For this argument's sake this author will avoid the ‘if He isn’t True God then He is not True God and thus False God’. Mainly, two words are used in the Bible for ‘worship’ :they are ‘proskuneo’ and ‘latreuo’. Proskuneo occurs many times in the Bible. It can be rendered, “to worship, to do obeisance, show honor for, prostrate oneself, adore, to bow low, welcome respectfully.”

So one can see it has many levels and colours of meaning from respectful bowing to worship that can be due only God.

This single word can sometimes be very damaging to the Arian belief system of the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Let’s explore scripture and the pros and cons of it’s rendering. Heb. 1:6 reads in part, “Let all God’s angels worship Him” in most translations. The NWT renders “And let all God’s angels do obeisance to him.”

The obvious here is that obeisance doesn’t carry the same weight as worship, by definition. So one must ask is which one is right?

In contemporary English these two rendering mean different things. It should be noted that in almost all cases in the NWT ‘proskuneo’ in relation to Jesus is rendered ‘obeisance’ and ‘worship’ in relation to Very God. In almost every other translation ‘proskuneo’ is rendered ‘worship’ for either Very God or Jesus. So what is the reason that the Watchtower renders differently in connection with Jesus? Do they have any valid grammatical reasons? Are there any contextual reasons? Let’s explore their reasons.

Firstly, they contend that this command from God to ‘proskuneo’ Jesus was directed at angels not man.   This is superficially true but the argument that if higher beings than man are commanded to ‘worship’ then man, being lower would probably follow suit eliminates this wiggle room for denial.

The next, and somewhat more plausible argument is that in the LXX, a Greek translation of the original Hebrew scripture, renders ‘proskuneo’ for ‘bowing low and prostrating oneself’ in several different parts of the Old Testament where worship of the True God isn’t the meaning. *  For example, Ex. 18:7, 1 Chor. 29:20, 1 Sam. 24:8. Even though the LXX is not inspired it does validate the mute point that the word ‘proskuneo’ can rightly be rendered, in context, ‘obeisance’. However the word can similarly, and rightly be rendered ‘worship’ as in the worship of True God. Thus we have seen that their argument hasn't proven anything not already know or provided valid justification for ‘obeisance’ in connection with Jesus.

Continuing on their argument turns to Rev. 3:9 where they rightfully point out that unbelievers are commanded by Jesus to
pay obeisance to the disciples. Again, this adds nothing to their argument. But here is where the argument gets good: they cite Matt. 4:10 where Jesus rebukes Satan by telling him “You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only," NAS. The NWT renders, “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render scared service.” The words ‘must render scared service’ here are derived from ‘latreuo’. They conclude that this means that God receives proskuneo-worship and also something else only due him, latreuo-worship.
 

* This author would like to make note of the watchtower's preferential use of the LXX. They quote it as part of their argument often in connection with inspired scripture from the Bible to forward their Theology. To be fair, they never, at least as far as this author is aware, claim it to be inspired  but quite obviously deem it some level of credibility.

The problem comes when the LXX works against their arguments.

Then they either ignore it altogether or simply pan it off as not convincing enough because it is not inspired. An excellent example of this is the Greek transliteration utilized for ‘beginning’ from the Hebrew ‘arche’ in Gen. 1:1. The problem is that they can't accept ‘arche’ being rightly rendered as origin or source because then it would weaken their John 1:1 argument and make Jesus equal and as infinite and without a beginning as God.

What is just as damaging is that in the 1950 version of the NWT they originally rendered ‘arche’ as ‘originally’.

They aver that latreuo-worship is the “highest form of worship” due only God.

It should be noted here that this is classic “Leap-frog” scripture reading and one should always avoid this and read scripture in context. The Watchtower here attempts to minimize the weight of the word proskuneo when in relation to True God to something less than rightful, true worship due only God. If we read the whole context of this verse it encompasses Matt. 4:1-11 where Satan try's to tempt Jesus into an act of proskuneo-worship  (the word is even rendered worship in the NWT) of him in order to cause Jesus to sin and break the very first commandment.

The degree of proskuneo-worship here obviously approaches the degree of true worship rightfully due only God and this would be a sin and wrong.

The fact that this word can extend upward into even true worship due only God is also validated by the Jehovah's Witnesses themselves! From the “TRINITY EXPOSED WEB PAGE”, no doubt ran out of Headquarters in Brooklyn, NY,  from page 6 of the book of Hebrews it reads, “So it is obvious that the level or degree of ‘proskuneo’ that John was about to offer the angel at Rev. 28,8,9 was only to be given Jehovah God.” So in their zeal to reduce the meaning somewhat of proskuneo in relation to latreuo in Matt. 4:10 they open up a can of worm in Rev. 22:3. Here both the Throne of God and of the Lamb receives latreuo-worship.

To be sure, they attempt to key in on the words ‘renders him scared service’ and say “see they are only worshipping one. But from a Christian perspective this is the point. “Trinitarian” Christians believe that God is one and never refer to God as “them.” Still they continue with “ and they [the worshipers] will see his face, and his name will be written on their heads.” Again this is not a dilemma to Christians for the triune God only has one true name and every one knows it has to be figurative to see a spirits face. Continuing on they still try that there is two distinct thrones mentioned here. But is that true? Let’s allow scripture to tell us. In Rev. 3:21 Jesus and Yahweh both sit on the same throne, one. In Rev. 5:6 the Lamb is in the very middle of the throne. Perhaps this is why the NWT renders ‘meso’ midst instead of middle here. In fact, nowhere in scripture can anyone show that two thrones exist in Heaven. There is only one, the same one every one will proskuneo and latreuo-worship to in Heaven with Jesus and Yahweh on.

In closing, it can be seen that they can not offer any valid reason for their rendering of obeisance other than they simple theological bias. The fact is that it can be rendered as such and almost every credible Biblical scholar, including Unitarians who also dispute Jesus Deity, render ‘proskuneo ‘ as worship. In view of this author would greatly entertain any additional “evidence” from Jehovah's Witnesses.