How does one argue the Trinity with Jehovah’s Witnesses?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DelsonJacobs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hebrews 1 and Michael the Archangel

“See?” the Jehovah’s Witnesses asked as he pointed to his copy of the New World Translation to prove to me that Jesus had to be Michael the Archangel. “The Bible even asks the question: ‘To which one of the angels did God ever say: “You are my son; today I have become your father?”’ The answer? Why to Michael the Archangel of course!”

They went on to read the rest of Hebrews from their Bible this way, finally stopping at Hebrews 1:13: “But about which of the angels has he ever said: ‘Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet’?” They then answered: “The angel is Michael the Archangel. That is why Paul is asking us ‘which angel.’ He is telling us here in Hebrews that God was speaking to an angel.”

I had never heard such a twisted reading of Hebrews chapter 1 in my life. We never used that type of reasoning when I was Jehovah’s Witness back in the 1980s.

“Not to Angels”

If you are like me, you don’t read Hebrews 1 the way the Witness mentioned above it. The subject under discussion in these texts is the identity of the Son, and Hebrews is teaching us that the Son is superior to angels. “For it was not to angels that he subjected the world to come, of which we are speaking,” we read in Hebrews 2:5.

How can we deal with this?

One way is to have the JW read the same verse from the Good News Translation (yes, there’s a Catholic edition). The GNT uses a thought-for-thought approach to render the Bible, whereas versions like the NWT and the RSV employ a word-for-word technique.

Note the comparison of two of the verses, namely Hebrews 1:5 and 13 between the NWT and GNT:CE.

NWT
For example, to which one of the angels did God ever say: “You are my son; today I have become your father”?

GNT:CE
For God never said to any of his angels: “You are my Son; today I have become your Father.”

NWT
But about which of the angels has he ever said: “Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet”?

GNT:CE
God never said to any of his angels: “Sit here at my right side until I put your enemies as a footstool under your feet.”

Both of the renderings are correct. But since angels are not the ones who will rule as Christ does in His Kingdom, the author explains, therefore none of these quotes can refer to angelic entities of any kind.

It was not to angels that God subject the world to come, of which we are speaking.—Hebrews 2:5

In fact the context supports this. For Hebrews 1:5 is a quote from Psalm 2:7 and 2 Samuel 7:14. To which one of the angels did God address in Psalm 2 or 2 Samuel 7? None of the angels. These texts are addressed to human beings, King David and his sons that reign after him to be exact.

Hebrews 1:13 is quoting Psalm 110:1. To what angel did God address in Psalm 110? None, not even Michael the Archangel. It’s a psalm of David repeating the promises God gave him and those that would be anointed in his royal dynasty. God didn’t place angels in the line of David, nor are angels going to rule over humans. As 1 Corinthians 6:2 and 3 state: “Do you not know the saints will judge the world?..Do you not know that we are to judge angels?” And again: “It was not to angels that God subject the world to come, of which we are speaking.”—Hebrews 2:5

No, these texts are not asking “which angel is going to rule” but “which angel was God ever addressing with these words of Scripture”? Not only does Hebrews 1 prove that Jesus is not the archangel, for he has “become as much superior to the angels as the name he has obtained is more excellent that theirs,” but the uses of “Son” and “begotten” here are further supportive of our previous subject.

That will come next.
 
**Begetting the Firstborn: How Trinitarians Understand These Terms **

“Begotten” and “Only-begotten”

Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that these terms prove beyond a doubt that Jesus is a created being. “Why else would Scriptures use these terms if Jesus was not truly begotten of God? The word ‘begotten’ means Jesus was born of or created by Jehovah.”

In the Bible and Hebrew culture, God is spoken of as “begetting” the anointed kings in David’s line. This “begetting” did not occur at the person’s birth but at the time of their anointing and becoming king. Only the anointed kings in David’s line were begotten in this way, and it has nothing to do with their literal birth or the time of their being conceived. “I will establish his kingdom,” the Lord promised David. “He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father and he shall be my son.”—2 Samuel 7:11-18.

The psalmist who wrote Psalm 2 shows that being “begotten” in this way doesn’t mean a person is created or born. Many years after being born the psalmist wrote:

I will tell of the decree of the Lord:
He said to me, “You are my son,
today I have begotten you.”—Psalm 2:7.

