Seraphim Hamilton

I am by nature an argumentative person.  I love a good debate.  By debate, I mean debate, not fighting.  Fighting is yelling insults at each other masked as “arguments.”  A debate is a rational gunfight where logic and evidence are the guns.  Because of my nature, I invited missionaries from the Jehovah’s Witnesses over to talk to them about their faith.  For those unfamiliar with the Witnesses, their basic beliefs are:

1. God is one person, the Father.

2. Jesus Christ is the Son of God because he is the first creation of “Jehovah God.”

3. The divine name “Jehovah” [it’s really YHWH] is the proper name of God that should be used.

4. Jesus Christ was the Messiah sent by Jehovah, who was crucified on a torture stake, not a cross, providing for the salvation of mankind.

5. On the third day, Jehovah disintegrated Jesus’ body and raised Him to “spirit life.”  In other words, the resurrection was not a bodily resurrection, but Jesus was simply a spirit.

6. The 144,000 are a group of Jehovah’s Witnesses selected from eternity past by Jehovah to rule with Christ in the Heavenly Kingdom forever.

7. Other Jehovah’s Witnesses who have attained some level of salvation will live on an earthly kingdom.

8. Damnation is annihilation of the soul; there is no conscious suffering.

9. The Day of the Lord is imminent, where the world will be judged and the damned annihilated.

In addition, JWs use a special translation of 66 books of the Bible called the “New World Translation,” which has been translated specifically to support JW doctrines and to mask orthodox Christian doctrine.

Well, here’s how the argument went.  During the first meeting, we simply went over our present beliefs and they gave me a small book entitled “What Does the Bible Really Teach?”  This book is intended to prove that the Bible teaches JW doctrine.  I read the book for the next meeting, and we delved into what I really wanted to discuss: the deity of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.  As expected, they took me to Colossians 1:15, which says “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.”

According to JWs, this passage demonstrates that Jesus was the first creation of God the Father, thus “firstborn.”  In response, I pointed them to three things:

1. In the Hebrew Scriptures, The Prophet King David is called the “firstborn,” though we know that he was actually the youngest son.  This implies that “firstborn” is simply a title denoting the heir to the kingdom.

2. An ancient Jewish rabbi named Benchai refers to YHWH God as “firstborn.”  If firstborn really denoted that the figure in question was created, how could an Orthodox Jew use this title of the LORD Himself?

3. The Greek word used for “firstborn” here is prototokos.  If Paul wished to convey the idea of “first-created,” the much clearer Greek word would be protoktizos.

So, what was the JW response?  Move to another verse: “Well, in the Book of John, Jesus even says that Jehovah God is greater than he is!”  John 14:28: You heard me say to you, “I am going away, and I will come to you.”  If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.  “As we can see,” the Witnesses stated, “the Father and the Son are not the same.  And, on top of that, Jesus Christ proclaims that Jehovah God is greater than he is!”

In their argument I could see two clear misunderstandings of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity.  “First of all,” I told them, “no Trinitarian argues that the Father and the Son are identical.  They are two distinct persons, as the Holy Spirit is a distinct person from the Father and Son.  The Trinity is one in essence, but it is not one in personhood.  Secondly, while the Son is functionally subordinate to God the Father, this does not refute His ontological equality with God the Father.  When Christ states that the Father is greater than He is, He is speaking of His functional relationship with the Father.”

Most Witnesses don’t understand what the doctrine of the Trinity actually is.  They tend to picture it as the modalistic heresy, which teaches that God is one person who simply manifests in three forms.  First proposed by the ancient priest Sabellius, it was condemned by the Church but has enjoyed recent revivals among certain sects of Pentecostals.  I could see that they were confused.  “Well, we really don’t see evidence from the Bible that Jesus Christ is equal with Jehovah God.”

I wanted to talk with them about their use of the divine name, and then I wanted to give them biblical support for Christ’s deity.  “In that New World Translation that you use, the name ‘Jehovah’ is used several places in the New Testament.  Why is that, considering that in no place in the original Greek New Testament is the divine name actually used?  The New Testament authors simply used ‘The Lord.’”

“The New Testament did use the divine name originally.  It was removed by biased translators.”

I asked them which manuscripts of the New Testament used the divine name.  “Considering that we have over 5,000 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, and none of them use the divine name, how could you say that?”  They told me that several manuscripts had the divine name.  “No, that is simply not true.  The tetragrammaton [the Hebrew divine name YHWH] is nowhere used in the Greek New Testament,” I replied.  “I have a book upstairs by Bruce Metzger and Bart Ehrman called The Text of the New Testament, which deals in detail with the manuscripts of the New Testament.  Would you like me to get it and show you?”  They assured me that this was not necessary.

“Well, even though there may be no manuscript evidence of the divine name, it was clearly removed by biased copyists.”

