Trinity, Jehovah's Witnesses, God and Jesus

Hello all,

Last weekend two Jehovah’s Witnessess came to our door, for the first time. They handed me a Watchtower magazine and the guy asked if he would be welcome to talk about it soon. I always want to talk about the true Christian Trinitarian faith, I was assuming that this will be were the conversation will be going.
So I have been doing some reading again and comparing some verses to the New World Translation. I also watched a video by James White in which he discussed the introduction of 2 Peter.

“Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ:” 2 Peter 1:1 [NASB]

The verse seems clear enough, our God and Savior, Jesus Christ. The following verse:

“Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord” 2 Peter 1:2

Here Peter splits God and Jesus. The knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord. So I can allready hear the question. "If Jesus is God, then why does Peter, and Paul so often speak of God AND Jesus, and not God the Father AND Jesus (the Son)?

Does anybody know some good explanation?

Well, you do know that “LORD” is really a translation of “Adonai,” which is the Hebrew way of not saying “YHWH” out loud.

So Peter is really saying, “the knowledge of El, and of the Messiah Jesus our YHWH.” (Or possibly, “the knowledge of El and of the Messiah Jesus, our YHWH.”)

In other words, it all boils down to “the knowledge of God the Father and of God the Son.”

And since divine knowledge is associated with the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, you’ve got the entire Holy Trinity right there in one verse.

So yeah, Peter is certainly Catholic. They’re just not reading it right.

(But the Jehovah’s Witness translation really stinks, so you probably don’t want to spend too much time on it.)

Im not sure I understand your question but if is is typical JW rhetoric then my question back would be why does Paul and all of the NT writers speak of Jesus much more, sometimes exclusively, than God, Jehovah, or other being?

There are many passages where Jesus only is being discussed and with no mention of God or Jehovah. This should go totally aginist their understanding of where the focus must always be which is Jehovah. Which maks me always wonder why they are consider themselves Christians as opposed to Jehovahins.:shrug:


Having discussed this with JW"s, inviting them in the house or at work, they typically don’t go after the Jesus God part. They hone in on the Holy Spirit. For a JW, the Holy Spirit is a force, not a person of the trinity. He isn’t a person. I would suggest when they bring this up going to John 14 and John 16, hard to argue when Jesus calls the Holy Spirit a HE. However don’t think there is such a thing as winning, obstinate denial is common.

The usual comeback is something along the lines of the bible has been changed, too which I reply personally “Then why read it at all if it’s been changed and you don’t know what’s true in it or not” Doesn’t that make it ultimately untrustworthy?"

As I said though, you can’t break obstinate denial, so don’t even try, this is more about defending what you believe than changing their minds.

Peace and God Bless

Other Scriptures that might help are John 1:1-3, and 14, Col, 1:15-20, and Phil 2:6-11. The later two are ancient canticles from the Liturgy of the Hours/Breviary in praise of the Divinity of Christ. However Phil 2:6 can backfire on you if you’re unfamiliar with the word Harpagmos. Theologically it’s a contentious word.

Hope any of this helps

Peace and God Bless

Another inconsistant finding…:rolleyes:

I just did a comparision in the NWT of Phil 2:6 and John 1:1. Notice the word translation of “theos” in Phil to “…with God” as opposed to the usage in John with the infamous “…a god”.:confused:


They will bring out their own mistranslated Bible and tell you that yours is not accurate, that the word is actually something different, etc.

As soon as they find out that you are Catholic they will excuse themselves, ask for another appointment and return with someone who is likely a former Catholic, or specially trained to debate Catholics. They will say things to you specifically designed to make you question your faith. They are very good, highly trained.

I had them at my front door and drinking coffee at my kitchen table three times. I won’t invite them in again and won’t debate them. Nothing good will come from it. Shake the dust off your feet and walk away. That’s my advice.


Good advice.

First of all, it’s usually 2 on 1. They are not there to hear about your faith, but to convince you of theirs.

Same thing goes for the LDS. They send out their trained hands to try and gang up on unsuspecting people. They are specifically told to not divulge the “meat and potatoes”. You wont hear about magic underwear or the Mormon god being a god from another planet. All you will hear is about how great Jesus is and this Book of Mormon is.