These words did not occur at or have reference to the psalmist’s birth. They are in reference to his being anointed as king. At that moment he was “begotten” or “adopted” as a “son” in a very special manner.

Because the Davidic king physically represented God’s rulership on earth, the anointed king was referred to as being adopted or “begotten” as a “son of God.” As such his rule was to be reflective of God himself.

A play on words was included into Psalm 45:6-7 to explain this very facet of Davidic kings. In the RSV-CE 2nd edition it reads:

Your *divine throne *endures for ever and ever.
Your royal scepter is a scepter of equity;
you love righteousness and hate wickedness.

Therefore God, your God has anointed you
with the oil of gladness above your fellows.

The footnote reads that the first line can also be translated in two other ways:

Your throne is *a throne of God *and endures for ever and ever.

And

Your throne, O God, endures for ever and ever.

The anointed human in David’s kingly line would be adopted or “begotten” as a “son of God.” As such it would be right to render this verse as one reads the way it was rendered in Hebrews 1:8:

But of the Son he says,

“Your throne, O God, is for ever and ever,
The righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom.”

Jesus is the “only-begotten Son” in the sense that the second Person of the Trinity has always been reflective of God from eternity. Human Davidic kings only typified the greater Sonship of Jesus, one where Jesus always represented God’s rulership from time indefinite. From all eternity:

He reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature, upholding the universe by his word of power.—Hebrews 1:3.

But, But, But!

“But,” you may hear the Jehovah’s Witnesses protest, “Doesn’t the Bible call Jesus ‘the first-born of all creation’ at Colossians 1:15?”

Yes, Colossians says he is creation’s firstborn, not the Father’s firstborn: the “first-born of all creation.” If this is literal it would mean that Jesus was the *product or offspring *“of all creation.” Like saying: “Tom is the firstborn of my uncle.” Uncle’s firstborn is Tom. If you read Colossians the way JWs want us to, it would mean that all creation, including you and I, gave birth to a child, and that child you and I gave birth to is Jesus! That is silly.

“The first-born of all creation” means that Jesus holds the place of the “Firstborn” as the “heir” of a king does. As it did with the case of Esau and Jacob, the right of firstborn does NOT always go to the person who was literally born first. It thus has nothing to do with being born or created first.—Genesis 25:27-34; 27:1-40.

“What about Revelation 3:14,” the Witness continues, “where Jesus refers to himself as “the beginning of God’s creation?”

To be the beginning of creation is different from being the first thing created. This verse means that Jesus is the one who started creation itself.

As Hebrews 1:10 reads in reference to Jesus (using the reading of the Divine Name as found in the Christian Greek Scriptures by William Robertson, J8):

And, Thou, Jehovah, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands.

In Review…
  • “Son of” often means “one and the same.”
  • Kings who claimed to be a “son of” a god were considered incarnations of that god.
  • “Son of God” in reference to Jesus means “incarnation of YHWH”
  • Jesus can’t be Michael the Archangel because “it is not to angels that God subjected the world to come.”—Hebrews 1:5.
  • A “begotten” son was an anointed king, adopted after his birth not at the time of his conception.
  • “Only-begotten” refers to Christ’s unique position, “begotten” in a way others are not.
  • The Bible never claims Jesus was created. Even Proverbs 8:22-31, often considered a prophecy about Jesus, is written in symbolic language. Proverbs claims “wisdom” is a woman who was the first of God’s creation and the mother of humanity, but just as wisdom is not an actual woman or mother that was created , neither is Jesus any of these things.
 
I always like to contrast heb2:5 with exodus 33 when debating this point with JW’s. In ex33 God is so exasperated with the isralites that he says he will send an angel to lead them into the promised land but Mosses replys tha unless it is God who leads them they will not go
 
Matt_Guitar_Man said:
I always like to contrast heb2:5 with exodus 33 when debating this point with JW’s. In ex33 God is so exasperated with the isralites that he says he will send an angel to lead them into the promised land but Mosses replys tha unless it is God who leads them they will not go
Click to expand...
That’s a very interesting point. I am sure there is some Christological typology involved with that. I will have to study up on that and see.

I am more than half way there from here: at this point I will deal with a few more direct points the Witnesses may bring up (such as the adding of “other” in Colossians, the Holy Spirit being a person, etc.). It will be quick and brief from here.

