I sincerely believe that Jesus is not Jehovah, but that he is Jehovah God's Son #2

TJ

Continued from part #1. Bible verses are from the Watchtower

[Above: Early latinised Greek ΙΧΘΥΣ (ICHTHYS or ICHTHUS = "fish") inscription, with fish symbols. ICHTHYS is an acrostic on the first letters of the Greek for "Jesus Christ, God's Son, Saviour." Again, "The use of the Ichthys symbol by early Christians appears to date from the end of the 1st century AD" (Wikipedia) and so this is archaeological evidence that the earliest Christians worshipped Jesus as their God and Saviour.]

Bible & Tract Society's online Bible, the New World Translation (NWT), or if in Greek from the Society's Kingdom Interlinear Translation (KIT), unless otherwise indicated.

>My question is, does the fact that both Jesus and Jehovah are each called "Savior" necessitate the conclusion that Jesus is Jehovah? Could one not, on this evidence, come to the valid conclusion that both Jesus and Jehovah are Saviors? I.e. Jesus is a Savior, Jehovah is a Savior, but Jesus is not Jehovah?

[...]

If there was room on the "Jesus is Yahweh" diagram, it could also have included the following verses which also show further that the Apostles Paul and Peter (who were Jews who already believed that Jehovah was both God and Saviour) , believed that Jesus was both God and Saviour:

Tit 2:13. while we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus,

There is no "[the]" in the above NWT mistranslation. Without the "[the]" The Gk. is, to megalou Theou kai soteros emon Kristos 'Iesou, i.e. "the great God and Savior of us Christ Jesus,"in my The Interlinear Bible (since the KIT also mistranslates the interlinear English ), or as in the NIV:

Titus 2:13 NIV. while we wait for the blessed hope-the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,

See various `tagline' quotes below that point out a number of things wrong with the NWT's rendering of Titus 2:13 above and 2 Pet 1:1 below. Rather than list all those points, which would make this post too long, the most basic error of the NWT's translation of these two verses, is that it contravenes a rule of Greek grammar (Sharp's rule), that when two nouns, i.e. "God" and "Saviour" are joined by an "and" and preceded by only one article, i.e. "the," then there is only one person or thing being referred to. It is exactly the same Greek construction as in "our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ," in the following verses correctly translated by the NWT:

2Pet 1:11. In fact, thus there will be richly supplied to YOU the entrance into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
2Pet 2:20. Certainly if, after having escaped from the defilements of the world by an accurate knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they get involved again with these very things and are overcome, the final conditions have become worse for them than the first.
2Pet 3:18. No, but go on growing in the undeserved kindness and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him [be] the glory both now and to the day of eternity.

The only difference is that the first noun is kurios ("Lord") instead of theos ("God") in Titus 2:13 and 2Pet 1:1. But Greek grammar, like English grammar, does not change because one noun is "Lord" and the other is "God." If it is correct grammar to translate 2Pet 1:11; 2:20 & 3:18 as "our/the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (which it is) then it is correct grammar to translate Titus 2:13 and 2Pet 1:1, which have an identical structure to the previous three verses, as "our/the God and Savior Jesus Christ."

The NWT also translates 2Pet 1:11 by inserting a "[the]" that is not there in the original Greek :

2Pet 1:1. ... the righteousness of our God and [the] Savior Jesus Christ:

The Gk. in the KIT is tou Theou emon kai soteros emon 'Iesou Kristos, which my The Interlinear Bible (because again the KIT mistranslates the interlinear English) renders "the God of us and Savior of us, Jesus Christ,"or as in the NIV:

2Pet 1:1. the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ

Those who can read Greek and have downloaded the BST Greek fonts and can check this out for themselves on the online Interlinear Bible (not to be confused with my hardcopy The Interlinear Bible), comparing 2Pet 1:11; 2:20; 3:18 with Titus 2:13 & 2Pet 1:1.

This is supported by the fact that it is not God the Father who will be manifested (Gk. epiphaneia, "appearing"), but Jesus (see also 2Th 2:8; 1Tim 6:14; 2Tim 4:1,8), i.e. God the Son.

So (again) the Watchtower's theological prejudices against the deity of Christ have overridden what the NWT translators' must have known was correct Greek grammar! This presumably is one of the reasons that "Dr Robert Countess, who wrote a doctoral dissertation on the Greek text of the New World Translation, concluded that the translation ... must be viewed as a radically biased piece of work. At some points it is actually dishonest." (see `tagline').

There is only one viable explanation for this evidence (which is consistent with all the other Biblical evidence) and that is that Jesus is Jehovah!

That is, the name of Jesus (which means Jehovah is salvation - Mt 1:21 NWT, 1971, footnote), is the "new name" that had superseded the Old Testament name of Jehovah, as predicted in Isa 62:2 NWT:

"And you will actually be called by a new name, which the very mouth of Jehovah will designate.

