Conversation - Jehovah's Witness: Did Rome invent the Trinity?

JW: There is no Scriptural trinity. The Catholic Church invented the trinity.

Me: That's a myth. There is zero evidence that Rome invented the Trinity. On the contrary, all of the evidence that we do have proves the earliest Christians believed in the Trinity. In the first few centuries after the resurrection, Christianity was illegal and it was heavily persecuted. There was no such thing as Roman Catholicism yet. That didn't develop until many centuries after the apostles. But early in the 2nd century a Christian named Ignatius wrote about his Trinitarian beliefs. So we can know for 100% certain that it has nothing whatsoever to do with Roman Catholicism since there were people believing in the Trinity many centuries before there was anything called Roman Catholicism.

The doctrine of the Trinity is biblically inescapable. That's why Christians are Trinitarians. It's in the Bible and we have to deal with it as we deal with everything else in the Bible. Jesus talks about Himself and His Father as one person talks about another person, and likewise the Father speaks to Jesus as one person speaking to another person. Jesus talks about the Holy Spirit as a 3rd person, differentiated from Jesus and the Father. All 3 of the Persons are explicitly called "God". The Bible is crystal clear that there is only one God. So the only conclusion is that there is 1 Being called "God" and the Being of God is shared by 3 Persons. There is zero proof that it was invented by Rome. There is 100% proof that it is and always has been a central doctrine for all Christians because it's biblically inescapable.

JW: Incredible. I provided all the evidence that the trinity is a lie, and you still can't see it. That is so sad.

Me: You provided no evidence at all. You merely made a claim. All you said is "There is no Scriptural trinity. The Catholic Church invented the trinity." Which part of that do you think is evidence? You also didn't deal with anything I said to show you that you're wrong. Show me how you know the Roman Catholics invented the Trinity. If it's an invention of Rome how do we have early Christians writing about it before Roman Catholicism existed? How do you explain the fact that the Bible says there is only one God yet it calls Jesus God, the Father God, and the Holy Spirit God, all while making a clear distinction between the Father, Son, and Spirit as distinct Persons.

JW: "How do you explain the fact that the Bible says there is only one God yet it calls Jesus God, the Father God, and the Holy Spirit God, all while making a clear distinction between the Father, Son, and Spirit as distinct Persons."

You're confusing the Catholic-invented Athanasian Creed with the Bible. As The Catholic Encyclopedia says: "In the words of the Athanasian Creed: ‘the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God." On the other hand, the Bible says...

1. "yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom all things are and for whom we exist." (1 Cor. 8:6a)

2. "[There is] one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.." (Eph. 4:6)

3. the Father is "the ONLY true God." (John 17:3)

4. Jesus' Father is also Jesus' God." (John 20:17)

5. Jesus' God and Father is also the God and Father of true Christians. (Col. 1:3, 2)

BTW, the following Catholic sources say the holy spirit of the Bible is not a person...

a. “Although this spirit is often described in personal terms, it seems quite clear that the sacred writers [of the Hebrew Scriptures] never conceived or presented this spirit as a distinct person” (Edmund Fortman, The Triune God, p. 9).

b. “Nowhere in the Old Testament do we find any clear indication of a Third Person” (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p. 49).

c. “The Jews never regarded the spirit as a person; nor is there any solid evidence that any Old Testament writer held this view…The Holy Spirit is usually presented in the Synoptic gospels (Matt., Mark, Luke) and in Acts as a divine force or power” (Edmund Fortman, The Triune God, pp. 6, 15).

d. “The Old Testament clearly does not envisage God’s spirit as a person…God’s spirit is simply God’s power. If it is sometimes represented as being distinct from God, it is because the breath of Yahweh acts exteriorly…The majority of New Testament texts reveal God’s spirit as something, not someone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 13, pp. 574, 575).

e. “On the whole the New Testament, like the Old, speaks of the spirit as a divine energy or power” (W.E. Addis and Thomas Arnold, A Catholic Dictionary, 1960, p. 810).

Since the holy spirit of the Bible is not a person, it can't be the third person of a three-person deity. In other words, there is no Scriptural trinity.

Oh, and there was no trinity until the Catholic Church invented it. As A Catholic Dictionary says: "The third Person was asserted at a Council of Alexandria in 362…and finally by the Council of Constantinople of 381."

