Jehovah's Witnesses: Is the New World Translation really the MOST accurate English bible translation?

I don't normally do this - I have the utmost respect for Jehovah's Witnesses and their beliefs, and I have read a large portion of the New World Translation (well over half). I state here in advance that I sincerely apologize if anyone is offended by this question. It is NOT my intention to offend... show more I don't normally do this - I have the utmost respect for Jehovah's Witnesses and their beliefs, and I have read a large portion of the New World Translation (well over half). I state here in advance that I sincerely apologize if anyone is offended by this question. It is NOT my intention to offend anyone.

However...

In a recent question, one answerer claimed without reservation that the New World Translation (NWT) was the most accurate bible translation.

Now - I'm willing to concede Anglocentrism, and suppose that the writer of this claim was not thinking at all about foreign language bibles.

However, here is my question - in two parts.

1) Do you believe that the NWT is more accurate than any other English translation?

2) If so, WHY do you believe that the NWT is more accurate than **any other** English translation? That is, what evidence do you have supporting that the NWT is more accurate than all other English translations? I'm not talking about 8 other English translations of questionable repute - I'm talking about all of them.
http://www.bible-reviews.com/charts_basic.html

I have some concluding questions as well:

3) Is it *right* to claim that the NWT is the most accurate English translation unless someone has evaluated the accuracy of the *entire* text of the NWT with the *entire* text of every single other English translation?

4) Has anyone at all evaluated the accuracy of the entire text of the NWT and compared it to an evaluation of the accuracy of the entire text of any other bible?

Maybe I'm wrong to let this "get my back up" so to speak - I guess it's because I'm trained as a scientist. When a claim is made, the claim should accurately reflect the meaning intended. The NWT with References has some very good features - I do not mean to discredit the NWT one iota. However, I have no faith in a claim such as this when it seems as if there is literally no evidence whatsoever to support the claim as stated.

I sincerely mean no offense!


Jim
Update: Adam B: this is exactly the type of claim I was talking about. Please let me explain why I object. I know of BeDuhn & "Truth in Translation". I have not read it, but I have read carefully the conclusion and how it was reached. 1) It compares only 9 bibles. There are literally dozens of English... show more Adam B: this is exactly the type of claim I was talking about. Please let me explain why I object.

I know of BeDuhn & "Truth in Translation". I have not read it, but I have read carefully the conclusion and how it was reached.

1) It compares only 9 bibles. There are literally dozens of English bibles in print. At best, DeBuhn could only support the claim that the NWT is more accurate than 8 other particular English bibles. Only 8.

2) It analyzes accuracy by comparing only particular New Testament verses that, in BeDuhn's opinion, are frequently poorly translated. In other words, it does not evaluate the accuracy of the entire NWT and compare that to an evaluation of any other entire bible. At best, DeBuhn could only support the claim that the NWT is more accurate than 8 other particular English bibles when comparing a very specific selection of verses.

more...
Update 2: My point: BeDuhn is very good evidence that certain verses of the NWT New Testament are, collectively, more accurately translated than the same verses in 8 other English bibles. BeDuhn is "circumstantial" evidence that the NWT is, as a whole, more accurately translated than those 8 bibles. BeDuhn in... show more My point: BeDuhn is very good evidence that certain verses of the NWT New Testament are, collectively, more accurately translated than the same verses in 8 other English bibles. BeDuhn is "circumstantial" evidence that the NWT is, as a whole, more accurately translated than those 8 bibles. BeDuhn in **no way** "supports the superior accuracy of the NWT over any other English text". That is, to be blunt, an unjustifiable claim - unjustifiable because the evidence in no way supports such a claim.
Update 3: Rick G: Some good points - but these are, as we might say, threads of the cloth. Certainly consistent translation of words can be a huge advantage. I myself favor the New Jerusalem Bible (NJB) because it does things like transliterate "sheol" and "hades" and the tetragrammaton rather then... show more Rick G: Some good points - but these are, as we might say, threads of the cloth. Certainly consistent translation of words can be a huge advantage. I myself favor the New Jerusalem Bible (NJB) because it does things like transliterate "sheol" and "hades" and the tetragrammaton rather then attempting to provide a less-than-precise translation. But this also brings home my point: here we have the NJB (and the earlier Jerusalem Bible) showing this same consistency of translation in the very same particulars that you mention - and the NWT, JB and NJB are not alone in this (though nearly so). SO - has any biblical languages expert compared the accuracy of the NWT to the NJB?

BTW - it so happens that these are the sort of features that I find attractive in the NWT. But even the NJB - which I favor - I can say no more than, "In my opinion, it is the best English translation available today".

About bible words
http://www.bible-reviews.com/topics_accuracy_words.html
20 answers 20