The Watchtower’s view of the development of the Creeds

The Watchtower July 15, 1969 — Development of Trinity in the Creeds

What did the Ante-Nicene Fathers believe?

This page discusses if the WT misrepresented the Church Father’s views of Christ in the brochure “Should You Believe In The Trinity?” It provides extensive quotes from the Father’s own documents to let them speak for themselves. But, first, let’s see how the organization has told its followers not to misrepresent others’ viewpoints and to present evidence truthfully.

Let’s begin by considering two examples of how quoting out of context can be misleading. The Bible itself contains these literal four words in a row “…there is no God…” 14x in the NASB version! (12x in the NWT.) Notice the ellipses! Using an ellipsis hides information that could be relevant (or not!) and can potentially change the meaning of the quoted text. The use of ellipsis is never accidental but deliberate! If this results in a change in meaning of the quoted text then it is deception!
A second example of quoting out of context can be illustrated as follows: the scriptures say “Judas went and hanged himself” (Mat 27:5) and it also says: “go and do likewise” (Luke 10:37). Bringing two unrelated passages together does not establish that the original writer had this connection in mind. The connection was made by the modern interpreter or author! An application of this is just because a word can be used figuratively in one context does not justify using it figuratively in another context where we want or need it to be figurative to justify a particular interpretation.

A biblical standard of using evidence is found in 2Co 4:2 “we have renounced the things hidden because of shame, not walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God, but by the manifestation of truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.”
Eph 4:14 (NWT) “So we should no longer be children, tossed about as by waves and carried here and there by every wind of teaching by means of the trickery of men, by means of cunning in deceptive schemes.”

The WTBS tells us to use quotes accurately

The Watchtower organization agrees that it is very important to be completely honest when quoting other sources.
From Qualified to be Ministers, 1955 (WBTS) — ⁸ “Be very careful to be accurate in all statements you make. Use evidence honestly. In quotations, do not twist the meaning of a writer or speaker or use only partial quotations to give a different thought than the person intended. Also if you use statistics, use them properly. Statistics can often be used to give a distorted picture. … ¹⁰ When you make references to the Scriptures or to any other authority, be definite. And use reliable, capable authority. The Bible is the most conclusive and reliable of all. Quoting from official publications of an organization to show what they believe is good. Also one wants to use evidence from an authority that the hearers will accept.”

Watchtower September 15, 1923 — “Had the circular quoted the entire statement made by the President there would have been no occasion for the publication of this statement in The Watch Tower; but because the quotation is only partial and is calculated to mislead the friends, it is necessary to make this statement.”

Theocratic Ministry School Guidebook, 1971, p. 110 — “Accuracy of statement. Jehovah’s Witnesses are an organization of truth. We should want to speak the truth and be absolutely accurate in every detail at all times. This should be so not only as regards doctrine but also in our quotations, what we say about others or how we represent them.”

*** w62 12/15 p. 762 We Need Jehovah’s Organization ***
The WTS has assured their followers that “…the organization will never knowingly misinform them.”

Materials that check WT claims about the early Church Fathers denying the trinity.

Is the brochure Should you believe in the Trinity an honest critique of the doctrine of the Trinity? It quotes over 50 sources, even some religious “authorities,” all of whom apparently denounce the doctrine for some reason or another. Does it quote these sources accurately? Or does it misrepresent them somehow? One way to find out would be to check the quotes that use ellipsis. Another way would be to check the text before and after the quotes to see if the larger context agrees with the actual quote, even if ellipsis were not used. Another way would be to check who the person is who is being quoted. Does he have a committed religious or philosophical point of view? In other words, we shouldn’t be surprised if a Unitarian rejects the Trinity, or a pantheist rejects the deity of Christ, or an atheist rejects the existence of God. Consider the source. Do opinions resolve disagreements? If so, would pro-trinitarian opinions be convincing to JWs? Opinions without evidence is really the lowest quality of evidence there is.
Does the end justify the means? Does supporting your doctrinal position or your organization (the end) justify using misrepresentation or deception (the means) to accomplish them?

