THE WATCHTOWER DOES BELIEVE IN THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY This might be a shocker to Jehovah's Witnesses but their

own organization believes in the Trinity. Whether Jehovah's Witnesses like it or not, accept it or not, it's the darn truth. How do I know for sure the Watchtower believes in the Trinity? By logical reasoning. Lets take a look at this. 1. The Watchtower published a magazine called "Should you believe in the Trinity." The objective of this magazine is to prove the doctrine of the Trinity is false and it originated from paganism and it should be rejected by all including Jehovah's Witnesses. 2. The Watchtower never printed the bibliography from any sources they quoted in order to substantiate or back up their claims. 3. 4. 99% of the sources were deliberately misquoted, taken out of context to mislead the reader and misrepresent the source. Several individuals they quoted were liberals, agnostics and atheists whom all are Bible trashers and do not believe in the infallible word of God.

In order for the Watchtower to prove the falsehood of the Trinity, they must lie to their readers and followers by misquoting the sources and then hide behind a curtain by not printing the references hoping the reader would accept what was printed on the magazine. I have to admit, it was diligent work and clever on a part of the Watchtower to take some time and figure out how to orchestrate a deceptive plan like this. These so called anointed men took the time to read the Church Fathers, books from individuals that are outside of the organization, books from disgusting men who hate the Bible and selectively picked partial quotations from the source to prove their claim. Am I suppose to believe the Watchtower is correct about the Trinity by reading this horrible misrepresentation material Should you believe in the Trinity? Why does the Watchtower have to lie, misrepresent facts, in order to prove a doctrine is false and filled with paganism? The reason they lie is because they have no circumstantial evidence to back up their claim. They cannot find a Trinitarian or qualified individual that agrees with the Watchtowers position. If they do find a Trinitarian the Watchtower has to misquote the individual by removing a particular passage or text to misrepresent the source and the reader as well. Since the Watchtower cant come up with any good sources, they must dig deep into the bowels of the graves and what do they come up with? They resurrect decomposed dead Russians, Germans, not to mention disgusting liberal theologians like Adolf Harnack, Albert Lyman, Alvan Lamson, Andrew Norton, Edward Gibbon, Siegfried Morenz,

Washburn E. Hopkins, Will Durant and their famous Bible trasher of all Bible trashers who has been quoted 4 times in their brochure, the star of the Jehovahs organization Arthur Weigall. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, these are the people the Watchtower can come up with who have been dead for almost 100 years. I could care less if these individuals have Doctorate PHD degrees in comparative religion or sociology etc. The second these individuals admit Christianity is a pagan religion and the Bible is not the infallible word of God, you have no business quoting these individuals. You are to immediately to turn away from these Bible trashers. 2 Tim 3:5 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. KJV Yes, the Watchtower truly believes in the doctrine of the Trinity, why else would they lie? If an individual believes in a particular thing such as Trinity is false and is filled with paganism and this individual has no circumstantial evidence or viable facts to prove their point or belief, the only option the individual has, IS TO LIE. Have you ever asked yourself , why do people lie? People lie for one reason. They lie to distort the truth and that is the agenda. The Watchtower in their heart believes in the Trinity but since they have been saying for years they dont believe it, they are too prideful to admit they were wrong. To save face, they wouldnt dare come out in the open and admit they were wrong! So what do they do, THEY LIE TO DISTORT THE TRUTH! What does the Bible say about those who lie to deceit people? Ps 5:6 6 Thou dost destroy those who speak falsehood; NAS This is a very scary verse ladies and gentlemen. God destroys those who speak falsehood. Prov 14:25 25 A true witness delivereth souls: but a deceitful witness speaketh lies. KJV Rev 21:8 8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. KJV Quoting Authorities If you ever noticed, the Watchtower loves to quote scholars outside the organization but they never quote their own people regarding important subjects. Subjects like The Trinity, John 1:1 etc.

