The organisation’s own 2004 Watchtower article acknowledges that Jason BeDuhn was ‘critical of some of its translation choices’ while praising the translation overall; the JW.org FAQ page quotes only his praise.
Claim ID claim-bible-beduhn-qualified-praiseConcerns 1 December 2004Context
1 December 2004 · p.30 · Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc.
“While critical of some of its translation choices, BeDuhn called the New World Translation a “remarkably good” translation, “better by far” and “consistently better” than some of the others considered.”
The article reports Jason BeDuhn’s comparison of eight English versions in Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament, and quotes the New World Bible Translation Committee’s foreword: “The translators of this work, who fear and love the Divine Author of the Holy Scriptures, feel toward Him a special responsibility to transmit his thoughts and declarations as accurately as possible.”
Provenance and verification note for The Watchtower, A “Remarkably Good” Translation
Confidence note. Opened on the Watchtower Online Library on 19 September 2026; the issue date was confirmed from the Online Library listing for The Watchtower of 1 December 2004 and the page number from the document’s page marker. BeDuhn’s book was NOT opened; only the organisation’s quotation of it is recorded here.
Notes. Worth noting for fairness in both directions: the organisation’s own article acknowledges that BeDuhn was critical of some renderings, a qualification the JW.org FAQ page omits.
Accessed. 19 September 2026 · Source ID.src-nwto-w-2004-1201-remarkably-good
19 September 2026 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Reliability. The New World Translation is based on up-to-date scholarly research and the most reliable ancient manuscripts. . . . Faithfulness. The New World Translation strives to convey faithfully the original message that was inspired by God. . . . Literalness. Unlike paraphrased translations, the New World Translation renders words literally as long as doing so does not result in awkward wording or hide the thought of the original writings.”
The page answers criticism of the translation under the headings reliability, faithfulness, literalness, missing books, missing verses and different wording, and then lists favourable comments from Edgar J. Goodspeed (letter of 8 December 1950), Allen Wikgren (The Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. I, p. 99), Alexander Thomson (The Differentiator, April 1952, p. 52), Charles Francis Potter (The Faiths Men Live By, p. 300), Robert M. McCoy (Andover Newton Quarterly, January 1963, p. 31), S. MacLean Gilmour (Andover Newton Quarterly, September 1966, p. 26), Thomas N. Winter (The Classical Journal, April-May 1974, p. 376), Benjamin Kedar-Kopfstein (1989) and Jason David BeDuhn (Truth in Translation, pp. 163, 165). Footnote a, whose marker is attached to the article’s opening sentence about people who have “commented on or questioned the accuracy of the New World Translation” — that is, above the endorsement list rather than beside it — reads: “Comments apply to editions of the English New World Translation prior to the 2013 revision.”
Provenance and verification note for JW.org Frequently Asked Questions, Is the New World Translation Accurate?
Confidence note. Page fetched from JW.org and read in full on 19 September 2026; the quotations, the scholar list and the footnote were confirmed from the page text. The date recorded is the access date because the page carries no publication date and may change. We have NOT opened the underlying books and journals, so the scholars’ wording is recorded here only as JW.org reproduces it.
A direct link to this claim is https://jwtruth.org/evidence/claim-bible-beduhn-qualified-praise/. Every source above opens the original document or the best available copy. If you believe the wording, date or context is wrong, report an error.