Me: You said "You're confusing the Catholic-invented Athanasian Creed with the Bible". No, I'm just reading the Bible and believing what it plainly says about God. Titus 2:13, 2 Peter 1:1, and John 20:28 specifically call Jesus "God". Jesus specifically calls the Father "God" in John 17:3. And the Father clearly calls Jesus "God" in Psalm 110 and Hebrews 1:8. The Holy Spirit is also called "God" in Acts 5:3-4. The Holy Spirit is called the Spirit of the Son in Galatians 4:6, and the Holy Spirit is called the Spirit of the Father in Matthew 10:20. Jesus talked about the Father and the Spirit as one person would talk about 2 other persons in John 16:12-15. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all called God in the Bible and the Bible says clearly that there is only one God while Jesus blatantly made a distinction between Himself, His Father, and the Holy Spirit. That's called Trinitarianism. You did not address the fact that we have Christian authors who wrote about their belief in the Trinity before Roman Catholicism even existed. So far you've only made claims but you have shown no evidence.

JW: "Jesus specifically calls the Father "God" in John 17:3."

Let me stop you right there. At John 17:3, Jesus not only called his Father God, but he called him "the only true God." The word "only" means, "to the exclusion of others." Since the Father is the true God to the exclusion of others, how many other true Gods can there be? Answer: NONE!!

"Titus 2:13, 2 Peter 1:1, and John 20:28 specifically call Jesus "God."

Titus 2:13 says: "as we await the blessed hope, the appearance of the glory of the great God and of our savior Jesus Christ." In harmony with other Bible verses, does Titus 2:13 say Jesus is both "the Great God" and "our savior"? NO, since it was God who made Jesus savior in the first place! As Acts 5:31 says: "God exalted [Jesus] at his right hand as leader and savior to grant Israel repentance and forgiveness of sins."

Clearly, then, you're twisting Titus 2:13 and then taking it out of context to mean that Jesus himself is both God and Savior. Paul knew that Jesus' Father was also Jesus' God. (Col. 1:3)

2 Pet. 1:1 says: "Symeon Peter, a slave and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have received a faith of equal value to ours through the righteousness of our God and savior Jesus Christ." In harmony with other things Peter said, did Peter mean at 2 Pet. 1:1 that Jesus was God? NO! If you recall, at Matt. 16:15, Jesus asked his apostles: "But who do you say that I am?" How did Peter answer? Did he say Jesus was God? NO! Instead, he said: "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God." (Matt. 16:16) Clearly, Peter believed Jesus was the Son of God, not God himself. Also, at 1 Pet. 1:3, Peter said: "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." In this verse, did Peter say Jesus was God? NO!! Instead, he said Jesus' Father was also Jesus' God, clearly meaning that God and Jesus are two different persons. Also, at Acts 2:32, 33, Peter said: "God has raised this very Jesus from death...and has been raised to the right-hand side of God." Did Peter mean here that Jesus raised himself from death and then raised himself to his own right hand? NO!! Clearly, Peter knew that God and Jesus are two different persons.

So, you twisted 2 Pet. 1:1 and took it way out of context to mean that God and Jesus are one in the same person. To Peter, Jesus was the Son of God, not God himself.

At John 20:28, Thomas said to Jesus: "My Lord and my God." Did Thomas mean Jesus was his God? NO! You seem to forget that Thomas and the rest of his fellow apostles had received a message from Jesus shortly after his resurrection. I that message, Jesus told Thomas (and the others): "'I am going to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'" (John 20:17)Did you get that? Jesus told Thomas that he was going to Thomas' Father who was also Thomas' God. So, Thomas' God wasn't even there in that room when Jesus spoke to Thomas.

So, you twisted John 20:28 and then took it way out of context to mean that Jesus was Thomas' God Thomas and the other apostles knew Jesus was the Son of God, not God himself. (Matt. 14:33)

At Acts 5:3, 4, Peter said to Ananias: "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart so that you lied to the holy Spirit and retained part of the price of the land? You have lied not to human beings, but to God." In harmony with other things Peter said, was he calling the holy spirit God? NO! If only you had kept reading IN THE SAME CHAPTER, you would have come to verse 32, where Peter said: "We are witnesses of these things, as is the holy Spirit that God has given to those who obey him." Clearly, God and the holy spirit are not the same person.

