The Holy Spirit is another topic that can be fruitfully discussed because the Bible is rich with verses on this subject. I’m wondering what you think of the following statement; do you agree with the logic or not?

Is the Holy Spirit a personification [a figure of speech that gives an inanimate object or abstract idea human traits and qualities] or a person? Can an unintelligent force carry on a conversation with a person? Only an intelligent person could. Every quality, every action, which can indicate personality, is attributed to him in language which cannot be explained away.

Please set aside your assumptions about the Holy Spirit and just think about the pure logic above. The Scriptures over and over speak of the Holy Spirit in overwhelming indication that he is a true person and not just a personification. Every quality, every action, surely indicates true personality in language which cannot be explained away.

Where is the problem with the above logic? Or do you agree with it in principle?

OK, let me now reveal to you that the above logic was asserted by the Watchtower concerning another person. Here is the actual statement (and you will see that I quoted from it accurately above in my second paragraph). I only changed the name and not the logic nor the actual words.

"Is the Devil a personification or a person?...Can an unintelligent ‘force’ carry on a conversation with a person?...only an intelligent person could...’Every quality, every action, which can indicate personality, is attributed to him in language which cannot be explained away.’" – Awake, 12/8/73, page 27.

So if you disagree with the logic, then you are disagreeing with the Watchtower’s logic. If the logic is true of one person, then it must be true with another or else the statement would not have been true in the first place. Do you believe the Watchtower is correct or not?

The Holy Spirit has a mind –Rom. 8:27 (Surprise, surprise: the Watchtower’s NWT mistranslates it, you must see this in any other translation including the Watchtower’s own Emphatic Diaglott): "the MIND of the SPIRIT" –Emphatic Diaglott (capital letters are in the actual translation).

The Holy Spirit has emotions –Eph. 4:30 "And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God...". And look up this in your own New World Translation: Isa. 63:10 "But they themselves rebelled and made his holy spirit feel hurt." In Hebrews 10:29 the NWT says that the Spirit was "outraged"!

The Holy Spirit has a will and issues commands. 1 Cor. 12:11, Acts 8:29; 13:2,4; 16:6; 2 Sam. 23:2. The Holy Spirit "said" and called persons (see Acts 13:2 NWT).

The Holy Spirit is spoken of and treated as a true person: John 14:16; 15:26.

The Holy Spirit "pleads for us" –Rom. 8:26 (NWT).

The Holy Spirit "will teach you" –John 14:26 (NWT).

The Apostle Peter calls the Holy Spirit God in Acts 5:3-4 (even in the NWT).

The Holy Spirit is spoken of in parallel and complete parity with the other divine persons, "of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" –Mat. 28:19. Also note that they are spoken of as being one "name" (singular). This is so interesting and so revealing.

The above examples are merely a very small sample of the sustained testimony found throughout the Bible concerning the personhood of the Holy Spirit. As the Watchtower’s logical assertion states about another person: "Every quality, every action, which can indicate personality, is attributed to him in language which cannot be explained away." – Awake. Are you aware that there is far more biblical testimony about the personality of the Holy Spirit than there is about the Devil? If the Watchtower is correct about the Devil, then by the Watchtower’s own logic we are far more assured from the Bible about the personhood of the Holy Spirit.

There are a couple of objections that I can quickly dispatch, but will be glad to elaborate on in the future:

What of the Watchtower’s use of small letters when printing the words "holy spirit"? We need not pay any attention to that, as we already know that all of the most ancient manuscripts employed the use of all capital letters. And even the Watchtower itself has admitted that the Spirit can be capitalized in the New World Translation itself: "Now Jehovah is the Spirit" –2 Cor. 3:17 NWT. (Note that there is absolutely nothing different about the word in Greek here. It is just the same as often written elsewhere in the Greek.) If the Watchtower can capitalize it here, then we may logically capitalize it in the other places as well. This is major argument used by the Watchtower, and isn’t it a completely worthless argument (when we know the facts)?

What about the neuter gender that is the Greek word for Spirit? Neuter gender in language is not to be confused with sex. It is just by happenstance (chance) that the Greek word for Spirit is neuter. It could have been masculine or it could have been feminine (as in other languages). You can also find neuter words for children and demons in the Greek New Testament. This does not at all mean that they are non-persons (as you will agree). Think about it, demons are spirit beings, do you not agree? Yet you believe they are true beings, do you not? I remember documenting this for you long ago. I will be glad to document that again for your convenience. Now, if demons are spirit beings (as you agree), then how in the world can you use the neuter argument against another spirit being (the Holy Spirit)? Am I right that the light just flashed forward? ;-) Do not confuse language’s gender with sex. While they often coincide, they often do not. In Luke 9:13, the Greek word for bread is in the masculine gender! Does that mean those loaves are men or persons? This is a major argument used by the Watchtower, and isn’t it a completely worthless argument (when we know the facts)?