It will culminate not with an opening for debate, however. Like Acts 26, it will take the points and present how Trinitarians follow through with the information as well as the failure that comes with our not doing so. It will also end with a warning, something Jehovah’s Witnesses never consider.

As previously stated the remaining points will involve how it is impossible for anyone less than God to die for us on the Cross in connection with the meanings behind “Son of Man.”
 
DelsonJacobs said:
That’s a very interesting point. I am sure there is some Christological typology involved with that. I will have to study up on that and see.

I am more than half way there from here: at this point I will deal with a few more direct points the Witnesses may bring up (such as the adding of “other” in Colossians, the Holy Spirit being a person, etc.). It will be quick and brief from here.

It will culminate not with an opening for debate, however. Like Acts 26, it will take the points and present how Trinitarians follow through with the information as well as the failure that comes with our not doing so. It will also end with a warning, something Jehovah’s Witnesses never consider.

As previously stated the remaining points will involve how it is impossible for anyone less than God to die for us on the Cross in connection with the meanings behind “Son of Man.”
Click to expand...
Yes when it comes to the JW identification of Jesus as Michael the Arc Angel there are so many holes in the JW logic that scripture can fill to produce the desired cognitive dissonance that you have been talking about. Just one other example of many which also throws their linear timeline of revelation out the window and backs up the traditional Catholic view is a contrast of Rev 12:7-9 where Michael the Arc Angel defeats the devil and casts him out of heaven to earth with Luk 10:17-19 which is where the 72 return rejoicing and Christ says to them that he saw Satan being cast out of heaven like lightening! Which means if we are to take the JW interpretation Christ was in two places at once being two different spirit beings at the same time? Or Satan wasn’t realy cast out at this time and Christ was mistaken for as the watch tower tells us he didn’t actually cast out Satan until 1914??? I have filled a small booklet with examples similar to the above as Delson has pointed out St Paul went to great lengths to dispel the notion that Christ was some sort of semi divine angelic being.
 
DelsonJacobs said:
Hebrews 1 and Michael the Archangel

One way is to have the JW read the same verse from the Good News Translation (yes, there’s a Catholic edition). The GNT uses a thought-for-thought approach to render the Bible, whereas versions like the NWT and the RSV employ a word-for-word technique.

Note the comparison of two of the verses, namely Hebrews 1:5 and 13 between the NWT and GNT:CE.

NWT
For example, to which one of the angels did God ever say: “You are my son; today I have become your father”?

GNT:CE
For God never said to any of his angels: “You are my Son; today I have become your Father.”

NWT
But about which of the angels has he ever said: “Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet”?

GNT:CE
God never said to any of his angels: “Sit here at my right side until I put your enemies as a footstool under your feet.”

Both of the renderings are correct. But since angels are not the ones who will rule as Christ does in His Kingdom, the author explains, therefore none of these quotes can refer to angelic entities of any kind.

It was not to angels that God subject the world to come, of which we are speaking.—Hebrews 2:5
Click to expand...
I doubt my friend would recognize the GNT.

What can we say when the JW tells us that God gave Jesus all authority and on his own Jesus has nothing that God did not give him. I get told this constantly from my friend which is her way of saying Jesus is not God.

By the way this is a great thread.

Thanks
 
LOL, our Bible study leader came up with a great idea. Find out where they live and knock on their door on a Sunday to talk about the Trinity.
 
Waynec said:
I doubt my friend would recognize the GNT.

What can we say when the JW tells us that God gave Jesus all authority and on his own Jesus has nothing that God did not give him. I get told this constantly from my friend which is her way of saying Jesus is not God.

By the way this is a great thread.

Thanks
Click to expand...
Once again it does little to counter a JW point by point because once you are in this mode with a JW they are just waiting for you to utter one of several possibilities so they can go to the next point they are ready with. Remember, your JW “friend” is programmed to disagree with everything you say, even if it sound right to them.

But, let’s just say for the moment that they are listening. Then this objection is easy to deal with. In fact, it isn’t an objection at all. It just proves Jesus is God.

All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me*.–Matthew 28:18.*

The JW will concentrate on the last part “has been given to me.” Then they say something like: “See? The fact the Jesus was given this authority shows he is in subjection to and lower than God.”

You reply: “If I gave you my car and the house I live in, does this mean I am superior to you?”

JW: No. It just means you gave me what is yours.

YOU: Exactly. Giving something does not demand that one person be inferior to another. If you gave something to a king, does that mean you are greater than the king?