So, you twisted Acts 5:3, 4 and then took it way out of context to mean that God and the holy spirit are one in the same person. Since it was God who revealed to Peter through his holy spirit that Ananias was lying about a certain matter, then, Ananias' lying to the holy spirit was the same as lying to God.

"And the Father clearly calls Jesus "God" in Psalm 110 and Hebrews 1:8."

Not so. But, at Luke 3:22, Jesus' God and Father called Jesus his "beloved Son."

"The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all called God in the Bible and the Bible. That's called Trinitarianism."

No. That's called tritheism. Not a single Bible verse that you mentioned even remotely says three persons make up the same "one God."Instead, you're trying to say that the Father, Son, and holy spirit are each God. You are confused.

One last thing. You continue to ignore that the Catholic Church acknowledges that the holy spirit of the Bible is NOT a person. As the New Catholic Encyclopedia says: "The Old Testament clearly does not envisage God’s spirit as a person…God’s spirit is simply God’s power...The majority of New Testament texts reveal God’s spirit as something, not someone. With no third person, there can be no three-person deity. In other words, there is no trinity.

Me: What translation are you using? What kind of church are you part of? I'm a Reformed Baptist. What are you?

JW: Since the trinity is a Catholic invention, I assumed you were Catholic, so I used the New American Bible and the Good News Bible, which are Catholic translations. But, the thing is that no Bible says that God is "a unity of three [persons]," which is what the word "trinity" means. If you wish to look up my beliefs, go to www.jw.org.

Me: You're a Jehovah's Witness. Thank you. I understand where you're coming from now. So first let's focus on the main point here and then we can discuss the rest. Rome did not invent the Trinity. All of history is against your position. You keep saying the Catholics invented the Trinity and I keep saying we have the writings of Christian authors who believed in the Trinity before there was anything called Roman Catholicism. How do you explain this?

JW: The Catholic Church did invent the 'Christian' trinity. As A Catholic Dictionary says: "The third Person was asserted at a Council of Alexandria in 362…and finally by the Council of Constantinople of 381.” Before then, not even the Catholic Church believed in a three-headed deity. This is brought out in the opening lines of the Nicene Creed of 325, which says: "We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all that is, seen and unseen."

"We have the writings of Christian authors who believed in the Trinity before there was anything called Roman Catholicism. How do you explain this?"

The writers of the NT did not believe in the trinity. They took Jesus at his word that only his Father was God. For instance...

1a. The apostle John recorded a prayer where Jesus called his Father "the only true God." (John 17:3) The word 'only' means, 'to the exclusion of others. Since Jesus' Father is the true God to the exclusion of others, how many other true Gods can there be? NONE!!

1b. the apostle John recorded Jesus' message to Mary, where he said: "Go to my brothers [the apostles] and tell them, 'I am going to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'" (John 20:17) Clearly, Jesus' God and Father was also the God and Father of his apostles and others.

1c. at Rev. 1:1, the apostle John wrote: "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him, to show his servants what must happen soon." In this verse, John showed that God and Jesus are two separate persons. God, as one person, gave the revelation to Jesus, another person.

1d. at Rev. 1:6, the apostle John wrote that Jesus "made us into a kingdom, priests for his God and Father." So, who is Jesus' Father. It's Jesus' God. This verse should remind you of John 20:17, where Jesus said to his apostles: "I am ascending to his apostles: "I am ascending to my Father and my God." (John 20:17)

So, did John believe God is a trinity? NO! To John, the Father is God.

2a. the apostle Paul wrote: "yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom all things are and for whom we exist." (1 Cor. 8:6a) Who did Paul say the "one God" is? A trinity? No, but the Father.

2b. the apostle Paul wrote: "[There is] one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all." (Eph. 4:6) Who did Paul say the "one God" is? A trinity? No, but the Father.

2c. the apostle Paul wrote: "We always give thanks to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you." (Col. 1:3) Who did Paul say God is? A trinity? No, but Jesus' Father.

How many NT writers believed God is a trinity? NONE OF THEM!! Catholic theologian, Edmund Fortman, a trinitarian, acknowledged this when he said: "If we take the New Testament writers together they tell us there is only one God, the creator and lord of the universe, who is the Father of Jesus."

