Criticisms of the New World Translation or Bible of Jehovah’s Witnesses 

The Bible of Jehovah’s Witnesses is known as the New World Translation. The Watchtower Society believes that this is the most accurate translation of the Bible and it is the only one they use in their teaching and reading. This Bible first appeared in English in a single volume in 1961, after having been presented in five successive volumes in 1953, 1955, 1957, 1958 and 1960. The Spanish version appeared in 1967 in a first edition of 500,000 copies.

Everet R. Storms, editor of The Gospel Banner, the official publication of the United Missionary Church, has accused Jehovah’s Witnesses of producing their own adulterated translation of the Bible (1). He and others have harshly criticized the Watchtower Society for altering and falsifying the Sacred Scriptures. Some examples of its poor translation can be found in the following texts: Hebrews 1:6; 1 Corinthians 11:30; John 1:1; Galatians 5:15; Titus 2:13; Colossians 2:12; John 8:58; and 1 John 5:20; Matthew 10:38; Romans 14:8-9; Matthew 27:52,53 and many more (2).

When editor Storms tried to obtain the names of the members who formed part of the committee that translated the New World Translation, he received no answer. “The society,” Storms said, “categorically refused to reveal the identity of the members of the translating committee” (3). When Eugenio Danyans asked them the same question, they told him the following: “The New World Translation of the Scriptures was not produced with the aim of glorifying or preserving the memory of men’s names. Therefore, the men who make up the translation committee have indicated to the Board of Directors of the Society their desire to remain anonymous, and specifically do not want their names to be published while they are alive or after their death” (4). One may now ask: why is it so important that they remain anonymous? Is it possible that they have something to hide?

In 1983, Raymond Franz, a former member of the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses and nephew of former president Frederick W. Franz, wrote a book entitled Crisis of Conscience. He notes that the New World Translation mentions the name of no translator and is presented as the result of the anonymous work of the “New World Translation Committee.” In reality, the members of this committee were Frederick W. Franz, Nathan H. Knorr, Albert Schroeder, Milton Henschel and George D. Gangas. Regarding Fredrick W. Franz, Raymond says that “he was the only one with sufficient knowledge of the biblical languages to attempt a translation of this kind. He had studied Greek for two years at the University of Cincinnati, but he studied Hebrew on his own (self-taught)” (5). Curiously, Dr. Walter Martin says that in a trial in Scotland on November 24, 1954, between Walsh and Latham, “Fredrick W. Franz admitted under oath that he could not translate Genesis 2:4 from Hebrew” (a verse that any first-year Hebrew student in a Theological Seminary could translate) (6). After reviewing the data, Dr. Martin concludes that the New World Bible Translation Committee deserves no respect because “there was no reputable translator with recognized degrees in exegesis or Greek or Hebrew translation” (7).

Here are the observations written by well-known scholars of Greek and of the New Testament on the way the NWT renders John 1:1, but they are also indicative of opinions about the NWT in general:

Dr. J.R. Mantey (who is quoted on pages 1158-1159 of the Watchtower Society’s Kingdom Interlinear Translation in English): “A shocking mistranslation.” “Obsolete and incorrect,” “It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 ‘the Word was a god.’”

Dr. William Barclay of the University of Glasgow, Scotland: “The way in which this sect deliberately twists the truth can be seen in its translations of the New Testament. John 1:1 is translated: ‘the Word was a god.’ A translation that is grammatically impossible. It is abundantly clear that a sect which translates the New Testament in this way lacks honesty from an intellectual point of view.”

Dr. Bruce M. Metzger of Princeton University (professor of New Testament Language and Literature): “A frightfully bad translation…” “erroneous,” “pernicious…” “reprehensible.” “If Jehovah’s Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists.”

Dr. Samuel J. Mikolasky of Zurich, Switzerland: “This anarthrous construction (used without the article) does not have the same meaning that the indefinite article ‘a’ has in English. It is monstrous to translate this phrase as ‘the Word was a god.’”

Dr. James L. Boyer of Winona Lake Theological Seminary, Indiana: “I have never heard, nor read, any Greek scholar who agrees with the interpretation of this verse (John 1:1) on which Jehovah’s Witnesses insist. I have never met one of them (members of the Watchtower Society) who has knowledge of the Greek language.” *

Dr. Philip B. Harner of the University of Heidelberg: “The verb preceding an anarthrous form would probably mean that the LOGOS was ‘a god’ or divine person of a certain kind, belonging to the general category of THEOS, but a being distinct from HO THEOS. In the form John used, the word THEOS is placed at the beginning for emphasis (which completely rules out the translation ‘a god’).”

