No Apologies #81: Jehovah's Witnesses and the Trinity (Part II)

Ave Maria, Welcome back to No Apologies. As we continue to take a look at the Jehovah’s booklet “Should you Believe in the Trinity.” Today we’re going to address the claim that the early Church did not teach the doctrine of the Trinity. And to this end the Jehovah’s quote from six early Church fathers; as we want to point out, the Jehovah’s twist their words or misrepresent their words in order to represent what they want them to.

The first father we want to look at is St. Justin Martyr from the year 100-165 AD. And the Jehovah’s claim that he taught that Jesus was only an angel, and therefore not God, and therefore the Trinity is false. They quote him as calling Jesus “other than the God who made all things.” They give no reference for the quote, but we do know that in his work, dialogue with [some name] the Jew, he does list various names that are given to the Son of God in Scripture: Wisdom, Word, Lord, Son, God, and, in one place, Angel. If we recall that, in the Old Testament, he was sometimes represented by an Angel, like in the Book of Genesis, Chapter 18.

And this is all that St. Justin is referring to, because there is no question that he believed that Jesus was God, if we look in another of his works “First Apology,” where he writes: “Our teacher of these things, born for this end, is Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, the Procurator in Judea, in the time of Tiberius Caesar. We will prove that we worship Him reasonably, for we have learned that He is the Son of the true God Himself. The Father of all has a Son who is both the first born Word of God and is God.

And despite that work, the Jehovah’s maintain that Justin still did not believe that Jesus was God, by quoting him as saying that “Jesus never did anything except what the Creator willed Him to do and say.” But we simply point out that that confirms what the Bible says in the gospel of John 5:19, and Luke Chapter 22, verse 42, that Jesus came to do will of the Father.

Another father quoted is St.Irenaeus, from the year 140 to the year 202 AD. And they claim that he taught Jesus to be separate or inferior to God. Again, here, there is no reference given to show where this was taken from, but we can find in St. Irenaeus’ teachings just the opposite if we look in his writing “Against Heresies” where we read this: “but not knowing Him who from the Virgin is Emmanuel, they are deprived of His gift, which is life eternal. Not receiving the Word of incorruption they remain in mortal flesh and are the debtors of death, not having received the antidote of life. Nevertheless, what cannot be said of anyone else who ever lived, that He is Himself, in His own right, God and Lord and Eternal King and Only Begotten and Incarnate Word, proclaimed as such by all the Prophets, by all the Apostles, and by the Spirit Himself, may be seen by all who attain to even a small portion of the truth. The scriptures would not have born witness to these things concerning Him, if like everyone else He were a mere man.”

A third father quoted is St. Clement of Alexandria, who died in the year 215 AD. The Jehovah’s quote him as calling God “the uncreated and imperishable only true God.” But, we point out that just affirms the Trinitarian position, that there is only one true God. And they go on to quote him as saying that “the Son is next to the only omnipotent Father.” But, we point out that that really doesn’t say anything about inequality and it can just as easily be interpreted and understood in line with our position. And this is so true that the Jehovah’s thought it necessary at the end of that quote to insert their own line, which reads, “but not equal to Him,” leading the reader to interpret according to their own designs.

So we have to just to look at other places in this exact same work to see that St. Clement of Alexandria did believe the Son to be equal to the Father. Where he writes, “And now this same Word has appeared as man. He alone is both God and man, and the source of all good things. Despised as to appearance, but in reality adored. The Expiator, The Savior, The Soother, The Divine Word, He that is quite evidently true God, He that is put on a level with the Lord of the universe, because He was His Son.

So as with the all the other fathers which the Jehovah’s quote, similar errors and dishonesty can be pointed out. They are either misquoted, pulled out of context, or isolated text which appear to teach what the Jehovah’s want them to teach. So an objective and an honest and a complete look at the fathers will reveal a definite belief in Christ’s divinity and in the Most Holy Trinity.

Well, thanks for joining me here on No Apologies, Ave Maria.