So, no true Christian writer believed that God is "a unity of three [persons]," which is what the word "trinity" means.

Me: First of all with respect to the councils you listed, the Christians who met at those councils were not Roman Catholics in any meaningful sense. Catholic apologists do pretend that their religion can be traced all the way back to the apostles in an unbroken line of succession but that's a myth. There's actually nothing in Church history that can be identified uniquely as Roman Catholicism during the first few centuries AD. Most of Rome's unique theological beliefs developed many centuries after this period. So referring to these councils as being "Roman Catholic", or "Catholic", is anachronistic at best or deceitful at worst. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not trying to intentionally deceive people but rather you've been misinformed and don't realize the errors you're perpetuating.

Second, just because a council affirmed a doctrine doesn't mean the doctrine was invented at that council. Please think about that. Your version of history would have Christians not believing in a Trinity until this council invented it, and then what? They all said okay we'll change our sacred beliefs because you say so? That's absurd. These people would lose limbs, lose family members, lose their very lives for the truth. Why would they just allow some group of men to change such an important belief and why would they all go along with it? This makes no sense at all.

You said "Before then, not even the Catholic Church believed in a three-headed deity". It's ironic that you're blaming me for believing Catholic inventions while you're the one actually spreading such ridiculous lies and intentional misrepresentations. It's debatable exactly when in history we can pinpoint the emergence of Roman Catholicism as we know it, but it's an interesting thing to look into. I would say by the time of the Fourth Lateran Council you could call it Roman Catholicism but that was the 12th century. Your insistence that there were Roman Catholics as far back as the 2nd century, and to the degree that they had these grand councils and had the ability to force Christians to change their beliefs is just completely silly. I'm sorry but it's an indefensible position. I have to wonder if you've ever taken Church History as a class or if you've read any meaningful history books on this subject. I don't mean to be offensive but it really sounds like you've never actually studied this seriously.

The Nicene Creed is an affirmation of something that Christians already believed. The Council of Nicea met because the heresy of Arianism was becoming such a problem that the bishops of the churches felt it was necessary to come together and reject Arius' theology in an official statement. I would strongly recommend taking a Church History class. There are even a few available on Youtube. Check the Master's Seminary. They have free seminary classes. At the very least I would plead with you to seek some unbiased information about exactly what happened at Nicea. Be objective and don't just look at JW material, or anti-trinitarian material.

Reformed Christians are at the very front of the line when it comes to opposing Rome's additions to the faith, so I can assure if anyone would want to know if he's inadvertently believing a Catholic invention it would be me.

JW: I have already made my case from Catholic sources that the trinity is a Catholic invention, whether or not you believe it. What I'm doing now is waiting for you to prove that "we have the writings of Christian authors who believed in the Trinity before there was anything called Roman Catholicism."

Me: Ignatius died in 110 AD and he wrote these words "Study, therefore, to be established in the doctrines of the Lord and the apostles, that so all things, whatsoever ye do, may prosper both in the flesh and spirit; in faith and love; in the Son, and in the Father, and in the Spirit; in the beginning and in the end; with your most admirable bishop, and the well-compacted spiritual crown of your presbytery, and the deacons who are according to God. Be ye subject to the bishop, and to one another, as Jesus Christ to the Father, according to the flesh, and the apostles to Christ, and to the Father, and to the Spirit; that so there may be a union both fleshly and spiritual."

There are plenty of people I could cite but most important to this discussion, we have the Christians who convened the Council of Nicea. You think they were Catholics but there was no Roman Catholicism yet. Why do you think these men were Catholics? Why do you believe Rome's lie at this point? Catholics will claim anyone from history was one of them as long as it suits them but they'll reject the same author when he disagrees with them. Why do you give them so much credit and go along with their myth? Don't you see the irony that you're accusing me of believing Catholic inventions while you're the one spreading their lies? You have such a conspiracy-centered mind that you will reject any Trinitarian author as "Catholic" just so you don't have to deal with the fact that you're dreadfully and woefully wrong about this issue. If that's your mindset then there is no reasoning with you. It's like debating a flat-earther. Everything will be rejected in order to maintain the conspiracy theory.