Much more can be said about this and I am willing to discuss all aspects of this topic. Your input will be appreciated, as I am so happy discussing the true words of God.

I went on much longer than I wanted to above, so I will keep this point short. You are aware that the Bible that Christ and his disciples had was the Old Testament, right? (My point is not what it is called but I’m referring to the set of books commonly known as the Old Testament; that was their Bible). Are you aware that Jehovah was known as the "husband" of his people?

"For your husband is your Maker, Whose name is the LORD [Jehovah] of hosts; And your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel, Who is called the God of all the earth." – Isaiah 54:4 (NASB). Jehovah is also called husband in other verses such as: Jer. 3:14, 31:32 and Hos. 2:7, 16, so it is a well established fact.

I'm sure you are aware of the many Scriptures that call Jesus the bridegroom. He called himself the bridegroom. What is a bridegroom? You were a groom, are you the husband of your wife? I won't list the many verses calling Jesus the bridegroom, but let us go on to a direct parallel to the verse above:

"For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy; for I betrothed you to one husband, that to Christ I might present you as a pure virgin." –2 Cor. 11:2 (NASB)

See also the book of Revelation:

"…the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready." –Rev. 19:6

""And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband." –Rev. 21:2.

And who is "her husband"?

"Come here, I shall show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb." –Rev. 21:9

Let us look at Isaiah 54:4 again. Look at all the titles and names:

"For your husband is your Maker, Whose name is the LORD [Jehovah] of hosts; And your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel, Who is called the God of all the earth."

What title or name belonging to Jehovah does not belong to Christ? He is our Husband (2 Cor. 11:2, etc.), he is our Maker (Col. 1:16, Jn. 1:3, 10, Heb. 1:10-12), his name is the Lord (Jehovah-Heb. 1:10-12), he is our redeemer (John 4:42, Titus 2:13-14), he is the Holy One (Acts 3:14), he is called God (John 1:1, Mat. 1:23, Isaiah 9:6/10:20-21,etc.). Truly Christ is the Lord of Lords, a designation only given to Jehovah (Ps. 136:3, Dt. 10:17, Rev. 17:14). Of course we could keep listing a lot more verses on this topic, but I will stop here because I believe the point is clear.

May God richly bless you with his Word.

The Watchtower, as we have seen, has taught in their booklet, Should You Believe in the Trinity? many things that are incorrect (and easily proved incorrect by checking out the original sources). On page 7 they indicate that the early church fathers did not really believe in the deity of Christ. For example, they state that Justin Martyr believed Jesus was a created angel and not God. But when we read Martyr’s actual words we find out that he explicitly taught the very opposite, that Jesus was the true God who appeared to many Old Testament believers. We have documented this same pattern with every single other church father that the booklet mentions.

Also, what is very telling is what the Watchtower left out of this section. Are you aware that unlike the Watchtower teaches, there is an unbroken line of believers who taught the deity of Christ all the way from the apostles to the present?

Curiously missing from the Watchtower’s booklet is another of the earliest church fathers. He actually was a student of the Apostle John himself; and he also knew other apostles such as Peter. His life spanned from the year 30 or 35 to 110 A.D. (obviously alive during the time of the apostles). So who is this man and what did he teach directly as received from the apostles and the Bible?

Here is what this man, Ignatius, taught:

"Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which is at Ephesus, in Asia...predestined before the beginning of time…and elected through the true passion by the will of the Father, and Jesus Christ, our God…Being the followers of God, and stirring up yourselves by the blood of God, ye have perfectly accomplished the work which was beseeming to you...There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; ... even Jesus Christ our Lord." –The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 1, pg. 49, 52

Note that Ignatius is not even trying to prove any new teaching, but is merely stating words that the young church already knows and accepts as the truth from the Bible. It does not sound like you have been told the truth, does it? When you read what the earliest fathers wrote in contrast to what the Watchtower leads you to believe about them in their booklet, there does seem to be some slight of hand going on in the Watchtower’s writings, does there not?

There is an unbroken chain, from the Old Testament to the New Testament, from the Apostle John (and the others) to Ignatius, to Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Origen, and on and on throughout the centuries until today. Not made up in the 4th century as the Watchtower is fond of allowing people to believe. The creeds merely codified that which was taught in an unbroken chain from the beginning. These things are verifiable.

