and it lies in Thy hand to make great, and to strengthen everyone." 1 Chron. 29:11-12
g. Christ is all-knowing (only God is all-knowing)
But Jesus, on His part, was not entrusting Himself to them, for He knew all men. John 2:24
"Now we know that You know all things, and have no need for anyone to question You; by this we believe that You came from God." John 16:30
He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, "Do you love Me?" And he said to Him, "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You." Jesus said to him, "Tend My sheep. John 21:17
...in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. Col. 2:3
But it is obvious that only God can know all things.
And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do. Heb. 4:13
Even David admitted that such a level of knowledge was beyond a created being.
Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is too high, I cannot attain to it. Ps. 139:6
h. Christ is immutable (unchanging, eternal, complete)—and only God is unchanging
The writer of Hebrews makes a very telling statement about the unchangeability of Christ:
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today, yes and forever. Heb. 13:8
But this is a quality only possessed by God:
"For I, the Lord, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed." Mal. 3:6
But Thou art the same, and Thy years will not come to an end. Ps. 102:27
Every good thing bestowed and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation, or shifting shadow. James 1:17
We must conclude, in the absence of any other examples of unchangeability in our turbulent universe, that the unchanging Christ and God are one and the same.
i. Christ is worshipped (and only God is to be worshipped)
We know that, according to the Bible, worship is reserved for God alone.
Then Jesus said to him, "Begone, Satan! For it is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.'" Matt. 4:10
...with whom the Lord made a covenant and commanded them, saying, "You shall not fear other gods, nor bow down yourselves to them nor serve them nor sacrifice to them. But the Lord, who brought you up from the land of Egypt with great power and with an outstretched arm, Him you shall fear, and to Him you shall bow yourselves down, and to Him you shall sacrifice." 2 Kings 17:35-36
And yet, in the New Testament accounts, we see that Christ frequently is worshipped, and even accepts worship.
Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem, saying, "Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we saw His star in the east, and have come to worship Him." Matt. 2:1-2
And those who were in the boat worshiped Him, saying, "You are certainly God's Son!" Matt. 14:33
And they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy and ran to report it to His disciples. And behold, Jesus met them and greeted them. And they came up and took hold of His feet and worshiped Him. Matt. 28:8-9
But the eleven disciples proceeded to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had designated. And when they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful. Matt. 28:16-17
Jesus heard that they had put him out; and finding him, He said, "Do you believe in the Son of Man?" He answered and said, "And who is He, Lord, that I may believe in Him?" Jesus said to him, "You have both seen Him, and He is the one who is talking with you." And he said, "Lord, I believe." And he worshiped Him. John 9:35-38
This is in contrast to others, who refuse worship on the grounds that they are created beings, and not God:
And when it came about that Peter entered, Cornelius met him, and fell at his feet and worshiped him. But Peter raised him up, saying, "Stand up; I too am just a man." Acts 10:25-26
Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels... Col. 2:18a
And he said to me, "Write, 'Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.'" And he said to me, "These are true words of God." And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said to me, "Do not do that; I am a fellow servant of yours and your brethren who hold the testimony of Jesus; worship God. For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." Rev. 19:9-10
The Witnesses' translation attempts to cloud this issue by translating the verb "to worship," which is proskuneo in the Greek, as "obeisance" only in those situations where Christ is the one being worshipped. This is in direct conflict with the Watchtower's own policy, found in the forward to the Kingdom Interlinear Bible: "To each major word we have assigned one meaning and have held to that meaning as far as the text permitted" (p. 10). This is absolutely untrue; they change the word out of a complete bias on those occasions when Jesus is worshipped without any grammatical justification. Assigning different English words to the same Greek verb might deceive the casual reader, since "doing obeisance" is a somewhat archaic expression for worship, but the student of Greek can clearly see that the occurrences of proskuneo in all the verses quoted represent the very same action—worship. Jesus is worshipped, and invites people to worship him. This would be blasphemy, unless he were God.
Answering the JW's Objections
I'll now run through some of the standard objections the Jehovah's Witnesses make to the divinity of Christ. Hopefully it's obvious that the verses in support of the divinity of Christ are very strong (in fact, I've never heard a Jehovah's Witness effectively respond to them, though I'd invite a response).
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:14
And He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation. Col 1:15
And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this... Rev. 3:14
Having the distinction of being the firstborn over all creation and the only begotten Son of God can refer to one of two possibilities:
(1) Christ was the first thing created by God, and is therefore his firstborn and only begotten son; or
(2) "Only begotten," "firstborn" and "beginning" are titles applied to Christ with some other significance than his (pro)creation.
If Christ is, as the Jehovah's Witnesses suggest, an angel or spirit being and not God himself, then surely scripture would state that Christ was a created being in clear terms apart from the potential symbology of "firstborn" and "only begotten." A careful search of the Bible demonstrates that no such reference exists, making it necessary to prove that "firstborn" and related terms always refer to the first child born to a parent. I will attempt to show that this is not the case.
a. The "firstborn" is a representation of might and power.