JW: No.

YOU: No, of course not. But note exactly what is given Jesus: “All authority in heaven and on earth.” Jesus is given something only God really has. Who has all authority in heaven?

JW: God does.

YOU: Is this Scripture saying that God is giving up all his authority to someone else? To an inferior being? Or is that God is sharing that authority? Notice what Jesus said at John 16:15:

All that the Father has is mine.

Note that the Father has given the Son everything he has. This includes the authority that God gives Jesus. But note also the context which shows that this is being shared between the Father, the Son, and someone else:

When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you*.–John 16:13-15*.

Did you notice that “when the Spirit of truth comes” that “he will take what is mine and declare it.” And from what is the Spirit sharing? Jesus said “all that the Father has is mine.”

Note that the Father has shared things with the Son and that the Spirit takes from this shared source, Jesus adding that the Spirit “will take what is mine [which is shared by the Father] and declare it to you.”

For Trinitarians, we see this as sharing of power and authority. We don’t interpret it as one is giving it up to the other or taking something that they have no right to take. All Three are on the same level in our eyes because they all share the same things.

If I shared something with you, would this be my way of saying your were inferior to me or would I be saying I hold you as an equal?

As Jesus said to the Father about all he ruled over: “All mine are yours, and yours are mine.” (John 17:10) God is NOT giving up authority to an inferior in this case. Instead God is sharing it with an equal.
 
ajcstr said:
LOL, our Bible study leader came up with a great idea. Find out where they live and knock on their door on a Sunday to talk about the Trinity.
Click to expand...
I had a JW call me on the phone to preach to me (she was just going through the phone book and calling people). Just a minute or two into the conversation she ended up yelling at me and hanging up.

The reason? I had attempted to correct her understanding of Catholic doctrine and quoted something from the Catechism to do it, but when she heard what I had read she claimed I was lying.

“Don’t you try to teach me what Catholics believe,” she said in anger. “I’ve read and studied Catholic books myself and I know for myself that what you are saying can’t be true. You just made it up!”

She then disconnected the call.

So what did I do? I used the call return feature, *69, and she was even more infuriated that I called her back.

I asked why she got angry and what would make her claim that I was making things up. I invited her to look up the place in the CCC on the Internet to prove that I was actually quoting from it.

Her reply? “How did you get my number? You have no right to call me on the telephone and speak to me! I don’t want to ever hear from you! Don’t ever call me again! You have no right to preach to me!”

And she hung up.

While I can’t say all JWs would act like her, I can also say I know from experience that they don’t all appreciate being placed in the same situation they put us in either. 😉
 
DelsonJacobs said:
I had a JW call me on the phone to preach to me (she was just going through the phone book and calling people). Just a minute or two into the conversation she ended up yelling at me and hanging up.

The reason? I had attempted to correct her understanding of Catholic doctrine and quoted something from the Catechism to do it, but when she heard what I had read she claimed I was lying.

“Don’t you try to teach me what Catholics believe,” she said in anger. “I’ve read and studied Catholic books myself and I know for myself that what you are saying can’t be true. You just made it up!”

She then disconnected the call.

So what did I do? I used the call return feature, *69, and she was even more infuriated that I called her back.

I asked why she got angry and what would make her claim that I was making things up. I invited her to look up the place in the CCC on the Internet to prove that I was actually quoting from it.

Her reply? “How did you get my number? You have no right to call me on the telephone and speak to me! I don’t want to ever hear from you! Don’t ever call me again! You have no right to preach to me!”

And she hung up.

While I can’t say all JWs would act like her, I can also say I know from experience that they don’t all appreciate being placed in the same situation they put us in either. 😉
Click to expand...
:rotfl: DelsonJacobs - smart AND funny!

Peace!!!
 
Waynec said:
I doubt my friend would recognize the GNT.
Click to expand...
And, of course, the point is not to get your friend to recognize the GNT. It is just a tool to show that some are misreading the text by thinking that Hebrews is asking: “Guess which angel were are talking about?” Instead it is stating that angels are not being spoken to in these texts.