Immediately before His ascension, Jesus commanded His disciples that they would be witnesses of Him (i.e. be Jesus' Witnesses, not Jehovah's Witnesses):

Acts 1:8. but YOU will receive power when the holy spirit arrives upon YOU, and YOU will be witnesses of me both in Jerusalem and in all Ju•de´a and Sa•mar´i•a and to the most distant part of the earth."

And the Apostle Paul, quoting Isa 45:23 (two verses after Isa 45:21 in which, as we saw above, Jehovah stated that, "besides" Him "there is no other God ... and ... Savior"), that to "Jehovah", "every knee will bend down, every tongue will swear" :

Isa 45:21-23. Make YOUR report and YOUR presentation. Yes, let them consult together in unity. Who has caused this to be heard from a long time ago? [Who] has reported it from that very time? Is it not I, Jehovah, besides whom there is no other God; a righteous God and a Savior, there being none excepting me? "Turn to me and be saved, all YOU [at the] ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no one else. By my own self I have sworn-out of my own mouth in righteousness the word has gone forth, so that it will not return-that to me every knee will bend down, every tongue will swear,

applies it to "Jesus," that "God ... gave him the name that is above every [other] name" so that to Him "every knee should bend " and "every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord [Kurios]":

Php 2:9-11. For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.

But there is no "[other]" in the Gk, it literally is, to onoma to huper pan onoma , "the name the over every name." And that "every name" (even the NWT's insertion of "[other]" does not change it) includes the Old Testament name, YHWH (Jehovah).

This would be even clearer if the Watchtower had been consistent in their policy of replacing the original Greek word Kurios "Lord" with "Jehovah," "By determining where the inspired Christian writers have quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures ... we have followed this course in rendering our version of the Christian Greek Scriptures" (see `tagline'), because then, in Php 2:10-11 "the inspired Christian writer" Paul "quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures," Isa 45:23, and so the NWT of Php 2:11 should then read:

"... and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Jehovah to the glory of God the Father."

>Many thanks,
TJ

You are welcome. I hope this has helped answer your question. To summarise: 1) Titus 2:13 & 2Pet 1:1, rightly translated, state that Jesus is both God and Saviour; 2) only Jesus is going to appear, not God the Father, and yet the One who is going to appear is called "the great God" in Titus 2:13, even in the NWT; 3) Jehovah claims to be the only Savior (Isa 43:11; 45:21; Hos 13:4 NWT); therefore Jesus must be Jehovah!

And if the NWT was consistent in replacing "Lord" with "Jehovah" in the New Testament, when it is a quote from the Old Testament, then Philippians 2:11 (which is a quote from Isa 45:23) would say that Jesus Christ is Jehovah!

Ps: See also `tagline' quotes below (emphases in italics are original, bold emphases are mine). Bible verses below are from the New International Version (NIV), unless otherwise indicated.

Stephen E. Jones.
My other blogs: CreationEvolutionDesign & TheShroudofTurin

---

"What are some examples of NWT mistranslation? ... Titus 2:13 a) Comparison of translations of Titus 2:13 (the same mistranslation occurs in 2 Peter 1:1). The Jehovah's Witnesses in their New World Translation have translated Titus 2:13 in this way: NWT: `While we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of (the) Savior of us, Christ Jesus.' (Jehovah's Witnesses have added the word `the' and put it in parentheses in front of the word Savior.) On the other hand, the NIV translates this: NIV: `While we wait for the blessed hope-the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ....' b) The reason the Jehovah's Witnesses have mistranslated this verse is to deny the deity of Jesus Christ, a doctrine they do not accept." (Ankerberg, J. & Weldon, J., 1988, "The Facts on Jehovah's Witnesses," Harvest House: Eugene OR, Reprinted, 2003, pp.33-34).

"c) Proof and documentation from scholars that the New World translators dishonestly translated this verse: By adding the word `the' in parentheses, the New World translators obscured the fact that in this verse Paul clearly called Jesus `our God and Savior.' They have made it read as if Paul were speaking of two persons here, God and Jesus, rather than one, namely Jesus. Paul expressly stated that it is Jesus who is our great God and Savior. The Jehovah's Witnesses completely violate what Greek grammarians call Granville Sharp's rule for the use of the article with personal nouns in a series. In essence, Sharp's rule states that when two singular personal nouns (God and Savior) of the same case (God and Savior are both in the same case), are connected by `and' (the Greek word is kai), and the modifying article `the' (the Greek word is ho) appears only before the first noun, not before the second, both nouns must refer to the same person. In Titus 2:13, `God' and `Savior' are connected by `and.' Also, `the' appears only before `God.' Therefore, `God' and `Savior' must refer to the same Person-Jesus. (The same rule also applies to the words in 2 Peter 1:1 that the Jehovah's Witnesses have also mistranslated in the NWT.)" (Ankerberg & Weldon, 1988, pp.34-35).

"In fact, scholars have conclusively shown that in ancient times the phraseology `god and savior' was used of a ruling king, clearly showing that only one person was meant.' In an exhaustive study, C. Kuehne found Sharp's rule to be without demonstrable exception in the entire New Testament. [Kuehne, C., `The Greek Article and the Doctrine of Christ's Deity,' Journal of Theology, Church of the Lutheran Confession, Vols. 13-14, Sept. 1973-Dec. 1974] Thus, honest and unbiased scholarship requires that the words in these verses must be translated `our God and Savior, Jesus Christ.' Dr. Bruce Metzger, an authority on the Greek language and professor at Princeton University, has stated: `In support of this translation [our God and Savior must refer only to Jesus Christ] there may be quoted such eminent grammarians of the Greek New Testament as P.W. Schmiedel, J.H. Moulton, A.T Robertson, and Blass-Debrunner. All of these scholars concur in the judgment that only one person is referred to in Titus 2:13 and that therefore, it must be rendered, `our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.' [Metzger, B.M., "The Jehovah's Witnesses and Jesus Christ: A Biblical and Theological Appraisal," Theology Today, Apr. 1953, p.74] Greek scholars Dana and Mantey, in their A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, confirm the truth of Sharp's rule, and then explain: `Second Peter 1:1...means that Jesus is our God and Savior. After the same manner Titus 2:13... asserts that Jesus is the great God and Savior.' [Metzger, op. cit., p.79] The greatest English-speaking Greek scholar, A.T. Robertson, insisted that `one person, not two, is in mind in 2 Peter 1:1.' [Robertson, A.T., "Word Pictures in the New Testament," Broadman: Nashville TN, 1933, Vol. 6, p.147.]" (Ankerberg & Weldon, 1988, pp.34-35).

"Even the context of Titus 2:13 shows that one Person, not two, was in Paul's mind, for Paul wrote of the `glorious appearing' of that Person. The Bible knows of only one such appearing: when `the Son of Man [Jesus] comes in his glory' (Luke 9:26). Indeed, an appearing of `the invisible God,' other than as the visible Christ, who is His image (Colossians 1:15), would be impossible. From all of this, scholars conclude that the Jehovah's Witnesses' New World Translation of Titus 2:13 is a biased and inaccurate translation." (Ankerberg & Weldon, 1988, p.35).

"Titus 2:13-Our Great God and Savior The Watchtower Teaching. The New World Translation renders Titus 2:13, `While we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus' (emphasis added). This is in contrast to, for example, the New American Standard Bible, which renders this verse, `Looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus' (emphasis added). Notice how the two translations are different. The Jehovah's Witnesses mistranslate Titus 2:13 to make it appear that two different persons are in view-God Almighty and Christ the Savior. Yet all legitimate translations have only one person in view in this verse-our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. ... The Biblical Teaching. A study of the Old Testament indicates that it is only God who saves. In Isaiah 43:11, God asserts: `I, even I, am the LORD [Yahweh], and apart from me there is no savior' (emphasis added). This is an extremely important verse, for it indicates that 1) a claim to be Savior is, in itself, a claim to deity; and 2) there is only one Savior-God. Since the New Testament clearly refers to Jesus Christ as the Savior, the only conclusion that makes sense is that Christ is indeed God. Shortly after His birth, an angel appeared to a group of nearby shepherds and said, `Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord' (Luke 2:11). John's Gospel records the conclusion reached by the Samaritans: Jesus `really is the Savior of the world' (John 4:42)." (Rhodes, R., 1993, "Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Jehovah's Witnesses," Harvest House: Eugene OR, Reprinted, 2006, pp.88-90. Emphasis original).

"In Titus 2:13 Paul encourages Titus to await the blessed hope, the `glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.' An examination of Titus 2:10-13, 3:4, and 3:6 reveals that the phrases God our Savior and Jesus Christ our Savior are used interchangeably four times. The parallel truths that only God is the Savior (Isaiah 43:11) and that Jesus Himself is the Savior constitute a powerful evidence for Christ's deity. One must keep in mind that the apostle Paul (who wrote Titus) had been trained in the strictest form of Judaism (its main tenet being monotheism-the belief that there is only one true God). It is against this backdrop that Paul unabashedly affirms that Jesus is `our great God and Savior.' Now, we must emphasize that Greek grammarians have taken a solid stand against the Watchtower's view that there are two persons-Jehovah and the Savior Jesus-in Titus 2:13. Indeed, these scholars are emphatic that only one person-'our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ'-is found in this verse. Greek scholar Bruce Metzger writes: `In support of this translation ['our great God and Savior'] there may be quoted such eminent grammarians of the Greek New Testament as P.W. Schmiedel, J.H. Moulton, A.T. Robertson, and Blass-Debrunner. All of these scholars concur in the judgment that only one person is referred to in Titus 2:13 and that therefore, it must be rendered, `our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.' [Metzger, B.M., "The Jehovah's Witnesses and Jesus Christ," Theology Today, April, 1953, pp.78-79] Likewise, Dana and Mantey's authoritative Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament positively affirms that Titus 2:13 'asserts that Jesus is the great God and Savior.' [Dana, H.E. & Mantey, J.R., "A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament," Macmillan: New York, 1957, p.147] Such Greek scholars argue their case based upon a detailed study of a number of identical sentence constructions in the Greek New Testament. Greek scholars have thus come up with a guiding principle or rule for interpreting such constructions: `When two nouns in the same case are connected by the Greek word `and,' and the first noun is preceded by the article `the,' and the second noun is not preceded by the article, the second noun refers to the same person or thing to which the first noun refers, and is a farther description of it.' [Wuest, K.S., "Wuest's Word Studies," Eerdmans: Grand Rapids MI, 1953, Vol. 3, p.31] In Titus 2:13, two nouns-'God' and `Savior'-are joined together with the Greek word for `and,' and a definite article ('the') is placed only in front of the first noun ('God'). [Bowman, R.M., "Why You Should Believe in the Trinity," Baker: Grand Rapids MI, 1989 p.105.] The sentence literally reads: `the great God and Savior of us.' In this particular sentence construction in the Greek New Testament, the two nouns in question-'God' and `Savior'-are referring to the same person, Jesus Christ. [Ibid., p.105] As scholar Robert Reymond explains, `The two nouns [`God' and `Savior'] both stand under the regimen of the single definite article preceding `God,' indicating ... that they are to be construed corporately, not separately, or that they have a single referent.' [Reymond, R.L., "Jesus, Divine Messiah: The New Testament Witness," Presbyterian & Reformed: Phillipsburg NJ, 1990, p.276] Indeed, `the presence of only one definite article has the effect of binding together the two titles [`God' and `Savior'].' [Bruce, F.F., ed., "Titus," in "The International Bible Commentary," Zondervan: Grand Rapids MI, 1979, p.1495.]" (Rhodes, 1993, pp.90-91. Emphasis original).

"From reading all the above, it seems utterly clear that a primary goal of the New World Translation committee was to strip from the Bible any vestige of Jesus Christ's identification with Yahweh. The fact is, the New World Translation is an incredibly biased translation. Dr. Robert Countess, who wrote a doctoral dissertation on the Greek text of the New World Translation, concluded that the translation `has been sharply unsuccessful in keeping doctrinal considerations from influencing the actual translation.... It must be viewed as a radically biased piece of work. At some points it is actually dishonest. At others it is neither modern nor scholarly.' [Countess, R.H., "The Jehovah's Witnesses' New Testament," Presbyterian & Reformed: Phillipsburg NJ, 1982, p.91] No wonder British scholar H.H. Rowley asserted, `From beginning to end this volume is a shining example of how the Bible should not be translated.' [Rowley, H.H., "How Not to Translate the Bible," Expository Times, November 1953, pp.41-42] Indeed, Rowley said, this translation is `an insult to the Word of God.' [Ibid.] Are Drs. Countess and Rowley alone in their assessment of the New World Translation? By no means! Dr. Julius Mantey, author of A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, calls the New World Translation `a shocking mistranslation.' [Mantey, J.R., in Grieshaber, E. & J., "Exposé - of Jehovah's Witnesses," Jean Books: Tyler TX, 1982, p.30] Dr. Bruce M. Metzger, professor of New Testament at Princeton University, calls the New World Translation `a frightful mistranslation,' `erroneous,' `pernicious,' and `reprehensible.' [Metzger, B.M., "The Jehovah's Witnesses and Jesus Christ," Reprint of article in Theology Today, April, 1953, pp.65-85] Dr. William Barclay concluded that `the deliberate distortion of truth by this sect is seen in their New Testament translation.... It is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest.' [Barclay, W., "An Ancient heresy in Modern Dress," Expository Times, October 1957]" (Rhodes, R. 1993, pp.96).

"In still another crucial verse the New World Translation has garbled the meaning of the original so as to avoid referring to Jesus Christ as God. In Titus 2:13 it reads, `We wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of our Savior Christ Jesus.' This rendering, by separating `the great God' from `our Savior Christ Jesus,' overlooks a principle of Greek grammar which was detected and formulated in a rule by Granville Sharp in 1798. This rule, in brief, is that when the copulative kai connects two nouns of the same case, if the article precedes the first noun and is not repeated before the second noun, the latter always refers to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun. This verse in Titus, therefore, must be translated, as in fact the Revised Standard Version (1952) renders it, `Awaiting our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.' In support of this translation there may be quoted such eminent grammarians of the Greek New Testament as P. W. Schmiedel, J. H. Moulton, A. T. Robertson, and Blass-Debrunner. All of these scholars concur in the judgment that only one person is referred to in Titus 2:13 and that therefore it must be rendered, `Our great God and Savior Jesus Christ." (Metzger, B.M., 1953, "The Jehovah's Witnesses and Jesus Christ," Theology Today, April, 1953, Princeton Theological Seminary: Princeton NJ, Reprinted, pp.65-85, pp.78-79. Greek transliterations mine).

