How accurate is the New World Translation REALLY.?

Question

This results from a previous "question" about New World Translation (NWT) accuracy. I have read a significant amount of the NWT With References and find it to be a very useful study bible (my review here: http://www.jimpettis.com/bibles/nwt.htm ). I am not a JW or a KJV-only-er and so consider myself somewhat unbiased in this matter, but there are real degreed bible scholars on Y!A and I would like their opinion. I have read at least 5 versions cover-to-cover and have 4 more (including NWT) sitting here waiting for me. Is the NWT more accurate than the average bear (I mean, bible)? Why, specifically, yes? Why, specifically, no? Please support your answers with evidence, not "I like what my bible says better than I like what the NWT says". Thanks, Jim

Answer 1

Bad Translations of the Jehovah's Witness Bible,
the New World Translation (NWT).

1. Gen. 1:1-2 - "In [the] beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Now the earth proved to be formless and waste and there was darkness upon the surface of [the] watery deep; and God's active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters." (New World Translation, Emphasis added)
A. The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society denies that the Holy Spirit is alive, third person of the Trinity. Therefore, they have changed the correct translation of "...the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters," to say "...and God's active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters."
2. Zech. 12:10 - In this verse God is speaking and says "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son" (Zech. 12:10, NASB).
. The Jehovah's Witnesses change the word "me" to "the one" so that it says in their Bible, "...they will look upon the one whom they have pierced..."
Since the Jehovah's Witnesses deny that Jesus is God in flesh, then Zech. 12:10 would present obvious problems--so they changed it.
3. John 1:1 - They mistranslate the verse as "a god." Again it is because they deny who Jesus is and must change the Bible to make it agree with their theology. The Jehovah's Witness version is this: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."
4. Col. 1:15-17 - The word "other" is inserted 4 times. It is not in the original Greek, nor is it implied. This is a section where Jesus is described as being the creator of all things. Since the Jehovah's Witness organization believes that Jesus is created, they have inserted the word "other" to show that Jesus was before all "other" things, implying that He is created.
. There are two Greek words for "other": heteros, and allos. The first means another of a different kind, and the second means another of the same kind. Neither is used at all in this section of scripture. The Jehovah's Witness have changed the Bible to make it fit their aberrant theology.
5. Heb. 1:6 - In this verse they translate the Greek word for worship, proskuneo, as "obeisance." Obeisance is a word that means to honor, show respect, even bow down before someone. Since Jesus, to them, is created, then he cannot be worshiped. They have also done this in other verses concerning Jesus, i.e., Matt. 2:2,11; 14:33; 28:9.
6. Heb. 1:8 - This is a verse where God the Father is calling Jesus God: "But about the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.'" Since the Jehovah's Witnesses don't agree with that they have changed the Bible, yet again, to agree with their theology. They have translated the verse as "...God is your throne..." The problem with the Jehovah's Witness translation is that this verse is a quote from Psalm 45:6 which, from the Hebrew, can only be translated as "...Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom." To justify their New Testament translation they actually changed the OT verse to agree with their theology, too!
The NWT translation is not a good translation. It has changed the text to suit its own theological bias in many places.

Interesting Quotes from Watchtower Literature

It is important to understand the psychological hold the Watchtower organization has in the life of the average Jehovah's Witness. The Watchtower organization is the guide, the teacher, and the expounder of correct doctrine. The average Jehovah's Witness attends several meetings each week where he is repeatedly indoctrinated to believe Watchtower doctrines. Every Jehovah's Witness thinks very much alike and has the same standard answers because they read from the same sources and are conditioned into the same way of thinking: the Watchtower way. So, if you've witnessed to one Jehovah's Witness, you've heard the same arguments they all will use.
In opposition to the Watchtower, according to the Bible, Jesus is the mediator between God and man (1 Tim. 2:5). He alone is the one who reveals truth (John 1:17), not the Watchtower organization. As you will read in these quotes, the Watchtower organization subtly takes the place of Jesus. Though it claims to bear witness of Him and point to Him, in reality it takes His place. This is typical for a cult.

Answer 2

Jim I'll bet you had no idea what you were going to get when you asked this question. There is a way to deal with this question easily enough.

Treasury Department Agents, when trained to determine the difference between counterfit money and actual currancy are never exposed to any counterfit bills in their training. It is my understanding that they only study real US currancy. The idea is that they are to become so familar with the real thing that anything that comes alnog the is different from the original or authorized article they will know the difference.