“That’s untenable for two reasons.  First, there are many streams of textual tradition from a geographically diverse area, and none use the divine name.  The systematic conspiracy to destroy the divine name would have to spread across thousands of miles and be perfectly coordinated.  For a conspiracy of that magnitude to leave no evidence is impossible.  Second, even in the pre-Christian Greek Septuagint translation of the Old Testament, the divine name is replaced with ‘The Lord.’  This is because by ancient Jews and ancient Christians, the divine name was regarded as so holy that it was not usually written down.”

They decided to try a different tactic.  “Look at the Gospel of John,” they said.  John 17:25-26: O righteous Father, even though the world does not know you, I know you, and these know that you have sent me.  I made known to them your name, and I will continue to make it known, that the love with which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them.  “As we can see, Jesus states that he made known the name of Jehovah to the people.”

I responded, “That’s not what He says at all.  First, if Jesus was talking about the divine name, why is there no place in the Gospels where Christ actually uses that divine name?  Second, it is clear from the context that He is speaking of making the general knowledge of God the Father accessible to the people.”

Silence again.  I changed the subject.  “Let’s talk about the biblical evidence for the deity of Christ.”  They had to leave soon, but I wanted to give them two verses of Scripture that demonstrated that Christ was God.  “Well, first, let’s go to the book of Hebrews.  In heaven we can see a conversation between the Father and the Son.  The author quotes passages of the Hebrew Scriptures where the Father is speaking.  Hebrews 1:5: For to which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son, today I have begotten you’?  Or again, ‘I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son’?  As we can see, in this context, the Greek theos clearly refers to God, not merely a lesser angelic being.  The important thing in this chapter is when God the Father tells the Son: (Hebrews 1:8) But of the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.’  The same Greek word, as we can see, is used in the immediate context to refer to both God the Father and the Son.  The Father even addresses the Son as ‘God’ and speaks of His eternal reign.”

“Well,” the Witnesses replied, “Jesus Christ can be spoken of as ‘a god’ meaning that he is a very powerful being, but not as ‘Almighty God,’ because there is only one ‘Almighty God.’”

I could see that they still did not understand the doctrine of the Trinity.  “But you see,” I said, “I completely agree that there is only one Almighty.  In fact, the ancient creeds of the Orthodox Church use that precise terminology [I refer to the Athanasian creed].  The persons of the Trinity are one God in essence.  Secondly, this cannot refer to a lesser god because the author uses the precise same Greek term in the same immediate context to refer to both God the Father and God the Son.”

There were a few moments of silence, so, to break the awkwardness, I asked to move to the next verse.  They agreed.  I took them to the Book of Revelation: “Let’s look at the beginning of John’s Apocalypse.  The Apostle writes of God (it is unclear whether this is the Father or Son speaking): (Revelation 1:8) ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega,’ says the Lord God, ‘who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.’”

The Witnesses agreed that this was clearly a reference to God.  I then took them to the end of the Apocalypse.  Revelation 22:12-13: Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay everyone for what he has done.  I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.  “As we can see, the Apostle is actually using a framing device.  He opens the Apocalypse with a declaration from God that He is the Alpha and the Omega, and ends it with a declaration from the Lord Jesus Christ that He is the Alpha and the Omega.  We know that Revelation 22 has Jesus speaking because the speaker says ‘Behold, I am coming soon.’  There are three options.  One, there could be two Alphas and Omegas.  We know from the Bible that this is false.”  They agreed.  “Two, there could be two gods.  We know from the Bible that this is false.”  They agreed again.  “Or three, there could be one Alpha and Omega who exists in three persons.”

They were silent for a few seconds.  Slowly, they answered, “Well, we agree that in verse twelve, Jesus is speaking, but in verse thirteen the speaker changes to Jehovah God.”  I asked them how they came to that conclusion.  They replied that they knew from the rest of the Bible that Jehovah is not the same as Jesus, so that is the only logical conclusion.  I didn’t have time to reply, because they had to get to a meeting, so we said farewell and agreed to meet again in a few weeks.

Our next meeting only had one of them there.  We dove right into the discussion.  I had brought along a book called Putting Jesus in His Place, which is a systematic case by two New Testament scholars for the deity of Jesus.  I opened first to 1 Peter 3:14-15:…Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, but in your hearts regard Christ the Lord as holy….  “Let’s compare this passage of scripture to a passage from the Prophet Isaiah: (8:12-13) Do not call conspiracy all that this people calls conspiracy, and do not fear what they fear, nor be in dread.  But the LORD of hosts, him you shall regard as holy.  Let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.”  While these passages look somewhat different in English, the original Greek New Testament and the Greek Septuagint language is almost identical:

1 Peter 3: ton de phobon auton me phobethete mede tarachthete kurion de ton christon hagiasate

Isaiah 8: ton de phobon autou ou me phobethete oude me tarachthete kurion auton hagiasate

I showed him the Greek text.  “As we can see, Peter almost directly quotes the Prophet Isaiah, merely replacing YHWH with ‘Christ the Lord’ indicating that the Lord God and the Lord Christ are equal.”