And if the Watchtower quotes any individuals that are outside the organization these individuals are mainly liberals who trash the bible and trash Christianity. There is no need to misquote these individuals. Obviously if a liberal is a scholar and states Jesus is not God and the Trinity is a pagan doctrine, Jehovahs Witnesses will accept this without a doubt and without question even without checking if these people are really scholars. Jehovahs Witnesses wouldnt care less if these liberals are satan worshippers, bible trashers and haters of Christianity. This is not important to Jehovahs Witnesses but only what they say. Statements like Jesus is not God. Let me put it this way. Those who trash God's word, doesn't believe the Bible is God's word is already doing the work of the devil. So in reality, the Watchtower is quoting the devil himself. I ask this question to all Jehovahs Witness, Would you believe any scholar regardless of their background and kind of scholarship on anything they say because they have a degree? I guess for some Jehovahs Witnesses it doesnt matter just as long you have a degree in theology, comparative religion etc, you are good enough for them. What about scholars that believe Jesus is God in other words that are Trinitarians? Arent they as reliable as well and if not...why not? At least Trinitarian scholars dont trash the bible and also do not claim Christianity is pagan religion. Whats the difference between a liberal scholar and a Trinitarian scholar? It is interesting to note, whenever the Watchtower quotes a Trinitarian they misquote the individual by taking partial quotations, removing words and adding words to give a different context or meaning of what individual originally intended to say. Indeed the Watchtower writes in their publication Qualified to be Ministers; 1967; page 199; 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. When you make references to the Scripture 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 publication of an organization to show what they believe is good. Also one wants to use evidence from an authority that the hearers will accept. There are a few important key points here. Lets bullet point them:

Make accurate statements Use evidence

Dont twist the meaning of the writer or speaker Dont use partial quotations to give a different thought of what the person intended. Use reliable and capable authority. Use an authority that the hearers will accept.

It would be so beautiful that everyone would follow these rules including the Watchtower, however the Watchtower hypocritically breaks each and everyone of them. Lets begin with a few quotations and check to see if these rules have been broken. The Watchtower quotes a man by the name of Arthur Weigal from his book The paganism in Our Christianity stating The origin of the [Trinity] is entirely pagan. Should you Believe in the Trinity; page 11; 1989 This is the language Jehovahs Witnesses love to hear. Again, for Jehovahs Witnesses it doesnt matter who Arthur Weigal is and what he believes. The point is, he is a scholar and he said The origin of the Trinity is pagan. There are a few things Arthur Weigal said which is interesting to note. Take a look at what he said in the same book The paganism in Our Christianity which the source the Watchtower used in the magazine Should You Believe in the Trinity. 1. The Twelve Disciples Derived From Zodiac: p25 2. The 27 books of the New Testament Canon is invalid: p37 3. The name Mary is of pagan origin: p41 4. The virgin birth is of pagan origin: p44,47,60 5. The early life of Jesus is totally unknown: p49 6. Jesus born in a stable and wrapped in swaddling clothing is of pagan origin: p52 7. Miracles of Jesus are of pagan origin: p58 8. Jesus' 40 day temptation in wilderness is of pagan origin: p61 9. Earthquake at cross is false: p62 10. Jesus Crucifixion was a Jewish human sacrifice of pagan origin: p69,76 11. Jesus Side Pierced is of pagan origin: p83,84 12. Jesus never actually died, two angels were only men: p93,94 13. Ascension is of pagan origin: p100 14. Jesus suffering to save us is of pagan origin: p106 15. Jesus decent into Hades is of pagan origin: p113 16. Jesus "hung on a tree" is of pagan origin: p118 17. Jesus the "Rock of salvation" is of pagan origin: p129 18. Jesus the "slain Lamb of God" is of pagan origin: p131,132 19. "Washed in the Blood of the lamb" is of pagan origin: p132 20. Baptism and the Lord's Supper are both of pagan origin: p134, p146,147 21. Phrase "Soldiers of Christ" is of pagan origin: p135 22. Jesus as "the Shepherd" is of pagan origin: p136 23. Lords Supper is of pagan origin" p146,147 24. The idea of "blood atonement for sins" is of pagan origin: p152,158

