The two verses are;
Titus 2:13, “…of our Great god and Savior, Jesus Christ.” and,
2 Peter 1;1, “…the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
The Greek in these two verses demands that both “God” and “Savior” be attributed to the person of Jesus Christ. A very brief description of this construction is, if two nouns are connected by a copulative “Kai” (and), and the first noun (in this case God) has the article ‘ho’ (the) in front of it but the second noun (in this case savior) does not, then the second noun refers to the same person that the first one does. Both nouns describe the same person.
This is the exact construction of both Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. When applied under Sharp’s full definition this rule has never been known to fail. (2) Robertson, and (3)Dana and Mantley.
Unfortunately, the KJV translators handled these verses in a way that is ambiguous and obscures the obvious connection of the nouns god and savior to one person, Jesus Christ. The KJV translated them in the following manner; Titus 2:13, ..of our Great God and our Savior Jesus Christ. and 2 Peter 1:1, …the righteousness of God and our Savior Jesus Christ. This translation allows the reader to separate God from Savior as if they were two different people.
The Watchtower, with a known bias against the discovery of the proclamation of Christ as the Deity in Scripture, adopted the KJV’s translation and then went further to take advantage of it by inserting the article (the) in front of the second noun. An article that clearly does not exist in the Greek. Such a translation is not possible though, as both passages follow the exact construction as the following verses, 2 pet. 1:11, …our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. 2 Pet. 2:20, “…the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,”; 2 Pet. 3:2 “,…The Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.”
A.T. Robertson suggest a reason why the KJV team mistranslated this verse. It appears that at the time of the translation there was a very prominent scholar by the name of George B. Winer. He was held in such high esteem that few men dared to buck his findings and views. This Winer was not a witch or a new age person, but he was a anti-trinitarian, who admitted that his reason for interpreting these verses the way he did was not grammatical, but theological. And either out of intimidation or just reluctance to go against the flow of the periods scholarship, the KJV translators may have followed suit. Stranger things have happened in the world of scholarship.
(1) Bowman, Why You Should Believe in the Trinity
(2) Robertson, The Minister and His Greek New Testament, p.62 (3) Dana and Mantley, A Manual of Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p.147 (4) Robertson, ibid, p.66