"Exactly similar to the last error considered above is the rendering of II Pet. 1:1 in the New World Translation, `... by the righteousness of our God and the Savior Jesus Christ.' All that has been written in the preceding section, including the judgment of the grammatical authorities cited there, applies with equal appropriateness to the correct rendering of II Pet. 1:1. Accordingly, in this verse also there is an express declaration of the deity of Jesus Christ, `... of our God and Savior Jesus Christ.'" (Metzger, 1953, pp.65-85, p.79. Ellipses original).

"It is important to note the force of the one article with attributive genitives like 2 Pet. 1:11 ten aionion basileian tou kuriou emon kai soteros 'Iesou Christou the eternal Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour (the one article tou pointing at kuriou kai soteros as one individual just like ho adelphos umon kai: sunkoinonos (Rev. 1:9) your brother and companion). So in 2 Pet. 1:1 dikaiosune tou theou emon kai soteros 'Iesou Christou can only mean grammatically in righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ. Winer admits this as the necessary grammar, but for doctrinal reasons draws back. Grammar has nothing primarily to do with theology. So in Tit. 2:13 ton makarian elpida kai epiphaneian tes doxa tou megalou theou kai soteros Christou 'Iesou the happy hope and epiphany of our great God and Saviour Christ Jesus. The use of epiphaneian besides the single article tou points directly to the second coming of Christ Jesus. Note the correlation of articles here (ton, tes, tou). Paul's doctrinal system (Phil. 2:9; Col. 1:15-19; 2:9; Rom. 9:5; Acts 20:28) does not forbid the necessary force of the single article in Tit. 2:13." (Robertson, A.T. & Davis, W.H., "A New Short Grammar of the Greek Testament: For Students Familiar With the Elements of Greek," [1933], Baker: Grand Rapids MI, Tenth edition, 1977, Fourth printing, 1985, p.278. Greek transliteration mine)

"Titus 2:13 The debate surrounding this verse relative to our present interest is whether the Apostle Paul intended to refer to one person (Christ) or to two persons (the Father and Christ) when he wrote: `...while we wait for the blessed hope, even the appearing of the glory [or, glorious appearing] of the great God and Savior of us, Jesus Christ.' The issue, more pointedly put, is this: Are the two words `God' and `Savior' to be construed as referring to one person or are they to be divorced from one another because of the demands of exegesis and referred to two persons? In my opinion, there are five compelling reasons for understanding Paul to be referring to Christ alone throughout the verse and to translate the relevant phrase: `the appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.' ." (Reymond, R.L., 2003, "Jesus, Divine Messiah: The New Testament and Old Testament Witness," [1990], Mentor: Fearn UK, p.471).

"First, it is the most natural way to render the Greek sentence as numerous commentators and grammarians have observed. Indeed, more than one grammarian has noted that there would never have been a question as to whether `God' and `Savior' refer to one person if the sentence had simply ended with `our Savior.' Second, the two nouns both stand under the regimen of the single definite article preceding `God,' indicating (according to the Granville Sharp rule) that they are to be construed corporately, not separately, or that they have a single referent. If Paul had intended to speak of two persons, he could have expressed this unambiguously by inserting an article before `Savior' or by writing `our Savior' after `Jesus Christ.' Third, inasmuch as `appearing' is never referred to the Father but is consistently employed to refer to Christ's return in glory, the prima facie conclusion is that the `appearing of the glory of our great God' refers to Christ's appearing and not to the Father's appearing. Fourth, note has often been made of the fact that the terms ... theos kai soter, `god and savior') were employed in combination together in second and first century B.C. secular literature to refer to single recipients of heathen worship. ... Fifth, contrary to the oft-repeated assertion that the use of ... theos, as a Christological title is an `un-Pauline locution' and thus the noun cannot refer to Christ here, I would simply say that our exposition of Romans 9:5 has demonstrated that this simply is not so. Grammatically and biblically, the evidence would indicate that Paul intended in Titus 2:13 to describe Christ as `our great God and Savior." (Reymond, 2003, pp.471).