A repeated claim in this brochure is that the early church fathers didn’t use the language of the Nicene Creed when speaking of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and that this is evidence that they didn’t believe in the “Trinity.” We can readily admit that they didn’t use the exact same vocabulary as found in the Nicene Creed and that as the debates over the Deity of Christ raged on over centuries the way people expressed their beliefs changed. This is hardly surprising. This happens in every field of human knowledge, even among JWs. Charles Russell and Rutherford didn’t use the same language as a modern JW. Does that disqualify them in everything they had to say? Galileo didn’t use modern day language to describe his understanding of the Solar System. Should we count that against him?

The writings of the early Church Fathers

Some Watchtower articles on the Church Fathers WT April 15, 2001 and WT April 1, 1992.

In the brochure called “Should you believe in the Trinity?” (1989) the WTS claims that the Early Church Fathers (they mention 6 Fathers: Justin Martyr, Irenaeus of Lyons, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, and Hippolytus of Rome) did not believe that Jesus was God or they didn’t believe in an early form of the doctrine of the trinity. Below are some quotes from the very men they claim held these views. I have linked to online resources that allow you to check whether the quotes are real and so the context can be read as well if so desired. The brochure then goes on to quote a Unitarian theologian(!) named Alvan Lamson that the doctrine developed late and had no support from the Church Fathers. Check it out for yourself.

Remember, we want to determine if the WTS accurately represented what the Church Fathers said. The links below point to the actual words in the various Church Father’s loooong documents so you don’t have to search for the text 😊. (Works in most browsers 😢) Do read the context in each case to get the fuller picture of what each writer is saying. After each Church Fathers’ introduction there will be a quote [in this colour] from the brochure “Should you believe in the Trinity?” about what each Church Father supposedly said. Pay attention to how quotation marks and ellipses are used in these quotes and what are the words of the WTS versus the words of the Church Fathers. Where I have found the actual quotes in their writings I link to them in the highlighted section. However, the WTS hasn’t said which translation they used as the source for quoting the Church Fathers so while their exact words may not be found in the works I link to, the sense will be the same.

Remember that the doctrine of the Trinity is based on 3 premises.

The Bible states there is one God.
The Bible states there are 3 persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
The Bible calls each of them God.

So, the question is “did the Early Church Fathers teach and believe Christ was God or not?” An anachronistic expectation and demand would be “Did the Early Church Fathers express their belief in the Trinity using the language of the Nicene Creed, or the Apostle’s Creed, or any other creed that was formulated centuries later?” To expect that would be the equivalent of criticizing Galileo for not using modern language for astronomy. Even modern JWs use different language and concepts than Charles T. Russell and J.R. Rutherford. To expect language and expressions to remain the same over centuries is not reasonable.

For a more comprehensive collection of quotations by the early Church Father’s views of the deity of Christ see this page.

Justin Martyr (AD 100-165) was a Christian apologist of the second century.

WTS Quote: Justin Martyr, who died about 165 C.E., called the prehuman Jesus a created angel who is “ other than the God who made all things.” He said that Jesus was inferior to God and “ never did anything except what the Creator … willed him to do and say.”

Please note that the links in the quote above point to a specific translation of Justin Marytr’s work. The Watchtower organization has not provided us with information of which translation they used, so the actual quotes they use are different from the one I link to. But note the distinction between what is in quotes and what the WTS insinuates about what Justin Martyr meant. They claim Justin “called the prehuman Jesus a created angel” and “that Jesus was inferior to God.” Those statements should be in Justin’s documents, but so far I haven’t been able to find them. The following statements are what I did find instead:

Justin Martyr First Apology Chapter 63: “For they who affirm that the Son is the Father, are proved neither to have become acquainted with the Father, nor to know that the Father of the universe has a Son; who also, being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God.”