In both cases, I say be cordial and invite them to a bible study at your church. That way the playing field is even. Of course they are not likely to go, but you did your part and made the offer…

Not really, only if they choose to ignore Greek grammar. One denotes the subject the other the object. It isn’t like English grammar which they try to force into the text, and personally I call them on it when they try it.

Peace and God bless

Do understand this: if you have faith in what is correct, that is Catholic, if you have faith in what is incorrect, that is Demonism.

Agree with this 100%. It is always 2 on 1 and they communicate non verbally.

They are very good, highly trained. I would just politely tell them no thanks.

This is not a correct way to articulate the Catholic teaching on other religions.

One cannot be participating in “Demonism” unless one intends to participate in “Demonism”.

Well their version of the Bible is altered from ours. It could also be looked at as knowledge of God (in general as in the Trinity) and specifically a personal knowledge of the second Person of the Trinity when Jesus took on human flesh. You could combat them with their own translated verse that way.

By showing knowledge of God and of Jesus is simply saying knowledge God in general and of our Saviour. By learning knowledge of God in general we now have knowledge of the second person of the Trinity thus this verse of is showing Jesus is God.

Try and poke holes in their arguments by using their own Bible against them since their way is self interpretation since it is not of the Catholic Church’s Magesterium. Then show them the propper articulation in our Bible and why we are right using the history of how we were the Church that gave the Bible in the first place.

I often like to tell people who say it is a matter of interpretation “Ok so the Catholic Church comes out with the Bible in the 4th century and says it needs to be read in a certain way (Sacred Scripture itself, Sacred Tradition, and Magisterial teaching) And you, following in the footsteps of Martin Luther, take the Book my Church gave you and then tell me to explain my faith without reading it the way it’s supposed to be read.”

Then I’ll usually point to 2 Peter 1:20

“20*Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation,”

Also I wrote this before I saw the poster was protestant so I’m not intending on to debate just giving you a way to combat their arguments.

When ever talking to JW’s it always comes down to the fact that they flat out do not beleive that Jesus is God and uncreated, as we say in the creed “Begoten not Made”.
I always get to the nub of the problem very directly by making the statement that “Christianity simply does not work as a theology if Christ is not God”.
Christ being God is what makes Christianity different from all other world religions.
What the Watch Tower Teaches is just another variation of all the other religions from Christianity’s mother faith of Jeudaism to Islam and all the myriad of Eastern religions.
What they teach is not knew or special it just simply falls short of the fullness of Gods revelation to man through Christ a gets lost in the cacophany of all the others.

“Truly Man and Truly God” without that it just simply is not Christianity.

In the interest of debating fairly I would say we also have to look at other verses.

Bible verses that show Jesus is God, Divine.


I try not to get into a “Let’s Show a Doctrine From the Bible” discussion with JWs.

Firstly, our doctrines do not come from a book, no matter how holy the book is.

Our faith comes from Christ, through His Apostles, to the Church.

Secondly, the JWs have a point: no one can read the Bible and conclude that God is a Trinity.

If there was a man stranded on a desert island and a Bible was plopped into his lap, there really no way he would be able to glean, from its pages, that this God is a Trinitarian God.

That’s why we use the Church to receive our teachings.

:eek: Please elaborate especially about the underwear.

The Trinity protects our interests through God.

You’re wrong. The BIBLE does teach Trinity . But you are right we need Church, teachers. If the man on island lived for 10 million years, and by God’s grace worked through his prejudice he would see trinity. Difficult, but possible. .

An evangelist has to work through the narrow window of their interests to get past their closed minded ness. .

Bible verses that show Jesus is God, Divine.


I am wrong? I asserted that our doctrines do not come from the Bible.

You say “the Bible does teach Trinity.”

Those 2 are not related.

I never said the Bible doesn’t teach the Trinity.

I said, again, that our doctrines do not come from the Bible

You do realize that the dogma of the Trinity was taught way before a single word of the NT was ever put to writ, yes?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit