Editing New World Translation (section)

=== Overall review ===

In its review of Bible translations released from 1955 to 1985, ''The HarperCollins Bible Dictionary'' listed the ''New World Translation'' among the major modern translations.{{sfn|Bratcher|1996|pp=292}}

In 1982, [[Renewal theologian|Pentecostal theologian]] [[Gordon Fee]] and [[Douglas Stuart (biblical scholar)|Douglas K. Stuart]] in their ''How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth'' refer to the ''New World Translation'' as being an "extremely literal translation" filled with "heretical doctrines".<ref>{{cite book|title=How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth: A Guide to Understanding the Bible|first1=Gordon D.|last1=Fee|first2=Douglas K.|last2=Stuart|publisher=Zondervan|date=1982|isbn=9780310373612|quote=Among the whole Bible translations not discussed are some that are theologically biased, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation (1961). This is an extremely literal translation filled with the heretical doctrines of this cult|pages=41|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=blUgAQAAIAAJ}}</ref> In 1985, [[Alan Stewart Duthie]] responded to the assertion by Fee & Stuart that the NWT is "filled with the heretical doctrines of this cult",{{sfn|Duthie|1985|pp=20}} stating that although "there are some heretical doctrines to be found ... [it] does not reach even 0.1% of the whole, which is very far from 'full'".{{sfn|Duthie|1985|pp=70}} Duthie adds "if your purpose is to study the Bible in detail [...] then you can be recommended to use [[New Jerusalem Bible|NJB]] or [[New American Bible|NAB]] for their accessibility and commentary features, or study edition of other translations. If your study interest is more in the original wording, then you could use [[Revised Standard Version|RSV]] or NWT or [[NASV]]".{{sfn|Duthie|1985|pp=114}}

In October 1996, James B. Parkinson compared various translations and gave scores for accuracy for 30 Old Testament translations and 51 New Testament translations.{{sfn|Parkinson|1996|pp=}} Parkinson gave a score of 76 to the NWT Old Testament (1960).{{sfn|Parkinson|1996|pp=}} For the New Testament he gave the NWT (1950) overall: 75, manuscripts: 99 and translation: 66.5. He scored the ''[[Kingdom Interlinear Translation]]'' (1985) overall: 80, manuscripts: 99 and translation: 73.5.{{sfn|Parkinson|1996|pp=}} Parkinson stated, "the Jehovah's Witnesses' New World Translation (NWT, 1950) offers a relatively accurate translation from a different theological perspective. Like Rotherham, though, it is often not smooth reading."{{sfn|Parkinson|1996|pp=}}

[[Jason BeDuhn]] stated in 2003 that the differences between Jehovah's Witnesses' theology and that of mainstream denominations, "creates a hostile atmosphere in which every representative of that mainstream theology charges that any variation in the NW from more familiar translation must serve the ulterior motives of distorting the 'truth'".{{sfn|BeDuhn|2003|pp=38–39}}

In 2004, [[Anthony Byatt]] and Hal Flemings published their anthology ''{{'}}Your Word is Truth', Essays in Celebration of the 50th Anniversary of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (1950, 1953)''. They included essays responding to criticism of the ''New World Translation'' from non-Witnesses, and a bibliography of reviews of the work.{{sfn|Williams|2006|pp=54}}

[[George D. Chryssides]] stated in 2019 that the unfavourable criticisms by [[H. H. Rowley|Harold Henry Rowley]] (1953), Julius R. Mantey (1974) and [[William Barclay (theologian)|William Barclay]] (1953) "were extremely vague", but that [[Bruce M. Metzger]] (1953) "mentioned a few specific passages which he believed were wrongly translated."{{sfn|Chryssides|2019|pp=232}}