Justin Martyr Dialog with Trypho Chapter 34: “ For Christ is King, and Priest, and God, and Lord, and angel, and man, and captain, and stone, and a Son born, and first made subject to suffering, then returning to heaven, and again coming with glory, and He is preached as having the everlasting kingdom: so I prove from all the Scriptures.”

Justin Martyr Dialog with Trypho Chapter 36: “…permit me first to recount the prophecies, which I wish to do in order to prove that Christ is called both God and Lord of hosts…”

Justin Martyr Dialog with Trypho Chapter 56: “…then in regard to Him who appeared to Abraham on earth in human form … and who was God even before the creation of the world.”

Justin Martyr Dialog with Trypho Chapter 63: “Therefore these words testify explicitly that He is witnessed to by Him who established these things, as deserving to be worshipped, as God and as Christ.”

Justin Martyr Dialog with Trypho Chapter 68: “…which expressly prove that Christ was to suffer, to be worshipped, and [to be called] God, and which I have already recited to you, do refer indeed to Christ.”

Justin Martyr Dialog with Trypho Chapter 71: “…by which this very man who was crucified is proved to have been set forth expressly as God, and man.”

Justin Martyr Dialog with Trypho Chapter 87: “…this referred to Christ, and you maintain Him to be pre-existent God” - (spoken by Trypho)

Justin Martyr Dialog with Trypho Chapter 113: “For the former [Moses] gave them a temporary inheritance, seeing he was neither Christ who is God, nor the Son of God.”

Justin Martyr Dialog with Trypho Chapter 124: “Now I have proved at length that Christ is called God.”

Justin Martyr Dialog with Trypho Chapter 126: “But if you knew, Trypho,” continued I, “who He is that is called at one time the Angel of great counsel, and a Man by Ezekiel, and like the Son of man by Daniel, and a Child by Isaiah, and Christ and God to be worshipped by David, and Christ and a Stone by many, and Wisdom by Solomon, and Joseph and Judah and a Star by Moses, and the East by Zechariah, and the Suffering One and Jacob and Israel by Isaiah again, and a Rod, and Flower, and Corner-Stone, and Son of God, you would not have blasphemed Him who has now come, and been born, and suffered, and ascended to heaven; who shall also come again, and then your twelve tribes shall mourn. For if you had understood what has been written by the prophets, you would not have denied that He was God, Son of the only, unbegotten, unutterable God.”

Justin Martyr Dialog with Trypho Chapter 128: “And that Christ being Lord, and God the Son of God, and appearing formerly in power as Man, and Angel, and in the glory of fire as at the bush…”

Irenaeus of Lyons (AD 130-202) was bishop of Lugdunum in Gaul, which is now Lyons, France. Irenaeus was born in Smyrna in Asia Minor, where he studied under bishop Polycarp, who in turn had been a disciple of John the Apostle.

WTS Quote: Irenaeus, who died about 200 C.E., said that the prehuman Jesus had a separate existence from God and was inferior to him. He showed that Jesus is not equal to the “One true and only God,” who is “supreme over all, and besides whom there is no other.”

Irenaeus Book I: “…in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Saviour, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, “every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess” to Him…”

Irenaeus Book II: “But the Son, eternally co-existing with the Father…”

Irenaeus Book III: “For I have shown from the Scriptures, that no one of the sons of Adam is as to everything, and absolutely, called God, or named Lord. But that He is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, and Lord, and King Eternal, and the Incarnate Word…”

Irenaeus Book III: “ God, then, was made man, and the Lord did Himself save us.”

Irenaeus Book III: “Carefully, then, has the Holy Ghost pointed out, by what has been said, His birth from a virgin, and His essence, that He is God (for the name Emmanuel indicates this).”

Irenaeus Book III: “so that He indeed who made all things can alone, together with His Word, properly be termed God and Lord: but the things which have been made cannot have this term applied to them, neither should they justly assume that appellation which belongs to the Creator.”