2 COMMENTS

Denis del Callar March 27, 2011 at 10:13 am

Would there be a written version of Fra Joseph Mary’s lecture somewhere that I can download? Hope you can help. Thanks!

Scott Parker March 27, 2011 at 2:50 pm

Ave Maria, Welcome back to No Apologies. As we continue to take a look at the Jehovah’s booklet “Should you Believe in the Trinity.” Today we’re going to address the claim that the early Church did not teach the doctrine of the Trinity. And to this end the Jehovah’s quote from six early Church fathers; as we want to point out, the Jehovah’s twist their words or misrepresent their words in order to represent what they want them to.

The first father we want to look at is St. Justin Martyr from the year 100-165 AD. And the Jehovah’s claim that he taught that Jesus was only an angel, and therefore not God, and therefore the Trinity is false. They quote him as calling Jesus “other than the God who made all things.” They give no reference for the quote, but we do know that in his work, dialogue with [some name] the Jew, he does list various names that are given to the Son of God in Scripture: Wisdom, Word, Lord, Son, God, and, in one place, Angel. If we recall that, in the Old Testament, he was sometimes represented by an Angel, like in the Book of Genesis, Chapter 18.

And this is all that St. Justin is referring to, because there is no question that he believed that Jesus was God, if we look in another of his works “First Apology,” where he writes: “Our teacher of these things, born for this end, is Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, the Procurator in Judea, in the time of Tiberius Caesar. We will prove that we worship Him reasonably, for we have learned that He is the Son of the true God Himself. The Father of all has a Son who is both the first born Word of God and is God.

And despite that work, the Jehovah’s maintain that Justin still did not believe that Jesus was God, by quoting him as saying that “Jesus never did anything except what the Creator willed Him to do and say.” But we simply point out that that confirms what the Bible says in the gospel of John 5:19, and Luke Chapter 22, verse 42, that Jesus came to do will of the Father.

Another father quoted is St.Irenaeus, from the year 140 to the year 202 AD. And they claim that he taught Jesus to be separate or inferior to God. Again, here, there is no reference given to show where this was taken from, but we can find in St. Irenaeus’ teachings just the opposite if we look in his writing “Against Heresies” where we read this: “but not knowing Him who from the Virgin is Emmanuel, they are deprived of His gift, which is life eternal. Not receiving the Word of incorruption they remain in mortal flesh and are the debtors of death, not having received the antidote of life. Nevertheless, what cannot be said of anyone else who ever lived, that He is Himself, in His own right, God and Lord and Eternal King and Only Begotten and Incarnate Word, proclaimed as such by all the Prophets, by all the Apostles, and by the Spirit Himself, may be seen by all who attain to even a small portion of the truth. The scriptures would not have born witness to these things concerning Him, if like everyone else He were a mere man.”

A third father quoted is St. Clement of Alexandria, who died in the year 215 AD. The Jehovah’s quote him as calling God “the uncreated and imperishable only true God.” But, we point out that just affirms the Trinitarian position, that there is only one true God. And they go on to quote him as saying that “the Son is next to the only omnipotent Father.” But, we point out that that really doesn’t say anything about inequality and it can just as easily be interpreted and understood in line with our position. And this is so true that the Jehovah’s thought it necessary at the end of that quote to insert their own line, which reads, “but not equal to Him,” leading the reader to interpret according to their own designs.

So we have to just to look at other places in this exact same work to see that St. Clement of Alexandria did believe the Son to be equal to the Father. Where he writes, “And now this same Word has appeared as man. He alone is both God and man, and the source of all good things. Despised as to appearance, but in reality adored. The Expiator, The Savior, The Soother, The Divine Word, He that is quite evidently true God, He that is put on a level with the Lord of the universe, because He was His Son.

So as with the all the other fathers which the Jehovah’s quote, similar errors and dishonesty can be pointed out. They are either misquoted, pulled out of context, or isolated text which appear to teach what the Jehovah’s want them to teach. So an objective and an honest and a complete look at the fathers will reveal a definite belief in Christ’s divinity and in the Most Holy Trinity.

Well, thanks for joining me here on No Apologies, Ave Maria.