25. Jesus "Begotten of God" is of pagan origin: p169 26. Incarnate Logos of Jn 1:1 is of pagan origin, The "pre-existent angel" is a 4th century concept: p172,173-175 27. The Trinity is of pagan origin: p182 28. The "Lord's Day" (Sunday) is of Pagan Origin: p209,210-211 29. Jewish Sabbath and the Sunday Lord's Day both of pagan origin: p136, p209,210211 By reading his entire book which one will conclude the entire book bashes almost the entire Christian Doctrines by labeling them as pagan origin not to mention Watchtower doctrines as well! Isnt Arthur Weigal a wonderful scholar and a great authority huh? You gotta love the guy. He trashes practically all of Christianity even some of the beliefs of Jehovahs Witnesses. Yes ladies and gentlemen, this man was quoted by the Watchtower. Lets now go back to the key points from the Watchtowers rules of quoting individuals.

Make accurate statements Yes, the Watchtower did quote Arthur Weigal accurately. There is no need to misquote this individual right? I did mention the Watchtower misquotes individuals 99% of the time. The 1% of accurate quotations are the liberals like this guy Weigal. Congratulations Watchtower, you quoted the individual correctly. Use evidence Well, the Watchtower managed to provide the name of the individual and the name of his book but forgot the page number and year the book was released not to mention Weigal's background. So they really didnt follow this rule to the letter. Dont twist the meaning of the writer or speaker No need to do this for this scholar huh! Dont use partial quotations to give a different thought of what the person intended. No need to do this either for this scholar. Use reliable and capable authority. Ahh! That is the million dollar question. Do Jehovahs Witnesses claim Arthur Weigal as a reliable and capable authority? The Watchtower has to, after all they did use him as a source. Use an authority that the hearers will accept. Another one million dollar question. Do you Jehovahs Witness who are the hearers, accept Arthur Weigal as an authority?

Yes ladies and gentlemen, this is the scholar the Watchtower can come up with to back up their claims. Weigal is a modernist liberal that the watchtower failed to identify. Why? Because Jehovahs Witnesses will never accept him as an authority if he is a liberal. If this isnt enough, the Watchtower encourages the Jehovahs Witnesses to stay away from apostate literature because it is just like reading pornographic material. What do you call Arthur Weigals book? Is his book good material for Jehovahs Witnesses to read? I pose this question to the governing body, Would you recommend Arthur Weigals book The paganism in our Christianity to your innocent Jehovahs Witnesses? The Watchtower identifies and quotes Trinitarians but do they fully quote them in context? When ever the Watchtower quotes a Trinitarian they have no problem identifying the individual as a Trinitarian. In other words the Watchtower is saying something like this look, this guy is a Catholic Jesuit Priest who in fact is a Trinitarian and check out what he said... The Watchtower tries to make the Trinitarian look bad. They do this by misquoting the individual. They remove words, or take certain parts of the statement and combines them to give a different view or thought of what the individual intended to say. Hey, isnt that the number one rule of the Watchtower? Not to misquote individuals by partially quoting them? Thats a no no. The Watchtower shouldnt do this. You can rest for sure, if the individual who is being quoted by the Watchtower is identified as a Trinitarian, 100% of time they are misquoted. Guarantee. Anyway, the Watchtower misquotes Trinitarians but they accurately quote liberal bible trashers. I just dont get it. The Watchtower only applies their rule to a selected few. Shouldnt the rule apply to all? Lets take a look at a Trinitarian that was quoted by the Watchtower in their famous brochure Should you Believe in The Trinity. The Watchtower writes on page 6: Jesuit Fortman states: The New Testament writers . . . give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons. . . . Nowhere do we find any Trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead. Ahh yes, the language Jehovahs Witness love to read especially either from a liberal bible trasher or even from a Catholic Jesuit priest. It doesnt matter who said it as long as the individual is a scholar right? This is the part where a JW will tell you, Look,