Irenaeus Book III: “they showed, by these gifts which they offered, who it was that was worshipped; myrrh, because it was He who should die and be buried for the mortal human met; gold, because He was a King, “of whose kingdom is no end; “ and frankincense, because He was God”

Irenaeus Book III: “Therefore neither would the Lord, nor the Holy Spirit, nor the apostles, have ever named as God, definitely and absolutely, him who was not God, unless he were truly God; nor would they have named any one in his own person Lord, except God the Father ruling over all, and His Son who has received dominion from His Father over all creation…” (The rest of this paragraph is enlightening as well.)

Irenaeus Book IV: “He received testimony from all that He was very man, and that He was very God, from the Father, from the Spirit, from angels, from the creation itself, from men, from apostate spirits and demons, from the enemy, and last of all, from death itself.” [the phrase “very God” appears also in the Nicene Creed, but Iraneus wrote this 180 years earlier!]

Irenaeus Book IV: “ Christ Himself, therefore, together with the Father, is the God of the living, who spake to Moses, and who was also manifested to the fathers.”

Irenaeus Fragments LIII: “The law and the prophets and evangelists have declared that Christ was born of a virgin, and suffered on the cross; was raised also from the dead, and taken up to heaven; that He was glorified, and reigns for ever. He is Himself termed … [then lists several names] …” God in God; King to all eternity … [lists many other names] … God of God; Jesus Christ our Saviour.”

Irenaeus Fragments LIV: …“Christ was born of a virgin… Son in the Father; God in God; … God of God; Jesus Christ our Saviour.”

Irenaeus Against Heresies II Chap. XXV: “For thou, O man, art not an uncreated being, nor didst thou always co-exist with God, as did His own Word”

Clement of Alexandria (AD 150-215) was another early Church Father. He wrote around AD 200. The quote below (“the uncreated and imperishable and only true God” is translated as “unbegotten and indestructible” in the link) could easily and arguably apply to Jesus Christ, not the Father, when read in context. The first quote from Exhortation can be read in context either below or in the entire document by following the link.

WTS Quote: Clement of Alexandria, who died about 215 C.E., called God “the uncreated and imperishable and only true God.” He said that the Son “is next to the only omnipotent Father” but not equal to him.

Clement Exhortation: “…thou shall join the choir along with angels around the unbegotten and indestructible and the only true God, the Word of God, raising the hymn with us. This Jesus, who is eternal, the one great High Priest of the one God, and of His Father, prays for and exhorts men.”

Clement Exhortation: “This Word, then, the Christ, the cause of both our being at first (for He was in God) and of our well-being, this very Word has now appeared as man, He alone being both, both God and man”

Clement Exhortation: “the Word, who “was with God,” and by whom all things were created, has appeared as our Teacher. The Word, who in the beginning bestowed on us life as Creator when He formed us, taught us to live well when He appeared as our Teacher; that as God He might afterwards conduct us to the life which never ends.”

Clement Exhortation: “For it was not without divine care that so great a work was accomplished in so brief a space by the Lord, who, though despised as to appearance, was in reality adored, the expiator of sin, the Saviour, the clement, the Divine Word, He that is truly most manifest Deity, He that is made equal to the Lord of the universe; because He was His Son, and the Word was in God”

Clement Fragments — III Comments on the First Epistle of John: “For when he says, “That which was from the beginning,” he touches upon the generation without beginning of the Son, who is co-existent with the Father. There was, then, a Word importing [implying] an unbeginning eternity; as also the Word itself, that is, the Son of God, who being, by equality of substance, one with the Father, is eternal and uncreate.”

Tertullian (AD 150-225) was an early Christian apologist who wrote in Latin and used the term “trinity.”

WTS Quote: Tertullian, who died about 230 C.E., taught the supremacy of God. He observed: “The Father is different from the Son (another), as he is greater; as he who begets is different from him who is begotten; he who sends, different from him who is sent.” He also said: “There was a time when the Son was not. … Before all things, God was alone.”

