How do Jehovah's Witnesses explain Paul's apparent equating of Yahweh and Jesus in Romans 10? Recently I was listening to a lecture by Reformed theologian Robert Cara, in which he mentioned how frequently NT writers connect and apply OT Yahweh references to Jesus.  A number of examples could be given, but one of the stronger ones is Romans 10:9–13, which reads:


  [I]f you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. 11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” [ESV]


In verses 9, 12, and 13, "Lord" is a translation of the Greek word kyrios, and verse 9 clearly associates "Lord" with Jesus.  The same association seems to continue in verses 12 and 13.  But, crucially, verse 13 is a quote of Joel 2:32, where the Hebrew text clearly shows Yahweh.  

Thus, the argument goes, Jesus is the "Lord" in verse 12 who is called upon, and in verse 13 Paul connects this "Lord" (Jesus) with Joel 2:32's Yahweh. This indicates that he believes Jesus is truly the God of the Old Testament (Yahweh).

How do Jehovah's Witness's explain this?  Do they interpret Romans 10 differently, or Joel 2 differently, or have some other explanation?

Similar issue: How do Jehovah's Witnesses explain Paul's apparent equating of Yahweh and Jesus in Ephesians 4?



Lecture 06 Acts 1–2, starting 39:20
The explanation of any group or individual regarding which 'Lord' (or Lords) Romans chapter 10 deals with depends upon their theology, as Ben Mordecai has actually pointed out. Any group or individual believing that Jesus was created by God the Father (Jehovah, to Jehovah's Witnesses) cannot see Romans chapter 10 in any way other than, that, although Jesus is the Lord of verse 9, it is the name of Jehovah that must be called upon in order to be saved by verse 13.

However, for those who believe from the Bible that prior to becoming the man, Jesus, he was the eternal, uncreated Word of God who made everything that was made (John 1:1-14) Romans chapter 10 is clear that the Hebraic phrase to "call upon the name of the Lord" (or Yahweh) to be saved (as in Joel 2:32) becomes calling upon the name of Jesus to be saved in the Christian Greek scriptures (Acts 2:38-39). Jesus is the one Lord Christians acclaim. They do not have two Lords (1 Corinthians 8:6).

For Jehovah's Witnesses, when Romans 10:9 says "That if you confess with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord', and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved" they agree that that Lord is Jesus, but when verse 13 quotes Joel 3:32, they say THAT Lord is Jehovah and it's actually faith in the name of Jehovah that saves people, not faith in the name of Jesus. That's because, to them, Jesus is subordinate to Jehovah due to having been created by Jehovah.

Now, this is not the place to examine whether the ancient Christian Greek scriptures had the Hebrew letters for Yahweh in verse 13, which Jehovah's Witnesses claim as their reason for refusing to equate Jesus with Yahweh here. Unsurprisingly, their Greek Interlinear footnotes for chapter 10 claim some 'J' manuscript references for putting 'Jehovah' there in place of 'Lord,' whilst insisting that 'Lord' was in ancient texts for verse 9, adding, "Not 'Jehovah'." (Pages 722 &amp; 723 of the Kingdom Interlinear of the Christian Greek Scriptures produced by New World Bible Translation Committee, 1985 edition)

To examine whether the Jehovah's Witness Bible is justified in putting 'Jehovah' in verse 13 yet retaining 'Lord' in verse 9, is another question entirely.  This answer simply explains why Jehovah's Witnesses do not equate the Lord of verse 9 with the Lord of verse 13. They do not believe it is theologically possible so to do, and they can give their reasons for that. This question should not provide a platform for Jehovah's Witnesses trying to convince others that their interpretation and translation is correct. The information here is merely being used in this answer to show why Romans chapter 10 presents no conundrum to Jehovah's Witnesses, because they think they can change the Lord in verse 13 to Jehovah and so maintain their clear differentiation between Jesus and Jehovah, which their theology demands.