I have been a christian for approximately 28 years, but it has only been in the last 7 or so that I have applied this teaching in my life and I have discoverd the God is true to His word, and His discernment is there in the authorized versions.

I would also have you look to any Christian Book store and note that most to my knowledge do not carry the New World Translation, nor do they have Book of Mormon or Doctrine and Covenents w/Pearl of Great Price (LDS Writings) you wont find much of Mary Baker Eddy's writings there either, or L. Ron Hubbard as well. Something to think about.

In closing for, me the down fall of the NWT is the Translation of John 1:1. The idea that every Bible translation I have ever read (KJV, NKJV(one of my favorites), NASB, NLT (Catholic Version), LB, NCV, The Message, Darbys, Websters, The Literal Translation, RSV, ASV) all of these make reference to the fact that the "Word" (which is a metaphore for Jesus the Son of God see John 1:14) was with God and the "Word was God". Not Was a God but was God. Any book or teaching or denomination that blaintantly or subtly denies the Diety of the Lord Jesus Christ, is not worth the time of day as a teacher of true doctrine.

Counterfit money is usless, counterfit faith... a person can be witnessed to, prayed for, shown the truth and should be, but in the end you know what can happen to you if you are caught spending counterfit money, you can get burnned.

I hope this helps

God bless you my brother in Christ, stay on the right path I pray you. In Jesus Name Amen.

al 4 now B

Answer 3

You have many Trinitarians and JW haters that will say the NWT is not accurate and was translated with bias to our beliefs. However, our beliefs such as that Jesus is God's Son and not the Almighty God was based on the KJV and other bibles used in the 1800's. The NWT was not published until 1961.

If you look into the history of some of the scriptures used by Trinitarians, you will find that they were added to the bible.
One such is 1 John 5: 7 & 8 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, The Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one." KJV

Textual critic F.H.A. Scrivener wrote: "We need not hesitate to declare our conviction that the disputed words were not written by St. John: that they were originally brought into Latin copies in Africa from the margin, where they had been placed as a pious and orthodox gloss on ver. 8: that from the Latin they crept into two or three late Greek codices, and thence into the printed Greek text, a place to which they had no rightful claim." A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament (Cambridge, 1883, third ed.), p. 654

As noted by other Witnesses, there are Greek scholars who have stated that the NWT is not only accurate, but the most accurate translation.

Answer 4

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo

I have written a book entitled "The Role of Theology and Bias in Bible Translation With a special look at the New World Translation of Jehovah's Witnesses" where I discuss many of your points below from a philological and linguistic point of view.

The conclusion is that the NWT is a very accurate translation, but in the book it is criticized on several points as well.

I see no reason to discuss in detail your NT points on this OT list. I would just like to mention three points:

1) There is quite a good philological evidence that the word KURIOS found in NT manuscripts from the middle of the second century C.E. onward, is a translation of two different words used by Jesus and his disciples, that one of these words may have been the tetragrammaton, and that YHWH was replaced by KURIOS in NT manuscripts between 100 and 125 C.E. as was the case with LXX manuscripts.

2) All the renderings that are criticize are perfectly legitimate on the basis of the rules of Greek grammar and syntax. You may disagree with the choice of the translators, but linguistically their choices have a firm basis.

3) Your words that "In Colossians 1:16 the NWT adds the word "other" even though it's not anywhere in the Greek" can rightly be criticized. I argue in my book that "other" in this place is perfectly legitimate from a lexical, grammatical and contextual point of view. But I criticize that a footnote or appendix explaining this is lacking, and say that a correct understanding of the meaning is possible also without "other".

The translators of the NWT have been extremely faithful both to their own translation principles and to the the Hebrew text. those who say that the translators did not know the original languages either have not read the text of the NWT or don't know the original languages themselves.

Answer 5

greek biblical scholar? Julius R. Mantey PhD
Spiros Zodiates PhD ...need more? they all say the same, STARTING with the grossly innaccurate and irresponsible rendering if John 1:1..."translated" to suit the doctrine of jehovah's witnesses. i've read a lot on faithfull translations by scholarship. to be perfectly honest, you are the first person to endorse the errant NWT. you MUST be a JW. i don't care what you say...only a JW would say something like that. You know Lamsa has a screwy translation you would like.