But if your JW friend does reject the GNT then they are just showing their horrible ignorance. *The Good News Translation *is one of the world’s (not just in America) top-selling and widely published books (not just Bible), and the entire GNT Bible has been translated into 349 languages (and some 2123 languages have at least one book of the GNT Bible in that language). It was produced by the American Bible Society, featuring not only the work of some of the world’s top specialists in Biblical languages but the artwork of the late Annie Vallotton, who has been called the world’s bestselling artist by the BBC. It is recognized by Catholic and Protestants as one of the most accurate and easiest to understand translations to employ a dynamic equivalence approach.

In the end regardless of the translation you use, it is the Scripture testimony that no angel that exists, archangel or not, will reign over humans. Again, the testimony of 1 Corinthians 6:2, 3 is clear: “Do you not know the saints will judge the world?..Do you not know that we [human beings] are to judge angels?” Angels and archangels will be made subject to us, not the other way around.

For it is written: “It was *not to angels *that God subject the world to come.”—Hebrews 2:5
 
DelsonJacobs said:
And, of course, the point is not to get your friend to recognize the GNT. It is just a tool to show that some are misreading the text by thinking that Hebrews is asking: “Guess which angel were are talking about?” Instead it is stating that angels are not being spoken to in these texts.

But if your JW friend does reject the GNT then they are just showing their horrible ignorance. *The Good News Translation *is one of the world’s (not just in America) top-selling and widely published books (not just Bible), and the entire GNT Bible has been translated into 349 languages (and some 2123 languages have at least one book of the GNT Bible in that language). It was produced by the American Bible Society, featuring not only the work of some of the world’s top specialists in Biblical languages but the artwork of the late Annie Vallotton, who has been called the world’s bestselling artist by the BBC. It is recognized by Catholic and Protestants as one of the most accurate and easiest to understand translations to employ a dynamic equivalence approach.

In the end regardless of the translation you use, it is the Scripture testimony that no angel that exists, archangel or not, will reign over humans. Again, the testimony of 1 Corinthians 6:2, 3 is clear: “Do you not know the saints will judge the world?..Do you not know that we [human beings] are to judge angels?” Angels and archangels will be made subject to us, not the other way around.

For it is written: “It was *not to angels *that God subject the world to come.”—Hebrews 2:5
Click to expand...
Thanks Delson. I didn’t realize that this translation way that acclaimed. I am going to go right now and retrieve my copy and give it a look through.

We all appreciate your sharing and more than that teaching.
 
DelsonJacobs said:
Jesus can’t be Michael the Archangel because “it is not to angels that God subjected the world to come.”—Hebrews 1:5.
Click to expand...
Another argument against Jesus being Michael is in the book of Jude where Michael will not rebuke Satan directly, but Jesus rebukes Satan directly in the desert.
 
ajcstr said:
Another argument against Jesus being Michael is in the book of Jude where Michael will not rebuke Satan directly, but Jesus rebukes Satan directly in the desert.
Click to expand...
Ah, yes! Excellent point!
 
Waynec said:
Thanks Delson. I didn’t realize that this translation way that acclaimed. I am going to go right now and retrieve my copy and give it a look through.

We all appreciate your sharing and more than that teaching.
Click to expand...
You’re welcome. It’s all there from the Church of course. Were God not merciful to me to open my eyes when and how He did, I would still be as blind as I once was and lost in error.
 
I am so fortunate. I live in a suburban almost rural location. Maybe they run out of breath before they make it to the door? 😃

Actually they made it here once and when they thought I only spoke English and not Spanish they went away quickly. Apparently most of the JWs here are Latino and only speak Spanish or likely Tex-Mex.
 
As some of you know from news reports, there has been a major disaster in my area. An incredible overnight storm producing hundreds of thousands of lightning strikes and bringing in some areas over 20 inches of rain in one evening has destroyed homes and completely wiped away major streets and parts of the highways. There have even been fatalities.

Due to this it will be several days before I can return to complete this. My apologies for now. Please keep the people of Mobile, Alabama and Pensacola, Florida in your prayers.
 
DelsonJacobs said:
As some of you know from news reports, there has been a major disaster in my area. An incredible overnight storm producing hundreds of thousands of lightning strikes and bringing in some areas over 20 inches of rain in one evening has destroyed homes and completely wiped away major streets and parts of the highways. There have even been fatalities.

Due to this it will be several days before I can return to complete this. My apologies for now. Please keep the people of Mobile, Alabama and Pensacola, Florida in your prayers.
Click to expand...
Absolutely! God bless you, your family, and all who have been effected :crossrc: and we look forward to your return.

Peace!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top