"Second Peter In his second letter Peter refers to Jesus as `Jesus Christ' (1:1), `[the] Lord' (3:8,9, 10, 15; perhaps 2:9), `the Lord and Savior' (3:2), `our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ' (1:11; 2:20; 3:18), and finally, `our God and Savior Jesus Christ' (1:1). This last reference is very important, for now we find Peter-like Thomas and Paul before him-employing Θεοσ, theos, as a Christological title. This assertion, of course, has not gone unchallenged, the alternative suggestion being that by Θεοσ , theos Peter intended to refer to the Father. As earlier with Titus 2:13 the issue turns on the question whether by the phrase, `the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ,' Peter intended to refer to two persons (God the Father and Jesus) or to only one person, Jesus alone. It is my opinion, as well as that of the KJV, RV, RSV, NASV, NEB, NIV, and the NKJV, that Peter intended to refer only to Christ. I would offer the following six reasons for my conviction:" (Reymond, 2003, pp.489-490).

"First, it is the most natural way to read the Greek sentence. If Peter had intended to speak of two persons, he could have expressed himself unambiguously to that effect, as he does in the very next verse ('`knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord'), by placing `our Savior' after `Jesus Christ' or by simply inserting an article before `Savior' in the present word order. Bigg rightly observes: `... if the author intended to distinguish two persons, he has expressed himself with singular inaccuracy.' [Bigg, C., "A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude," T. & T. Clark: Edinburgh, 1902, p.251]:" (Reymond, 2003, p.490).

"Second, both `God' and `Savior' stand under the regimen of the single article before `God,' linking the two nouns together as referents to a single person. [Metzger, B.M., "Jehovah's Witnesses and Jesus Christ" in Theology Today, April 1953, p.789] Bigg again rightly states: `It is hardly open for anyone to translate in 1 Pet. 1.3 ο Θεοσ και πατηρ [ho theos kai pater] by `the God and Father,' and yet here decline to translate ο Θεοσ και πατηρ [ho theos kai soter] by `the God and Saviour.' [Bigg, Ibid., p.251]" (Reymond, 2003, p.490).

"Third, five times in 2 Peter, including this one [2Pet 1:1], Peter uses the word `Savior.' It is always coupled with a preceding noun (the other four times always with κυριοσ, kurios) in precisely the same word order as in 1:1. Here are the last four uses in their precise word order: 1:11: `... kingdom of the Lord of us and Savior Jesus Christ'; 2:20: `... knowledge of the Lord of us and Savior Jesus Christ' 3:2: `... commandment of the Lord and Savior'; 3:18: `... knowledge of the Lord of us and Savior Jesus Christ'. In each of these four cases, `Lord' and `Savior,' standing under the regimen of the single article before `Lord,' refer to the same person, a fact recognized by all grammarians, commentaries, and Bible versions. If we simply substitute the word Θεοσ, theos, for κυριοσ, kurios, we have precisely the word order in 1:1: `...righteousness of the God of us and Savior Jesus Christ.' In other words, the phrases in these verses are perfectly similar and must stand or fall together. The parallelism of word order between the phrase in 1:l and the other four phrases, where only one person is intended, puts it beyond all reasonable doubt that Peter intend one person in 1:1 as well." (Reymond, 2003, pp.490-491. Typo corrected).

"Fourth, the doxology to `our Lord Jesus Christ' in 3:18 ascribes `glory both now and forever' to him, an ascription suggesting a Christology in which Christ may be glorified in the same way that God is glorified. There would be, then, nothing incongruous in describing Christ as God in 1:1." (Reymond, 2003, p.491).

"Fifth, Peter was surely present on the occasion of Thomas' confession of Jesus as both Lord and God (John 20:28), which confession had received Christ's approval. The memory of that confession, not to mention his own confession in Matthew 16:16, would have dissolved any reticence on Peter's part to refer to Jesus as Θεοσ, theos. Such a description of Jesus here as God is simply in line with those earlier confessions and does not go one centimeter beyond them." (Reymond, 2003, pp.491-492).

"Sixth, since Peter was almost certainly aware of the content of' Paul's letter to the Roman church (he seems to allude to it in 2 Peter 2:19 and 3:15 (compare 2:19 with Rom 6:16, and 3:15 with Rom 2:4; 9:22-23, 11:22-23), he would have been aware that Paul in Romans 9:5 had referred to Christ as `over all, the ever-blessed God.' According `scriptural status' to Paul's letters as he does (3:16), he would have seen nothing inappropriate or `unscriptural' about his own description of Christ as God just as his `dear brother Paul' had done some years earlier. " (Reymond, 2003, p.492).

"We conclude then that 2 Peter 1:1 takes its place alongside John 20:28, Romans 9:5, and Titus 2:13 as a fourth verse in which Jesus is described as being God by the Christological title of Θεοσ, theos. [God]" (Reymond, 2003, p.492).