Tertullian A treatise on the soul Chpt XLI: “For God alone is without sin; and the only man without sin is Christ, since Christ is also God.”

Tertullian Apology Chpt XXI: “Thus Christ is Spirit of Spirit, and God of God, as light of light is kindled. The material matrix remains entire and unimpaired, though you derive from it any number of shoots possessed of its qualities; so, too, that which has come forth out of God is at once God and the Son of God, and the two are one. In this way also, as He is Spirit of Spirit and God of God, He is made a second in manner of existence - in position, not in nature; and He did not withdraw from the original source, but went forth. This ray of God, then, as it was always foretold in ancient times, descending into a certain virgin, and made flesh in her womb, is in His birth God and man united.”

Tertullian Against Praxeas: — This document is Tertullian’s defense of the Trinity. He uses the word 10 times!

Tertullian Against Praxeas Chpt 15: “Now the Word of life became flesh, and was heard, and was seen, and was handled, because He was flesh who, before He came in the flesh, was the “Word in the beginning with God” the Father, and not the Father with the Word. For although the Word was God, yet was He with God, because He is God of God; and being joined to the Father, is with the Father.”

Tertullian Against Praxeas Chpt 5: — Tertullian does indeed say that “ For before all things God was alone.” Yet he goes on to say two sentences later “Yet even not then was He alone.” Then at the end of the same paragraph: “I may therefore without rashness first lay this down (as a fixed principle) that even then before the creation of the universe God was not alone, since He had within Himself both Reason, and, inherent in Reason, His Word, which He made second to Himself by agitating it within Himself.”

Origen (AD 185-254) was another early Christian theologian.

WTS Quote: Origen, who died about 250 C.E., said that “the Father and Son are two substances … two things as to their essence,” and that “compared with the Father, [the Son] is a very small light.”

Origen De Principiis Preface pt. 4: “He in the last times, divesting Himself (of His glory), became a man, and was incarnate although God, and while made a man remained the God which He was”

Origen De Principiis Book I Chpt I: “…what belongs to the nature of deity is common to the Father and the Son.”

Hippolytus of Rome (AD 170-235) was a third-century theologian. He was a disciple of Irenaeus, who was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John.

WTS Quote: Hippolytus, who died about 235 C.E., said that God is “the one God, the first and the only One, the Maker and Lord of all,” who “had nothing co-eval [of equal age] with him … But he was One, alone by himself; who, willing it, called into being what had no being before,” such as the created prehuman Jesus.

Hippolytus Book X: “The Logos alone of this God is from God himself; wherefore also the Logos is God, being the substance of God.”

Hippolytus Book X: “For Christ is the God above all.”

Hippolytus Treatise on Christ and the Anti-Christ: “6. Now, as our Lord Jesus Christ, who is also God…”

Hippolytus Fragments: “For, lo, the Only-begotten entered, a soul among souls, God the Word with a (human) soul. For His body lay in the tomb, not emptied of divinity; but as, while in Hades, He was in essential being with His Father, so was He also in the body and in Hades. For the Son is not contained in space, just as the Father; and He comprehends all things in Himself.”

Hippolytus Against the Jews: (3) “For all, the righteous and the unrighteous alike, shall be brought before God the Word.”

Hippolytus Against the Jews: (17) “Let us believe then, dear brethren, according to the tradition of the apostles, that God the Word came down from heaven, (and entered) into the holy Virgin Mary, in order that, taking the flesh from her, and assuming also a human, by which I mean a rational soul, and becoming thus all that man is with the exception of sin, He might save fallen man, and confer immortality on men who believe on His name… He now, coming forth into the world, was manifested as God in a body, coming forth too as a perfect man. For it was not in mere appearance or by conversion, but in truth, that He became man. Thus then, too, though demonstrated as God, He does not refuse the conditions proper to Him as man, since He hungers and toils and thirsts in weariness, and flees in fear, and prays in trouble. And He who as God has a sleepless nature, slumbers on a pillow.”

