by Giuseppe Monno
According to Jehovah’s Witnesses, when Jesus states, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30), he would be referring only to a moral unity or unity of purpose, not to a unity of divine nature or substance. However, the immediate context of the passage demonstrates otherwise and provides an important interpretative key.
Immediately after this declaration, the Jews pick up stones to stone him (John 10:31). When Jesus asks why they are reacting in this way, they answer clearly: “We are not stoning you for doing a good work, but for blasphemy: though you are only a man, you claim to be God” (John 10:33).
This passage is decisive: the Jews understand Jesus’ words not as a simple statement of agreement or harmony with God, but as a claim to divine equality. If Jesus had intended to express only a moral unity, their reaction would have been disproportionate and unfounded. On the contrary, the charge of blasphemy makes sense only if his words imply a divine claim.
It is important to note that Jesus does not correct this interpretation in the reductive sense proposed by Jehovah’s Witnesses. On the contrary, he continues his discourse by appealing to the Scriptures (John 10:34–36) and implicitly reaffirms his unique identity as the Son of God consecrated by the Father. Furthermore, shortly afterward he declares: “The Father is in me and I am in the Father” (John 10:38), an expression that goes far beyond a simple unity of purpose and indicates a mutual indwelling proper to the communion within the Trinity.
Jehovah’s Witnesses also cite John 17:11 and 17:21–23, where Jesus prays that the disciples “may be one” as he and the Father are one, to argue that this refers only to a functional or moral unity. However, this interpretation does not adequately account for the fundamental distinction between model and participation.
In these verses, Jesus is not equating the disciples ontologically with God, but indicating that the unity among believers should reflect the perfect communion that exists between the Father and the Son. The unity of Christians is therefore analogical and participatory, not identical in nature.
Indeed, the unity among believers is ecclesial and spiritual: it is founded on faith, charity, and communion in the Spirit (cf. Ephesians 4:4–6; 1 Corinthians 12:12–13); the unity between the Father and the Son, instead, is ontological and substantial: they share indivisibly the same divine nature.
This distinction is essential to avoid misunderstandings. To say that believers are “one” does not mean that they share the same divine essence, but that they participate, by grace, in God’s communion. In contrast, when Jesus speaks of his own unity with the Father, he uses absolute and unique expressions, such as:
“All he has is mine” (John 16:15)
“To have seen me is to have seen the Father” (John 14:9)
These statements cannot be reduced to a mere moral unity without emptying them of their meaning.
Finally, the overall witness of the New Testament also confirms the full divinity of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is called both the Spirit of the Father (Matthew 10:20) and the Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9; Galatians 4:6), a sign of the perfect communion and the same divine nature that the three Persons share indivisibly.
The interpretation proposed by Jehovah’s Witnesses unduly reduces the meaning of Jesus’ words, ignoring both the immediate context and the whole of biblical revelation. The statement “I and the Father are one” expresses not merely a unity of purpose, but reveals a profound and unique communion that the Christian faith, from its earliest beginnings, has recognized as a unity of divine nature between the Father and the Son.