"Reuben, you are my first-born; My might and the beginning of my strength, Preeminent in dignity and preeminent in power." Gen. 49:3
b. The "firstborn" is heir to a blessing.
And Jacob said to his father, "I am Esau your first-born; I have done as you told me. Get up, please, sit and eat of my game, that you may bless me." Gen. 27:19
c. The "firstborn" always belongs to the Lord.
"The first offspring from every womb belongs to Me, and all your male livestock, the first offspring from cattle and sheep." Exod. 34:19
Therefore, being the firstborn or only begotten son entitled one to blessings and power in biblical times. When the term "firstborn" is used, it refers to THESE THINGS. But was it necessarily connected to being the first born (created) child? Scripture indicates that it being born first, last, or not at all is INCIDENTAL to the title of "firstborn."
d. The blessing promised to the firstborn is transferable, and therefore not necessarily connected with the act of procreation.
But Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it on the head of Ephraim, who was the younger, and his left hand on Manasseh's head, crossing his hands, although Manasseh was the first-born. And Joseph said to his father, "Not so, my father, for this one is the first-born. Place your right hand on his head." But his father refused and said, "I know, my son, I know; he also shall become a people and he also shall be great. However, his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his descendants shall become a multitude of nations." Gen. 48:14,18-19
e. The firstborn may be replaced by another, who can be dedicated to the Lord in his stead, proving that the acceptability of the birthright is not necessarily connected with the act of procreation.
"And you shall take the Levites for Me, I am the Lord, instead of all the first-born among the sons of Israel, and the cattle of the Levites instead of all the first-born among the cattle of the sons of Israel." So Moses numbered all the first-born among the sons of Israel, just as the Lord had commanded him; and all the first-born males by the number of names from a month old and upward, for their numbered men were 22,273. Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, "Take the Levites instead of all the first-born among the sons of Israel and the cattle of the Levites. And the Levites shall be Mine; I am the Lord." Num. 3:41-45
But I have taken the Levites instead of every first-born among the sons of Israel. Num. 8:18
f. The term "firstborn" is often used symbolically in the Bible.
"As the first-born of his ox, majesty is his, and his horns are the horns of the wild ox; with them he shall push the peoples, all at once, to the ends of the earth. And those are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and those are the thousands of Manasseh." Deut. 33:17
"Then you shall say to Pharaoh, ‘Thus says the Lord, "Israel is My son, My first-born.'" Exod. 4:22
g. God can appoint someone a firstborn, despite the order of his birth (or the necessity of being born at all).
"I have found David My servant; With My holy oil I have anointed him . . . he will cry to Me, ‘Thou art my Father, my God, and the rock of my salvation.' I also shall make him My first-born, the highest of the kings of the earth. My lovingkindness I will keep for him forever, and My covenant shall be confirmed to him." Ps. 89:20, 26-28
Note that this Psalm is typically considered Messianic, which would clearly establish Christ's status as being figuratively firstborn and not created. A final consideration is God's use of the title "firstborn," which would seem to conclude this dispute, since clearly God cannot use the term figuratively if it is inappropriate to do so:
And Joseph named the first-born Manasseh, "For," he said, "God has made me forget all my trouble and all my father's household." And he named the second Ephraim, "For," he said, "God has made me fruitful in the land of my affliction." Gen. 41:51-52
With weeping they shall come, and by supplication I will lead them; I will make them walk by streams of waters, on a straight path in which they shall not stumble; for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is My first-born. Jer. 31:9
The passage from Genesis informs us that Ephraim was not the first son born to Israel, but this fact is of no importance to the Lord, who uses the term in Jeremiah 31:9 as a title, apart from any necessity of procreation. The act of being born (or first created), again, is incidental to the title "firstborn."
h. Christ is clearly spoken of as having the benefits of being an only begotten Son, and as being the beginning (or origin) of all things, and as being the first to receive the promise of resurrection. This is a title, and is used apart from any reference to his creation.
He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything. Col. 1:18
Therefore, claiming that since Christ has the title "firstborn" he must have necessarily been created is fallacious; scripture nowhere claims that Christ was created, nor does it say that a firstborn must literally be the first one born.
What Scripture does say is that Christ, in his incarnation as a man, was begotten by the Holy Spirit:
And the angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy offspring shall be called the Son of God." Luke 1:35
Christ is certainly, as a man, the only being that can make this claim. Therefore to connect "only begotten Son" to an earlier "birth" than that spoken of in Luke 1:35 is without support.
In conclusion on this point, consider the following verse:
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life." John 3:16
The Jehovah's Witnesses think that "begotten" means "created" when it is used of Christ. If we change "begotten" to "created" in the verse above, then we have made a contradiction; we know that Christ was not the only created son of God. Other scripture claims that both men and angels are created "sons" of God, in some sense (cf. Hos 1:10; Gen 6:2; Job 1:6). When "begotten" is used of Christ, therefore, it cannot mean "created." What Christ is saying in John 3:16 must be some special title or relationship that need have nothing to do with actually having been created.