OK...shalei...you know, i wouldn't be so dismissive if I hadn't researched it before. if i felt the need, i could muster many scholars' references to how it is a deceptive rendering. honestly, i really don't care if "you" do conjure up a few liberal scholars who are fine with this atrocity of a translation...these are the same secular voices that will tell you that just because the New Testament doesn't have the word 'homosexual' in the text, Jesus must surely condone the behavior. for a few like me, their degree is just a piece of paper. one greek scholar says one thing, another says something else...well, what is the motive? where are they spiritually? that means a lot. FYI just because I personally don't have a degree in this discipline, doesn't mean I can't understand the grammatical principles involved in Jn 1:1. You simply can't debunk 2,000 yrs. of the finest biblical knowledge by coming up with your own version and own translational methods, have a few shady characters agree with you, and "poof" your version now supersedes what already has been proven otherwise.
all one needs to know is that someone, well intentioned or not, put "NWT" with "accurate" and "useful" in the same sentence, and there is a huge problem. today truth and orthodoxy are being supplanted, especially in universities and seminaries, with heterodox and divergent popular revisions that suit not the natural meaning, but favored substitutions.
you may want to entertain this trend, but I do not.

Answer 6

NO it is not even considered a real bible it is a cult document. Bad Translations of the Jehovah's Witness Bible, the New World Translation (NWT). 1. Gen. 1:1-2 - "In [the] beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth proved to be formless and waste and there was darkness upon the surface of [the] watery deep; and God's active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters," (New World Translation, emphasis added). 1. The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society denies that the Holy Spirit is alive, the third person of the Trinity. Therefore, they have changed the correct translation of "...the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters," to say "...and God's active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters." 2. Zech. 12:10 - In this verse God is speaking and says, "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son" (Zech. 12:10, NASB). 1. The Jehovah's Witnesses change the word "me" to "the one" so that it says in their Bible, "...they will look upon the one whom they have pierced..." Since the Jehovah's Witnesses deny that Jesus is God in flesh, then Zech. 12:10 would present obvious problems--so they changed it. 3. John 1:1 - They mistranslate the verse as "a god." Again it is because they deny who Jesus is and must change the Bible to make it agree with their theology. The Jehovah's Witness version is this: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." 4. Col. 1:15-17 - The word "other" is inserted 4 times. It is not in the original Greek, nor is it implied. This is a section where Jesus is described as being the creator of all things. Since the Jehovah's Witness organization believes that Jesus is created, they have inserted the word "other" to show that Jesus was before all "other" things, implying that He is created. 1. There are two Greek words for "other": heteros, and allos. The first means another of a different kind, and the second means another of the same kind. Neither is used at all in this section of scripture. The Jehovah's Witness have changed the Bible to make it fit their aberrant theology. 5. Heb. 1:6 - In this verse they translate the Greek word for worship, proskuneo, as "obeisance." Obeisance is a word that means to honor, show respect, even bow down before someone. Since Jesus, to them, is created, then he cannot be worshiped. They have also done this in other verses concerning Jesus, i.e., Matt. 2:2,11; 14:33; 28:9. 6. Heb. 1:8 - This is a verse where God the Father is calling Jesus God: "But about the Son he says, 'Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.'" Since the Jehovah's Witnesses don't agree with that they have changed the Bible, yet again, to agree with their theology. They have translated the verse as "...God is your throne..." The problem with the Jehovah's Witness translation is that this verse is a quote from Psalm 45:6 which, from the Hebrew, can only be translated as "...Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom." To justify their New Testament translation they actually changed the OT verse to agree with their theology, too! The NWT translation is not a good translation. It has changed the text to suit its own theological bias in many places.

Answer 7

I don't have the "proof" or the "facts" you're looking for but think of it this way; about the KJ version; who talks that way anymore? Even those who read it have a tough time understanding it. The NWT is written in modern day english.
You stated that you have read 5 versions cover-to-cover; anyone that knows how to read can do that. What did you get out of it? The versions that are easier to read are therefore easier to understand; don't you agree?

Answer 8

It is not accurate at all compared to what Greek and Hebrew scholars produce. No scholar( unless he is a dedicated JW before he is ascholar)thinks much of the NWT.

Compare even the interlinear New Testament that the JWs put out with their NWT to see the discrepancies and changing of words to suit their doctrinal purposes.

Compare the translation versions you have with the NWT and see how'creative" the NWT is with the texts.

Answer 9

I would be very cautious about alot of these modern day translations, you dont have to be a KJV only person , the NASB does a good job also although for study the KJV is great considering you can easily refer back to the greek through a good concordance. Get away from the JW stuff the watchtower society is modern day false prophets and will want you to follow them and not the bible.

Answer 10

Check out the book "Truth in Translation" By Jason BeDuhn Ph.D. He is an Assoc. Prof. of Religious Studies @ Northern Arizona University.