"ii. An appeal to the grace of God ([Titus] 2:11-15) Having described 'the things which befit the sound doctrine' (RV), Paul now turns to the doctrine which makes the demand. There can be no divorce between the two, and this second of the three great doctrinal passages of the letter is given as the impulse and reason for all practical godliness. The writer first refers to that most impelling of all motives-the grace of God. This spontaneous loving intervention of God in history has procured salvation for all men. Grace seen as a tutor teaching us, demands, negatively, that we renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, that we have done with all `godless ways' (NEB) and those desires which are dominant in the world that knows not God. Positively, it requires that the Christian's conduct in this present age should be marked by personal self-control (cf. v. 2 note), uprightness relative to others, and godliness. The grace which has appeared will find its consummation in the glorious appearing. Both alike are powerful incentives to true Christian living, for the first promotes a response of gratitude while the second stimulates the sense of expectancy, denoted by the participle `awaiting' (RSV). The text declaring the true hope of the believer to be the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ bears attractive testimony to the deity of Christ. The presence of only one definite article has the effect of binding together the two titles. In addition, nowhere in the NT is there any hint of separate appearances of the Father and the Son. Nor is the adjective great used of the Father. As Christ was the grace of God revealed (11), so will He be the manifestation of the glory of God." (Nute, A.G., 1986, "Titus," in Bruce, F.F., ed., "The International Bible Commentary," [1979], Marshall Pickering/Zondervan: Grand Rapids MI, Second edition, Reprinted, 1994, p.1495. Emphasis original).

"Jesus as God: Not Just a Title Besides the passages discussed so far in this chapter, there are four other texts in the Bible not discussed in the JW booklet ["Should You Believe in the Trinity?," Watchtower Bible and Tract Society: Brooklyn NY, 1989] that clearly testify to the truth that Jesus Christ is Jehovah God. These texts also show why it is so important to acknowledge Jesus as God. These four texts are Titus 2:13 [NASB], `of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus'; 2 Peter 1:1[NASB], `our God and Savior, Jesus Christ'; 1 John 5:20 [NASB], which calls Jesus Christ `the true God and eternal life'; and Hebrews 1:8-12 [NASB], which calls Christ both God and Lord. The translation of the first two of these texts is often disputed. Thus, the NWT translates them as `of the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus' (Titus 2:13 [NWT]) and `our God and [the] Savior Jesus Christ' (2 Peter 1:1 [NWT]). But the addition of the word the in brackets (indicating it is not found in the original Greek), attempting to make `God' a different person than the `Savior,' is incorrect (despite the fact that some translators have done so). These passages follow exactly the same construction as is found in the expressions `our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,' `the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,' and `the Lord and Savior' (2 Peter 1:11; 2:20; 3:2, 18 [NASB]). This construction in Greek connects two nouns with the Greek word for and (kai) and places a definite article `the' in front of the first noun but not in front of the second (e.g., `the Lord and Savior'). In fact, every occurrence of this construction, when the nouns are singular and are common nouns describing persons (Father, Son, Lord, Savior, brother, etc.), uses the two nouns to refer to the same person . Thus, the construction used, and especially the way Peter uses it elsewhere, strongly supports the conclusion that in 2 Peter 1:1 Jesus is called `God.'" (Bowman, R.M., 1989, "Why You Should Believe in the Trinity: An Answer to Jehovah's Witnesses," Baker: Grand Rapids MI, Third printing, 1990, pp.104-105).

"In Titus 2:13 [NASB] the context supports this interpretation also. First, the Greek word for manifestation (or appearing in some translations) is always used by Paul with reference to Christ alone (2 Thess. 2:8; 1 Tim. 6:14; 2 Tim. 1:10; 4:1, 8; Titus 2:13 [NASB]). This makes sense, since Jesus Christ is the visible representation or manifestation of God (John 1:18; Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:2 [NASB]; etc. ). Second, three times in Titus the expression `our Savior' is used with reference to God (1:3; 2:10; 3:4 [NASB]) and then immediately after with reference to Christ (1:4; 2:13; 3:6 [NASB]). In all six of these texts, the words `our Savior' have the Greek definite article the in front of them, except for Titus 2:13 (a point missed in English since the expression `our Savior' in English cannot have the word the in front of it). The simplest explanation, if not the only one, for this omission is that the definite article in front of `God' ('the great God and Savior of us') serves as the article for both nouns." (Bowman, 1989, p.105).

"1 John 5:20 ends, `...his Son, Jesus Christ. This is the true God and life everlasting' (NWT). Biblical scholars disagree as to whether `the true God' here applies to Jesus Christ, or to the Father whose `Son' Jesus Christ is. The JWs, naturally, insist that the Father is being called the true God. Grammatically this is just possible (though not the most obvious or simplest reading), but the context indicates otherwise. The statement `this is the true God and life everlasting' clearly is referring to one person as both `true God' and `life everlasting.' But in 1 John 1:2 Jesus Christ, who `was with the Father and was manifested to us,' is identified as `the everlasting life' (NWT). Thus, in this letter John begins and ends with a reference to someone called the `everlasting life'-and at the beginning of the letter it must be Jesus, while at the end the grammar most naturally suggests that it is also Jesus. Both grammar and context, therefore, point most strongly to the conclusion that it is Jesus Christ who is being called `the true God and life everlasting.' These three texts show that one cannot know Jesus as `Savior,' as the source of `everlasting life,' without also knowing him as `our great God,' `the true God.' It is only because Jesus Christ is God that he can save us. " (Bowman, 1989, pp.105-106).