Edmund Fortman was a Jesuit Catholic priest and a theologian and He rejects the Trinity. The quotation the Watchtower uses is from Fortmans book The Triune God. Obviously written by a Catholic and a Trinitarian, certainly this book is considered apostate material and it shouldnt be in the homes of any Jehovahs Witnesses. We are gonna have to help the Jehovahs Witnesses here with the full quotation of what Fortman really said. Lets see what the Watchtower failed to quote. Look Jehovahs Witnesses on what the Watchtower forgot to inform you. Please note, red is an important part of the quotation that the Watchtower failed to quote and blue is only what the Watchtower wanted to quote. "As a Catholic and a firm believer in the Triune God my belief will inevitably affect to some extent my selection, interpretation and presentation of the documents and writings that manifest the historical development of this doctrine, but hopefully it will not substantially distort these. This is not an exhaustive and definitive study but it is meant to be more than a superficial survey, and it is hoped it may stimulate other fuller studies. The doctrine of the Triune God has had an amazing history. Convinced that this doctrine is a Christian doctrine that did and could originate only from divine revelation. I start the study from the authentic record of divine revelation that is found in the sacred writings of the Old and New Testaments. What does the Old Testament tell us of God? It tells us there is one God, a wonderful God of life and love and righteousness and power and glory and mystery, who is the creator and lord of the whole universe, who is intensely concerned with the tiny people of Israel. It tells us of His Word, Wisdom. Spirit, of the Messiah He will send, of a Son of Man and a Suffering Servant to come. But it tells us nothing explicitly or by necessary implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. 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. They call Jesus the Son of God, Messiah, Lord, Savior, Word, Wisdom. They assign Him the divine functions of creation, salvation, judgment. Sometimes they call Him God explicitly. They do not speak as fully and clearly of the Holy Spirit as they do of the Son, but at times they coordinate Him with the Father and the Son and put Him on a level with them as far as divinity and personality are concerned. They give us in their writings a triadic ground plan and triadic formulas. They do not speak in abstract terms of nature, substance, person, relation, circumincession, mission, but they present in their own ways the ideas that are behind these terms. They give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons. But they do give us an elemental trinitarianism, the data from which such a formal doctrine of the Triune God may be formulated. To study the gradual transition from an unformulated Biblical witness to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit to a dogmatic formulation of a doctrine of the Triune God, we look first to the Eastern Church where most of this development took place. The Apostolic Fathers were witnesses to the Biblical data and the traditional faith rather than theologians, but they furnished useful insights into the

lines along which the Church's unconscious theology was developing. Most of them indicated quite clearly a belief in the divinity of Christ, less clearly a belief in the distinct personality and divinity of the Holy Spirit. They gave solid evidence of a belief in three pre-existent 'beings,' but they furnished no trinitarian doctrine, no awareness of a trinitarian problem. The Apologists were, in a sense, the Church's first theologians: the first to attempt a sketch of trinitarian doctrine and an intellectually satisfying explanation of Christ's relation to God the Father. To set forth the truths handed down to them from the Apostles they used the terminology and philosophy that were then current, and in the process they christianized Hellenism to some extent. They manifested a belief in the unity of God and in some sort of 'trinity of divinity.' even though they had as yet no distinct conception of 'divine person' and 'divine nature.' (The Triune God, Edmund Fortman, introduction, p.xv) Did anyone notice how the Watchtower deceptively takes partial quotations and combines two different statements giving a different thought of what the individual is actually saying? Now comes the big questions... 1. Do you Jehovahs Witness accept Edmund Fortman as an authority after reading his full statement? 2. Is he really a reliable source to use? 3. Why does the Watchtower quote liberals and bible trashers accurately and when it comes to Trinitarians the Watchtower must misquotes them? 4. Isn't Edmund Fortman considered an apostate who teaches the Trinity? 5. Which book would you highly recommend to your Jw members, "The Trinue God by the Trinitarian Edmund Fortman or "The paganism in Our Christianity" by the Bible trasher and hater of Christianity Arthur Weigall? I can go on with this and give a list of all of the misquotations of the Watchtower but it will be 10,000 pages long. The point is THE WATCHTOWER BELIEVES IN THE TRINITY. WHY ELSE WOULD THEY MISQUOTE TRINITARIANS AND QUOTE LIBERAL BIBLE TRASHERS!