The article then quotes Alvan Lamson, a unitarian.

*** ti p. 7 Is It Clearly a Bible Teaching? ***
Summing up the historical evidence, Alvan Lamson says in The Church of the First Three Centuries: “The modern popular doctrine of the Trinity … derives no support from the language of Justin [Martyr]: and this observation may be extended to all the ante-Nicene Fathers; that is, to all Christian writers for three centuries after the birth of Christ. It is true, they speak of the Father, Son, and … holy Spirit, but not as co-equal, not as one numerical essence, not as Three in One, in any sense now admitted by Trinitarians. The very reverse is the fact.” [Emphasis added]

Derives no support?? Seriously? You be the judge now that you’ve read some of their statements yourself. Then, what’s the “very reverse” of the trinitarian position? Polytheism? Modalism? Monarchianism? Arianism? Adoptionism? Docetism? Sabellianism? Monophysitism? All these, and more, were different views on how to understand the nature of God and Jesus Christ that the early church fathers battled against in the first 4 centuries. What is beyond question is that the WTBTS went to great lengths to misrepresent and twist the ideas, words and convictions of the early church fathers.

Any organization that claims to follow the One who said “I am the way, the truth, and the life…” needs to be transparently honest to its own followers and to people they wish to convince. Falsified evidence does not lead to an accurate knowledge of the truth. The Apostle Paul could state in 2Co 4:2 that he “manifests the truth so that he could commend himself to every man’s conscience.” A deliberate misrepresentation of facts violates every person’s conscience, even Jehovah’s Witnesses. Unfortunately, most JW’s are probably not aware of the facts presented above, because they trust the organization to do truthful research for them. The Faithful and Discreet Slave is not being faithful to the moral and ethical standards of the One they claim to follow.

More Early Church Fathers quotes on the deity of Christ

For an even more comprehensive compilation of more than 200 quotes from the Church Fathers quoted above, read this page.

Major Digital Libraries & Collections

Here are resources that you can use to check the original texts and translations of the Early Church Fathers.

Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) — Early Church Fathers Houses the Ante-Nicene, Nicene & Post-Nicene, and related collections (in English). (Christian Classics Ethereal Library)
New Advent — Fathers of the Church A large collection of Church Fathers’ works (in English) with navigation by author and book. (New Advent)
Wikisource — Early Church Fathers series Includes transcriptions of the volumes (English) of Ante-Nicene Fathers, Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers, etc. (Wikisource)
Early Christian Writings A site that collects works of early Christian authors, especially those from the 1st–3rd centuries. (Early Christian Writings)
Tertullian.org — Early Church Fathers (Additional Works) English translations (public domain) not included in the standard 38-volume collections. (tertullian.org)
Primary Texts Online – Early Christian Studies (Wheaton College guide) A curated guide with links to many online primary texts, both in translation and original languages. (guides.library.wheaton.edu)
Catholic Culture — Fathers of the Church A selection of patristic texts (mainly in English) with links for reading. (Catholic Culture)
Early Church Texts Offers original language (Greek/Latin) and English translations side by side for many early Christian works. $ (Early Church Texts)
Archive.org — Patrologia Latina (vols. 1-221) Scans / downloads of many volumes of Patrologia Latina are freely available. (Internet Archive)
Patristica.net — Patrologia Latina Offers Latin texts from Migne’s Patrologia Latina, organized by volume and author. (patristica.net)
Patrologia Latina Database / ProQuest A searchable, full-text (Latin) database of the Patrologia Latina (requires subscription or institutional access) (ProQuest)
Corpus Corporum (University of Zurich / Corpus Córporum) A digital Latin/Greek repository that includes Patrologia Latina among many medieval / classical corpora. (Wikipedia)