"Finally, Hebrews 1:8-12 [NASB] is one of the most powerful passages in the Bible on the subject of Jesus as God. The opening verses of Hebrews have already declared that the Son was the `heir of all things' (v. 2a; cf. Col. 1:15-17 [NASB]), the one through whom everything was made (v. 2b), the `exact representation' of God's very being (v. 3a), the one who `sustains all things by the word of his power' (v. 3b) and who accomplished our salvation (v. 3c), who is better than all the angels (v. 4), and is worshiped by the angels (v. 6). Thus, the Son has already been described as in essence God, identified as the Creator, Sustainer, Owner, and Savior, and ascribed worship by the inhabitants of heaven. It should come as no surprise, then, that in verse 8 God the Father says `of the Son, `Your throne, O God, is forever and ever...' (translating literally). To circumvent this plain statement, the NWT renders verse 8 as `God is your throne forever and ever....' On merely grammatical considerations, this translation is possible, and some biblical scholars have favored this rendering. According to such a reading, the point of the statement is then that God is the source of Jesus' authority. However, this seems to be an unusual, if not completely odd, way of making that point. In Scripture a `throne' is not the source of one's authority, but the position or place from which one rules. Thus, heaven is called `the throne of God' (Matt. 5:34). Surely God does not derive his authority from heaven, or from anyone or anything! But, even assuming that `God is your throne' would be understood as having that meaning, in context this makes no sense: The writer of Hebrews is quoting Psalm 45:6 [NASB] and applying it to the Son to show that the Son is far greater than any of the angels. However, if all this verse means is that the Son's authority derives from God, this in no way makes him unique or greater than the angels, since this could be said of any of God's obedient angels." (Bowman, 1989, pp.106-107).

"In any case, the next quotation from the Psalms leaves no room for doubt. Continuing to speak about the Son, the writer of Hebrews quotes these words (Heb. 1:10-12 NWT): `You [at] the beginning, O Lord, laid the foundations of the earth itself, and the heavens are [the] works of your hands. They themselves will perish, but you yourself are to remain continually; and just like an outer garment they will all grow old, and you will wrap them up just as a cloak, as an outer garment; and they will be changed, but you are the same, and your years will never run out.' In the context of Psalm 102:25-27 [NASB] from which this is quoted, these words are spoken of Jehovah. If the Son was not Jehovah, then it was illegitimate for the writer of Hebrews to quote these words about Jehovah and apply them to Jesus to try to prove that he was greater than the angels. Moreover, what these verses say about Jesus can only be true of Jehovah-namely, that he created the heavens and the earth (cf. Isa. 44:24) and is unchanging and eternal by nature. Thus, the entire first chapter of Hebrews testifies that the Son, Jesus Christ, is himself God. This is not merely a matter of possessing the title God, though he does have that title. It is a matter of his being the One who creates, sustains, and saves us; the One to whom worship is due; the One who deserves to rule on the throne forever and ever. These things are all true only of Jehovah God, and it is zeal for the greatness and uniqueness of Jehovah God that demands that these things can be admitted to be true of Jesus only if he is in fact Jehovah." (Bowman, 1989, pp.107-108).

"How is a modern translator to know or determine when to render the Greek words κυριοσ and θεοσ into the divine name in his version? By determining where the inspired Christian writers have quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures. Then he must refer back to the original to locate whether the divine name appears there. This way he can determine the identity to give to Ky'ri-os and the-os' and he can then clothe them with personality. Realizing that this is the time and place for it, we have followed this course in rendering our version of the Christian Greek Scriptures. To avoid overstepping the bounds of a translator into the field of exegesis, we have tried to be most cautious about rendering the divine name, always carefully considering the Hebrew Scriptures. We have looked for some agreement with us by the Hebrew versions we consulted to confirm our own rendering. Thus, out of the 237 times that we have rendered the divine name in the body of our version, there are only two instances where we have no support or agreement from any of the Hebrew versions. But in these two instances, namely, Ephesians 6:8 and Colossians 3:13, we feel strongly supported by the context and by related texts in rendering the divine name. The notes in our lower margin show the support we have for our renderings from the Hebrew versions and other authorities. Not in all cases where the divine name is shown in the lower margin have we rendered it in the main body of our version. Thus there are 72 instances where the divine name is shown in the margin alone, but not incorporated into the text, the warrant not being strong enough." ("The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures," Watchtower Bible & Tract Society: Brooklyn NY, Second printing, 1969, pp.18-19).