You said "I have already made my case from Catholic sources", but I keep trying to tell you that there was no Roman Catholicism in the first few centuries. The Christians from that time cannot be called Roman Catholics unless you have no idea what a Roman Catholic is. Rome wants you to think that they can trace their beliefs all the way back to the apostles and you are believing their lie and spreading it to others. Why? This is the main point that you refuse to accept. I understand why you reject it because it completely destroys your conspiracy theory. But now you still have to explain how these men were Trinitarians before Roman Catholicism existed.

Why don't you tell me your version of church history so I can understand what you think happened. The New Testament was finished, the apostles died, there were Christians in existence, and then what? When do you think Roman Catholicism came onto the scene? How did it happen? Were there still Christians when Catholicism "took over"? What did Christianity look like in the first few centuries? Give me some example of true Christians in the first 4 centuries AD. What are the sources of your information? What books have you read on this subject? What teachers have you learned this from?

JW: So, you say that Ignatius was one of those "Christian authors who believed in the Trinity"? You do know, don't you, that a Christian is one who believes in and goes by the teachings of Jesus Christ? As Jesus said: "If you obey my teaching, you are really my disciples." (John 8:31) So, if Ignatius were a Christian who believed in a trinity, then, that would mean that Jesus taught the trinity. But, did he? There's only one way to find out.

The easiest way to defend the trinity is to compare it with what the Bible says about God. If the two agree 100%, then that should confirm that the trinity is based squarely on Scripture. But is that the case? Well, judge for yourself:

1a. THE BIBLE says the Father–a single person–is the “only true God.” (John 17:3).

1b. THE TRINITY DOCTRINE says that “every Person [of the trinity] BY HIMSELF [is] God.” That’s THREE GODS!

2a. THE BIBLE says that “for us there is one God, the Father." (1 Cor. 8:6)

2b. THE TRINITY DOCTRINE says “We worship one God IN TRINITY.”

3a. THE BIBLE says the “Father is greater…” (John 14:28)

3b. THE TRINITY DOCTRINE says: “In this trinity, NONE is greater…”

4a. THE BIBLE says Jesus is the Son of God. (John 20:31)

4b. THE TRINITY DOCTRINE says “Jesus IS God,” which makes him a different God from the “one God in trinity."

5a. THE BIBLE says the “Father is greater…” (John 14:28)

5b. THE TRINITY DOCTRINE say that “the whole three persons [of the trinity] are “co-equal.”

6a. THE BIBLE says the holy spirit is not God, but a possession of God and that he gives it to deserving ones. As 1 Thess. 4:8 says: “Therefore, whoever disregards this, disregards not a human being but God, who (also) gives HIS holy Spirit to you.”

6b. THE TRINITY DOCTRINE says that “the holy spirit IS God.” However, A Catholic Dictionary says: “On the whole, the New Testament, like the Old, speaks of the spirit as a divine energy or power.” It adds: “The majority of New Testament texts reveal God’s spirit as someTHING, not someONE.”

7a. THE BIBLE says that the Father is the ONLY person that “the true worshipers” (Christians) should worship. (John 4:23)

7b. THE TRINITY DOCTRINE says: “The trinity in unity is to be worshiped.”

So, do the Bible and the Catholic trinity doctrine agree on who God is? Absolutely not. So, if Ignatius believed in a trinity, he wasn't Christian.

Me: You're being extremely dishonest here. Your claim is that the Catholics invented the Trinity. I showed you that Ignatius believed in the Trinity in 110 AD. Your claim is now refuted. The Catholics did not invent the doctrine of the Trinity. You've chosen to completely ignore entire paragraphs from my previous comment. Go back and read my last comment and have the integrity to actually interact with what I've said. If you can't interact with what I've said, all you have to do is stop responding and the conversation will be over.

*He never responded again*

For more information about Jehovah's Witnesses visit the following resources.

C.A.R.M. Christian Apologetics Resource Ministry: A message to Jehovah's Witnesses https://carm.org/jehovahs-witnesses/if-you-are-a-jehovahs-witness-please-read-this-first-organization-the/

The Christian gospel vs. the JW gospel: https://youtu.be/VjmVRPYs5Iw

How to reach Jehovah's Witnesses: https://youtu.be/0bpu7hDoWOQ