JWTruth.orgDocumented comparison resource
Search

The Bible and the translation · Claim record

The organisation's published answer to the charge that the translators were unqualified is that they asked to remain anonymous so that the translation would 'exalt the name of the living, true God', and that a translation should be judged by its own characteristics rather than by its translators' names.

Claim ID claim-bible-org-anonymity-defenceConcerns 15 October 1999Organisation's explanation
Organisation's explanation · 15 October 1999 Verified

The organisation's published answer to the charge that the translators were unqualified is that they asked to remain anonymous so that the translation would 'exalt the name of the living, true God', and that a translation should be judged by its own characteristics rather than by its translators' names. The Watchtower, 15 October 1999The Bible Translator, July 1964

The organisation’s position or later explanation: This is the organisation's own explanation, given in The Watchtower of 15 October 1999, pages 28-31, quoting The Watchtower of 15 September 1950 and the translation scholar Alan S. Duthie.

Show the evidence (2 sources)
Primary JW publication Verified

The Watchtower, “A Milestone for Lovers of God’s Word”

15 October 1999 · pp.28-31 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania

“Just who translated this remarkable Bible? The Watchtower of September 15, 1950, said: “The men who compose the translation committee have indicated their desire . . . to remain anonymous, and specifically do not want their names to be published while they are in life or after death. The purpose of the translation is to exalt the name of the living, true God.” Some critics charged that the work should be summarily dismissed as the product of amateurs, but not all took such an unreasonable stance.”

The article marks the hundred-millionth copy of the translation. It acknowledges that 'upon its release, this translation was subjected to severe criticism', defends the anonymity of the translators by quoting Alan S. Duthie ('If we know who the translators or the publishers of a particular Bible translation are, does it help us to decide whether that translation is good or bad? Not directly. … There is no substitute for examining the characteristics of each translation itself'), and cites the Andover Newton Quarterly of January 1963 for the view that the translation shows 'the presence in the movement of scholars qualified to deal intelligently with the many problems of Biblical translation'.

Official source

Provenance and verification note

Confidence note. Opened on the Watchtower Online Library on 19 September 2026 and read in full; the quotations were transcribed from the page (w99 10/15 pp. 28-31). [Independent audit, 19 September 2026] Fetched and read again; the quotation is verbatim and the page markers in the HTML (data-no="28" through "31") confirm pp. 28-31. The Duthie quotation in the context field is also verbatim.

Notes. This is the organisation's own statement of why the translators are not named, and its own acknowledgement of the criticism. It is the best single source for the organisation's answer to the 'amateur translators' charge.

Accessed. 19 September 2026 · Source ID. src-nwt-w99-milestone

Peer-reviewed / scholarly Verified

The Bible Translator, “Book Review: New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures”

July 1964 · pp.150-152 (quoted passages at pp. 151 and 152) · Bruce M. Metzger · United Bible Societies (published by SAGE; DOI 10.1177/000608446401500311)

“On the whole, one gains a tolerably good impression of the scholarly equipment of the translators (their names are not divulged). … Frequently an intelligent use of critical information is apparent. (p. 151) … Some of the translations which are simply indefensible include the following. The introduction of the word 'Jehovah' into the New Testament text, in spite of much ingenuity in an argument filled with a considerable amount of irrelevant material (pp. 10-25), is a plain piece of special pleading. (p. 152)”

A signed review of the 1950 New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures in the United Bible Societies' translation journal, running from the heading 'BOOK REVIEW' on p. 150 to the signature 'BRUCE M. METZGER' at the foot of p. 152. It is mixed, not uniformly hostile. Metzger notes the Westcott and Hort Greek text, records that 'one of the most notable features of the translation is the introduction of the name Jehovah 237 times into the main body of the text, as well as 72 times in the footnotes in the lower margin' (p. 151), and allows the translators 'a tolerably good impression of the scholarly equipment'. He then objects that rendering the same Greek word by the same English word 'has a specious show of faithfulness to the original, but the application of the principle with any degree of consistency tends to produce a certain woodenness' (p. 151); that 'and the Word was a god' at John 1:1, 'while entirely in accord with the Arian theology of the sect, is not justified despite a lengthy note which attempts to support it' (p. 152); and that 'in the interest of providing support for their Unitarianism, the translators have not hesitated to insert four times the word “other” (totally without warrant from the Greek) before the word “things” in Col. 1: 16 f.' (p. 152).

Official source Archived or alternative copy Scan of original

Provenance and verification note

Confidence note. Opened and read in full on 19 September 2026 — all three printed pages. journals.sagepub.com still returns HTTP 403 to automated requests and the live ubs-translations.org page now returns HTTP 404, but the Wayback Machine serves the United Bible Societies' own page images of the issue: a150.jpg, a151.jpg and a152.jpg under /tbt/1964/03/. Those three images were downloaded and read, and the quotations above are transcribed from them. The review is signed 'BRUCE M. METZGER'. Crossref independently confirms The Bible Translator vol. 15 no. 3 (July 1964), pp. 150-152, by B. Metzger.

Scan provenance. Page images of the printed journal from the United Bible Societies' own Bible Translator archive at ubs-translations.org, preserved in the Wayback Machine. The review occupies the images a150.jpg, a151.jpg and a152.jpg in /tbt/1964/03/, whose printed page numbers are 150, 151 and 152; the viewer's own index maps image a151.jpg to printed page 151, which is the page the secondary literature cites. The live ubs-translations.org page now returns HTTP 404.

Notes. This record previously said the text could not be opened and that nothing should be quoted from it. [Independent audit, 19 September 2026] It has now been read, and that judgement is reversed. The much-circulated sentence about 'a plain piece of special pleading' is accurate word for word, and it is on p. 152. The citation 'pp. 150-153' that circulates online is wrong: the review ends on p. 152. Note two traps. First, the same three pages contain the favourable sentence that defenders of the translation quote, so a page that uses one half without the other is quoting selectively. Second, Wikipedia's rendering of the p. 151 sentence, 'Frequently an intelligent use of a critical information is apparent', has a stray 'a'; the printed text reads 'an intelligent use of critical information'.

Accessed. 19 September 2026 · Source ID. src-nwt-metzger-1964-bible-translator

Claim page

A direct link to this claim is https://jwtruth.org/evidence/claim-bible-org-anonymity-defence/. 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.