The Witness responded, “Well, Peter is simply making the same point as Isaiah is.”  I asked him what that point was.  “Well, it’s to serve the Lord God.”

“Exactly!” I exclaimed.  “And that only works if the Lord Christ is God in flesh.”  He changed the subject.  I’m not sure what he was about to get at, but he began saying,

“Well, because Jesus used to be a man…”

“Wait.  Did you say, ‘used to be’?”

“Well, yes,” the Witness replied.  “He is now only a spirit, because as the Bible says, it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.”

I knew the exact verse he was talking about from arguments with secularists over Paul’s doctrine of the resurrection.  “Let’s go to 1 Corinthians 15 then.  The Apostle Paul states: (1 Corinthians 15:44) ‘It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.’  However, the Greek here for spiritual is pneumatikos. The suffix tikos indicates that Paul is talking about spiritual in orientation, not substance.  That is, it is a glorified, supernatural body, not an incorporeal spirit.  Paul uses the same Greek word in Galatians 6:1: ‘Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness.  Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted.’  Paul here mentions ‘spiritual people’ here, who are to counsel the others.  He obviously is referring to Christians in their local churches, not incorporeal spirits.  He means Christians who are filled with the Spirit of God.  This is what pneumatikos means.  It has nothing to do with the substance of the body.”

“But,” the Witness countered, “Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:50 ‘I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.’”

“Well, Paul is using an ancient Semitic idiom here.  ‘Flesh and blood’ is an idiom that does not refer to physicality, but to corruption.  This is why Jesus says that He is made up of flesh and bone in the Gospel of John.  Paul is simply saying that corruption cannot enter the kingdom of God.”

I then asked him to turn to 1 Timothy 2:5.  We turned there: “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”  I explained, “The Apostle Paul states that the figure that presently mediates between God and men is in fact a man.  He uses the present tense, which demonstrates that Jesus Christ is in fact still a man.”

The Witness changed the subject.  He asked me to turn to 1 John 4:8 and read that passage: Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.  “Now, your parents love you.  Would they want you to be confused?”  Not sure where he was going with this, I answered that they would certainly not.  “So why would God require one to do all this deep study to come to a true understanding of His Word?”

“Well, my answer is twofold,” I responded.  “First, God has not left us alone but has sent the Spirit of Truth into the Orthodox Church’s tradition so that it may guide us to the correct interpretation of Holy Scripture.  Second, it would actually be much more confusing if you are right.  The Bible clearly states that the Word was God.  It clearly states that the present mediator between God and man is a man.  It clearly states that Jesus rose from the dead in a body of flesh and bone.  If none of these things are actually true, it seems to require a lot more mental gymnastics for your interpretation of the Bible than it does for mine.”

The Witness answered, “I don’t really see that at all.”  In response, I told the story of Jewish Orthodox Christian Fr. James Bernstein.

“Young James had come to believe that Jesus was God’s Messiah, but he was not sure whether the New Testament taught His deity.  He wanted to see if the New Testament was clear enough that the New World Translation could not even mask it.  Thus, he purchased a New World Translation Bible and read the entire New Testament.  After reading it for himself, he concluded that even the NWT clearly taught the deity of Christ.  This is but one example of a man coming to the deity of Christ by himself without picking up over a hundred books on the subject.”

Silence again.  “Let’s talk more about the deity of Jesus,” I said.  He agreed to discuss it some more.  I brought out Philippians 2:5-11: Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the nature of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.  And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.  Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

“Now, the Greek word for nature here is morphe.  Daniel Wallace, a highly regarded scholar of the Greek language, states that this is one of the strongest ways to express Christ’s deity.  Morphe refers to internal attributes and characteristics, and Paul says that Jesus possesses the internal attributes and characteristics of deity.”

“But,” the Witness countered, “how can Jesus be the same as God the Father if God the Father exalts him?”

“The first thing we must understand, as I’ve mentioned, is that God the Father and God the Son are distinct persons in one being, and therefore can communicate with each other and exalt each other.  Second, as Richard Bauckham explains [I had the book in front of me]: ‘The verb does not indicate that God has exalted Jesus to a higher status than he had previously occupied (whether in pre-existence or in mortal life), but that God has exalted him to a higher status than that of anyone or anything else, i.e., to the pre-eminent position in the whole cosmos.’  Basically, God the Father is eternally exalting the Son to the pre-eminent position in the universe, just as the Father eternally begets God the Son and eternally spirates the Holy Spirit.”

Our time was up; the JW had to get to a meeting.  We shook hands and he politely informed me that we are at a stalemate and that unless we come to an agreement, there is no real point in discussing this further.  He asked me to call him back if we ever came to agreement on this issue.  I understood his point here and accepted.  We bade farewell, probably for the last time.

Thus, folks, that is my experience with JW missionaries. I hope you’ve learned something from it.