Here is another standard objection by the Jehovah's Witnesses:
These questions characterize a second error in reasoning: the assumption that something equal in essence to another thing cannot be subordinate to it in authority. This is obviously not a contradiction of any sort; authority need have no relation to essence at all. People who are essentially less in physical power and intelligence than others often rule over them. It is possible to be equal to another person (in essential character) and yet not be equal in authority. In the case of Christ, he is equal to God the Father in essence, and yet subordinate in authority. This does not conflict with God's ultimate sovereignty because Christ and the Father are one.
For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God. John 5:18
"I and the Father are one." John 10:30
These verses obviously explain that in John 14:28 Jesus does not mean that the Father is better than him. (Versions which use the word "better" here have chosen a poor English substitute for the Greek word.) Jesus only means that he has yielded up his authority in order to come and die on the cross. It is certainly possible for someone who is truly authoritative (like a king) to take on the trappings of a poor servant and live humbly, and still be king. This king might set aside his kingly prerogatives (e.g., he determines not to order anyone around while he is clothed like a beggar), but he is still the king. Jesus relinquished his divine prerogatives to become a servant, but he was still God. This relinquishing included knowledge of all things (such as the day and the hour of his return). Thus, Jesus can be fully God and still claim that the Father has authority over him, and he can rely on the Father's knowledge and power instead of his own and still be God.
No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him. John 1:18
But He said, "You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live!" Exod. 33:20
Exodus 33:20 makes it clear that no one can see God as he really is (as a spirit) and live. Christ, however, became a man at his earthly incarnation, taking on flesh (John 1:14) and the appearance of humanity (Phil 2:7-8). As John 1:18 says, Christ (through his human nature) made the unseeable God known to all men. He did this by modeling the nature of God in human form:
And so they were saying to Him, "Where is Your Father?" Jesus answered, "You know neither Me, nor My Father; if you knew Me, you would know My Father also." John 8:19
Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how do you say, ‘Show us the Father'?" John 14:9
Christ, as a man, was no more deadly to the eyes of those who saw him as God was when he appeared to the Israelites as a pillar of fire and a pillar of cloud during the 40 years in the wilderness (see Exod 13:21). This is not God as he truly is, but rather a mere physical manifestation of his invisible nature.
Arguments for the Divinity of the Holy Spirit
As I mentioned, once we have established that Jesus and the Father are both God, including the Holy Spirit is less contentious. I will present a few brief arguments, though, since the Jehovah's Witnesses argue that the Spirit is not a person at all, but is an active power of God—an impersonal force by which God accomplishes things. This is not compatible with the idea that the Spirit is God, if it were true.
2 Cor. 3:17 identifies the Holy Spirit with God. Paul is not saying that the Lord is a spirit, since in the following verse he makes it clear that the Spirit transforms us inwardly (v. 18), and this can only be the Holy Spirit who dwells in us (John 14:17; 1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19; Rom. 8:9). In Acts 5:3-4 we find Peter using "the Holy Spirit" interchangeably with "God," and God validates his judgment here by striking down Ananias.
The Holy Spirit is God, and therefore is worthy of our worship and prayer.
These references remind us that the Holy Spirit is not just a power or force; he is a person:
The Holy Spirit can be known (John 14:17).
The Holy Spirit can speak (John 16:13; Acts 13:2; 21:11).
The Holy Spirit can be lied to (Acts 5:3-4).
The Holy Spirit can direct us (Acts 13:4).
The Holy Spirit is intelligent (Acts 15:28).
The Holy Spirit is omniscient (1 Cor. 2:10-11).
The Holy Spirit can be grieved (Eph. 4:30).
The Holy Spirit can be blasphemed against (Matt. 12:31-32).
Obviously, an "active power" cannot be known, cannot be lied to, cannot be grieved. These are all characteristics of a person.
Conclusion
I have sought to establish an understanding of the Trinity as a biblical doctrine by showing that the Bible teaches that Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are all God, and yet there is only one true God. I've also argued that the Trinity is not in any way contradictory, and thus a Christian is reasonable to believe that God is one in essence and three in person. I've also tried to dialogue with the Jehovah's Witnesses to show that the contrary position (that the Father is God but Jesus was just a man and the Holy Spirit is merely an impersonal power) is not biblical. If you have any further comments or questions, please direct them to me on the discussion forum or via email.
Notes
1. Most analogies that attempt to explain the Trinity fail to capture this formula. For example, in saying that the Trinity is like the three parts of an egg (shell, white, and yoke), one incorrectly divides God into three essences. In saying that the Trinity is like water in three states (gas/steam, liquid, and ice/solid), one incorrectly reduces the three persons to mere ways that God appears. Neither does justice to the idea that Jesus is fully God, the Father is fully God, and the Spirit is fully God. I think I may have a better analogy based on an idea in computer science, but I think I'll avoid any heresy by keeping it to myself.
2. For other examples of this same phenomenon see Genesis 22:11-17; Exodus 3:2-4.
3. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (New International Commentary on the New Testament;
Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), 473-4.
4. Werner Foerster, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964), I:474.
5. H. E. Dana & Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1957), 147.