Dr. B.F. Westcott (whose Greek New Testament is used in the Watchtower Society’s Kingdom Interlinear Translation): “The predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in John 4:24. It necessarily lacks the article… No inferiority of nature is suggested by this form of expression, which simply affirms true deity of the Word… in the third clause it is declared that ‘the Word’ is ‘God’ and thus He is included in the Godhead.”

Dr. Eugene A. Nida, Director of the Translation Department of the American Bible Society and responsible for the Popular Version, whose committee worked under his direction: “With respect to John 1:1 there is a complication only because, evidently, the New World Translation was made by people who do not take Greek syntax seriously.”

Dr. J.J. Griesbach (whose Greek New Testament was used by the Watchtower Society in its publication of The Emphatic Diaglott): “So numerous and clear are the arguments and testimonies of Scripture in favor of the true deity of Christ, that I can scarcely imagine how, while acknowledging the divine authority of Scripture and respecting the just rules of interpretation, this doctrine can be called into question by any man. Especially the passage of John 1:1-3 is so clear and so far above every exception, that no effort, whether of commentators or of critics, can wrest it from the hands of the defenders of the truth.”

Other famous scholars of Greek and Hebrew who also criticize the New World Translation are: Dr. Edgar J. Goodspeed, Dr. Paul L. Kauffman, Dr. Charles L. Feinberg, Dr. Walter Martin, Dr. F.F. Bruce, Dr. Ernest C. Colwell, Dr. J. Johnson, Dr. H.H. Rowley and Dr. Anthony Hoekema (8).

* In the book “THE WORD” — WHO IS HE ACCORDING TO JOHN?, published by the Watchtower Society in 1962, page 5 included a translation of John 1:1 from the New Testament: “New Translation and Explanation based on the Oldest manuscripts by a German Roman Catholic priest named John (Johannes) Greber, 1937 edition.” They cite his work to support their translation of John 1:1, “the Word was a god.” They also cite him in the following publications: MAKE SURE OF ALL THINGS, 1970, p. 491; THE WATCHTOWER, May 1, 1976, p. 288; AID TO BIBLE UNDERSTANDING, 1987, p. 1258. The surprising thing about all this is the fact that THE WATCHTOWER of January 15, 1956 said the following: “It is very apparent that the ex-priest Greber was helped in his translation by the spirits in which he believes” (p. 432). The truth is that he and his wife (a spiritist medium) communicated with the spirit world. He recounts his experiences in his book COMMUNICATION WITH THE SPIRIT WORLD. It is evident that the Watchtower Society cited John Greber to support its poor translation of John 1:1, knowing that he was a spiritist who had left the priesthood.

(for more information write to: Agentes de Información, Apartado 297, 28932 Móstoles (Madrid), Spain. Or Agentes de Información, Apartado 354, 17002 Gerona, Spain)

(1). Eugenio Danyans Proceso a la ‘Biblia’ de los Testigos de Jehová, Ed. CLIE, 1983. página 31.

(2). Erich and Jean Grieshaber Respuestas Preparadas para Refutar la Doctrina de los Testigos de Jehová. Ed. propia, 1992. pag. 49; Francisco Blanca El Texto Griego del N.T. y el Nuevo Mundo de las Sagradas Escrituras, 1987; David Reed Respuestas Bíblicas a los Testigos de Jehová. Ed. VIDA, 1986; Gerald Wright The JW’s Bible, 1976; Robert M. Bowman,Jr. “The New World Translation on Trial”, Christian Research Journal, Winter, 1989; David Reed, “¡Eso No Esta en Mi Biblia !”

(3). Eugenio Danyans, página 32.

(4). Ídem

(5). Raymond Franz Crisis de Conciencia. Ed. CLIE, 1993. página 57; Bill and Joan Cetnar, Questions For Jehovah’s Witnesses who love the Truth, 1983, pag. 7, Route 3, Weir Lake Road, Kunkletown,PA 18058. USA.

(6). Dr. Walter Martin Los Testigos de Jehová. Ed. BETANIA, 1987. página 61-62; “Is the President of Jehovah’s Witnesses ‘In the Truth’”, Personal Freedom Outreach, P.O. Box 26062, St. Louis, MO. 63136; Bill I. Cetnar “El Libro Más Peligroso”, PA.

(7). Ídem, pagina 61.

(8). Erich and Jean Grieshaber, paginas 49-52; Dr. Julius Robert Mantey,” A Grossly Misleading Translation”; Ian Croft “The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures”. Bethel Ministries, Vol.7, Sept. 1988; “What Greek Scholars Really Think About the New World Translation”, Help Jesus Ministry, Kelowna, B.C. Canada 

Author: Dennis Swick