Do Ignatius' words "by the blood of God" strike you as funny or odd? Why would they when the literal words of Acts 20:28 speak of that same thing? How about "God existing in flesh" when John 1:1-3, 9-10, 14, Phil. 2:6-7 and Col. 2:9 blatantly say that very thing? (You will have to see these verses in the literal Greek translations, as the New World Translation is not faithful to the original Greek as we have already seen with our own eyes by directly comparing them). What of "Jesus Christ, our God" which John and the others gave solid foundation to in so very many verses that we have been examining for a very long time (yet still have not exhausted)? When we read Ignatius, we merely see words echoing that which we explicitly find in the Bible. Why do the Watchtower's words seem so out of sync with what is found in the Bible? Of course by cutting things out of context, one can come up with the Watchtower’s teachings. (One can come up with anything by doing that). But when one really studies what all the Scriptures say, one comes away with a very different view. Never forget that the Watchtower in its more candid moments has admitted that if you only study the Bible without their works, you will quickly believe what Christians have always believed and you will not be in the Watchtower's "truth". Doesn’t that admission reveal a lot to us?

Here is something to seriously ponder. If the Watchtower can so completely and consistently misrepresent what others say (such as what scholars and the church fathers have said), then why can they not do the same thing with the Bible? You may think that they could not misrepresent the Scriptures, but if they can so easily be misleading about what others say, then how would their teachings about the Bible be any different?

No matter where I look into the Watchtower's theology and writings regarding God and Christ, I see nothing but tremendous discord between what they teach and what is actually found in the Bible. For one example among many, the Watchtower has declared: "Any who use Jesus' name in their worship but fail to give the greater honor to Jehovah do not manifest a genuine love of the light" --The Watchtower, August 1, 1991, page 9. They reflect this same idea in another publication when they boasted that their song books now contain more songs that honor Jehovah than Jesus: "But in the latest songbook of 1984, Jehovah is honored by four times as many songs as isJesus."-- Revelation Its Grand Climax At Hand, page 36.

To me, this seems to be extremely out of step with what the Scriptures very explicitly teach. See John 5:23 to learn the correct biblical position: "in order that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He that does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him." -- NWT. This is so clear. By not honoring the Son "just as" the Father, then you are not honoring the Father at all. Are you not instead acting directly contrary to explicit Scripture? Also, what is one of the primary means of honoring God? Would worship be a part of honoring God?

12 "saying with a loud voice: 'The Lamb that was slaughtered is worthy to receive the power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing.'
13 And every creature that is in heaven and on earth and underneath the earth and on the sea, and all the things in them, I heard saying: 'To the One sitting on the throne and to the Lamb be the blessing and the honor and the glory and the might forever and ever.'
14 And the four living creatures went saying: 'Amen!' and the elders fell down and worshiped" -- Rev. 5, NWT.

Truly, isn't the Watchtower greatly out of step with biblical teaching? Note that the above Scripture contains no hint of greater or lesser honor and worship. It is one and the same honor and worship, as John had already stated in John 5:23. We have seen this true biblical message in other Scriptures such as in Phil. 2:10-11 taken from Isaiah 45:23 (compare Rom. 14:11 to see that Paul knew exactly what he was saying); and Heb. 1:6 directly quoted from Dt. 32:43 in the LXX-Septuagint which explicitly speaks of worship to God (compare Nehemiah 9:6 which has the same idea). For most of the Watchtower's existence they translated Heb. 1:6 as worship and even explicitly taught that it is equivalent to the same worship given to Jehovah. Which interpretation is more in step with its context and with all the Scriptures above, as well as John's own commentary? The Watchtower needs to learn that honoring Christ as Lord (Jehovah) is what actually brings glory to God according to extremely clear and explicit Scripture: Phil. 2:11/Isa. 45:23; Heb. 1:10-12/Ps. 102:25-27, and many other verses. It is astonishingly uninformed to say that we must honor Jehovah more than Jesus, when the Bible itself says that honoring Christ as Lord (Jehovah) is the very thing that brings glory to God (1 Pet. 3:14-15/Isa. 8:12-13)! Note that my cross references of the N.T. with the O.T. are exact quotations the N.T. takes from the O.T. in the Greek. It may look a little different in English, but not so in the Greek. The Apostles were making very direct references to Scripture that only can be applied to Jehovah and freely applied them to Christ with no qualifications. Only by understanding this can you now fully understand 1 Cor. 12:3… "and no one can say, 'Jesus is Lord,' except by the Holy Spirit."