In Truth in Translation (University Press of America, 2003) Jason BeDuhn, then associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University, compared nine English New Testaments across a set of disputed passages and concluded that, 'while it is difficult to quantify this sort of analysis', the New World Translation 'emerges as the most accurate of the translations compared', with the New American Bible 'a close second'.

Confidence note. The book itself was never opened. The previous confidence label of 'verified' rested entirely on Google Books' in-volume snippet search, which no longer runs from this environment at all: books.google.com, books.google.co.uk, books.google.de, books.google.ca and www.googleapis.com/books/v1 all answer HTTP 429, and WebFetch is redirected to Google's 'sorry' interstitial. An auditor cannot reproduce the retrieval, and a snippet is in any case not the document. Downgraded to 'supported' on 19 September 2026. What was confirmed independently on that date: the p. 163 sentence, in full and with its opening hedge, is reproduced at tetragrammaton.org; the p. 165 sentence is attested down to 'certainly better as a translation than the LB and AB'; and the fragments 'remarkably good', 'better by far' and 'consistently better' are quoted from pp. 163, 165 by The Watchtower of 1 December 2004, which has been read. The tail 'consistently better than the heavily biased NIV' is attested only in part — 'consistently better' is in the Watchtower, 'heavily biased NIV' is not — so the trailing ellipsis must stay. BeDuhn's own sigla for the New World Translation is 'NW', not 'NWT': Allin quotes him with 'NW', the reproduction of pp. 124-125 has 'the NW translation', and JW.org expands it as 'The NW [New World Translation]'. The tetragrammaton.org reproduction silently prints 'NWT' throughout. Where the two differ, 'NW' is used here. Until the printed book is in hand, do not present these quotations as letter-perfect.

Scan provenance. Not opened. The quotations below are transcribed from two independent published reproductions of the passage: the long review at tetragrammaton.org, which quotes the summary paragraph in full, and — for the second half — the partial quotation in The Watchtower of 1 December 2004 and on JW.org.

Corroborated by. src-nwt-jw-faq-accurate, src-nwt-w04-remarkably-good

Notes. This is the passage Jehovah's Witnesses quote. The organisation's 2004 Watchtower article says BeDuhn compared 'eight major translations'; the book compares nine (BeDuhn writes on p. 133 of 'the other eight translations we are comparing'). [Independent audit, 19 September 2026] The earlier version of this record began the quotation at 'the most accurate of the translations compared', with the preceding words supplied in brackets. That dropped BeDuhn's own hedge, 'While it is difficult to quantify this sort of analysis, it can be said that…', which is exactly the half JW.org also drops. The hedge has been restored and must be printed with the verdict.

Accessed. 19 September 2026 · Source ID. src-nwt-beduhn-2003-verdict

Copy citation Copy link

Confidence note. The whole page was fetched and read on 19 September 2026 and every quotation above was transcribed from it. The page is undated, so the access date is recorded as its date; its content may change. [Independent audit, 19 September 2026] The page was fetched and read again. The BeDuhn quotation above is verbatim. One correction: the page carries nine favourable comments, not eight — the earlier version of this record enumerated eight and left out Benjamin Kedar-Kopfstein, who appears between Winter and BeDuhn. The claim built on this record has been corrected to match.

Corroborated by. src-nwt-beduhn-2003-verdict, src-nwt-winter-1974-classical-journal

Notes. The page quotes BeDuhn's favourable verdict (pp. 163, 165) and does not mention his appendix (pp. 169-181), in which he calls the use of 'Jehovah' in the New Testament an inaccuracy. Of the nine favourable comments, four are cited to journals or reference works (Wikgren, McCoy, Gilmour, Winter), one to a scholarly monograph (BeDuhn) and four to a private letter, a privately circulated magazine, a general-readership book and an undated personal statement (Goodspeed, Thomson, Potter, Kedar-Kopfstein). Of the nine, only the Winter and BeDuhn items have been checked against their originals in this research, and the Winter one checks out.

Accessed. 19 September 2026 · Source ID. src-nwt-jw-faq-accurate

Copy citation Copy link

Confidence note. Opened on the Watchtower Online Library on 19 September 2026 and the wording confirmed against the page (w04 12/1 p. 30). [Independent audit, 19 September 2026] Fetched and read again; the quotation is verbatim, and the page marker in the Watchtower Online Library HTML (data-no="30") confirms p. 30. The article's own citation gives the book's title as 'Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament', which is the correct title and the one now used in the BeDuhn records.

Corroborated by. src-nwt-beduhn-2003-verdict

Notes. The article does say BeDuhn was 'critical of some of its translation choices' but does not say what the criticism was. It gives the number of translations compared as eight; BeDuhn compares nine.

Accessed. 19 September 2026 · Source ID. src-nwt-w04-remarkably-good

Copy citation Copy link