Comparing John 1:1 in the New World Translation JW Bible with 19 Bibles
We have taken our research from one of the most recommended bible resources on the internet: BlueLetterBible.org. See a list of 19 translated verses on John 1:1 to compare to JW.org’s version of the Jehovah’s Witness bible.
While Jehovah’s Witnesses claim to use many versions of the bible, their app shows differently. They have access to the following bibles as of 2017 on JW.org. However they only use NWT in their teachings and meetings. No other bibles could be used to support their doctrine if key scriptures regarding the Trinity were to be discussed.
New World Translation
John 1:1 (New World Translation): “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was a god*.” (* or, was divine)
19 Other Versions Disagree
The Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Brilliant Bible Scholars Discredit JW.org New World Translation
The following is a list of commentaries made by bible scholars pertaining to the Jehovah’s Witnesses New World Translation bible. (*This list has been graciously provided by BlueLetterBible.org)
– DR. J.R. MANTEY (who is quoted on pages 1158-1159, of the Society’s Kingdom Interlinear Translation): “A shocking mistranslation”. “Obsolete and incorrect”. “It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 “The Word was a god.”
– DR. BRUCE M. METZGER of Princeton University (Professor New Testament Language and Literature): “A frightful mistranslation…”, “erroneous…”, “pernicious…” “reprehensible...”. “If the Jehovah’s Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists.”
– DR. SAMUEL J. MIKOLASKI of Zurich, Switzerland: “This anarthrous (used without the article) construction does not mean what the indefinite article ‘a’ means in English. It is monstrous to translate the phrase ‘the Word was a god.'”
– DR. PAUL L. KAUFFMAN of Portland, Oregon: “The Jehovah’s Witnesses [translators] evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets of Greek grammar in their mistranslation of John 1:1.”
– DR. CHARLES L. FEINBERG of La Mirada, California: “I can assure you that the rendering which the Jehovah’s Witnesses give John 1:1 is not held by any reputable Greek scholar.”
– DR. JAMES L. BOYER of Winona Lake, Indiana: “I have never heard of, or read of any Greek scholar who would agree to the interpretation of this [John 1:1] verse insisted upon by the Jehovah’s Witnesses… I have never encountered one of them [Society member] who had any knowledge of the Greek language.”
– DR. WALTER MARTIN (who does not teach Greek but has studied the language): “The translation ‘a god’ instead of ‘God’ is erroneous and unsupported by any good Greek scholarship, ancient or contemporary, and is a translation rejected by all recognized scholars of the Greek language, many of whom are not even Christians, and cannot fairly be said to be biased in favor of the orthodox contention.”
– DR. WILLIAN BARCLAY of the University of Glasgow, Scotland (Leading translation scholar in Great Britain): “The deliberate distortion of truth by this sect is seen in their New Testament translations. John 1:1 is translated: ‘the Word was a god.’ a translation which is grammatically impossible. It is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest.”
– DR. F.F. BRUCE of the University of Manchester, England (Leading scholar in Great Britain): “Much is made by Arian amateur grammarians of the omission of the definite article with ‘God’ in the phrase ‘and the Word was God.’ Such an omission is common with nouns in a predicative construction… ‘a god’ would be totally indefensible.”
– DR. ERNEST C. COLWELL of the University of Chicago: “A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb... this statement cannot be regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in the confession of Thomas: ‘My Lord and my God.’-John 20:28.”
– DR. PHILIP B. HARNER of Heidelberg College: “The verb preceding an anarthrous predicate, would probably mean that the LOGOS was ‘a god’ or a divine being of some kind, belonging to the general category of THEOS but a distinct being from HO THEOS. In the form the John actually uses, the word THEOS is placed at the beginning for emphasis [thus ruling out the ‘a god’ translation].”
– DR. J. JOHNSON of California State University, Long Beach: “No justification whatsoever for translating THEOS EN HO LOGOS as ‘the Word was a god.’ There is no syntactical parallel to Acts 23:6 where there is a statement in indirect discourse; John 1:1 is direct… I am neither a Christian nor a Trinitarian.”
– DR. EUGENE A. NIDA, head of Translation Department, American Bible Society: “With regard to John 1:1, there is of course a complication simply because the New World Translation was apparently done by persons who did not take seriously the syntax of the Greek.”
– DR. B.F. WESTCOTT : “The predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in John 4:24. It is necessarily without the article… No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by [this] form of expression, which simply affirms the true deity of the Word… in the third clause ‘the Word’ is declared to be ‘God’, and so included in the unity of the Godhead.”
– DR. J.J. GRIESBACH (whose Greek New Testament text – is used in the JW’s publication The Emphatic Diaglott): “So numerous and clear are the arguments and testimonies of Scriptures in favor of the true Deity of Christ, that I can hardly imagine how, upon the admission of the Divine authority of Scripture, and with regard to fair rules of interpretation, this doctrine can by any man be called in doubt. Especially the passage, John 1:1-3, is so clear and so superior to all exception, that by no daring efforts of either commentators or critics can it be snatched out of the hands of the defenders of the truth.”
Learn more:
More errors in the JW Bible (apostates)
