NWT Aberrations

This is a repository of emendations, additions and deletions that I have found in the NWT that do not have authority from the Greek texts, as we have them. It is a working document subject to frequent update and revision.

NB NWT = 2013 edition; NWTR = 1984 Reference Bible It is often stated that JWs have their own Bible. Review this evidence and decide for yourself.

Luke 22:29 ‘and I make a [covenant] with you, just as my Father has made a [covenant] with me, for a kingdom,’ I bestow on you a kingdom, just as my father has bestowed one on me (BSB)

The ‘Kingdom Covenant’ is based upon these inserted words – one separate from the New Covenant and only between Jesus and his chosen ones. WTS is very confused. See too Appendix 7D of the Reference Bible and its list of 33 instances of diatheke in which Luke 22:29 does NOT feature!

Hebrews 9:16-17 For where there is a covenant, the death of the [human] covenanter needs to be established, 17 because a covenant is valid at death, since it is not in force as long as the [human] covenanter is living.
In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. (NIV)

According to NWT, either Jehovah is mortal or he has never made a covenant. The problems with being dogmatic about words irrespective of context. ‘Will’ makes so much more sense. Bogged down by the above appendix!

Matthew 26:26-28 – also Mr 13, Lu 22, 1 Co 11 As they continued eating, Jesus took a loaf, and after saying a blessing, he broke it, and giving it to the disciples, he said: “Take, eat. This [means] (estin, to be, is) my body.” 27 And taking a cup, he offered thanks and gave it to them, saying: “Drink out of it, all of you, 28 for this [means] my ‘blood of the covenant,’ which is to be poured out in behalf of many for forgiveness of sins.
…Take and eat; this is my body …this is my blood of the covenant, (NIV et al)
Compare John 6:55 ‘for my flesh is (estin) true food and my blood is (estin) true drink.’ (NWT)

Revelation 5:10 ‘…and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule [as kings] over (epi, on or over depending on belief) the earth.’
…and they will reign on the earth (NIV et al).

The words ‘as kings’ does not appear in the W&H Greek text and only Weymouth plus two others go with ‘over’ the earth, according to the parallel texts in the Bible Hub library. All others go with either ‘on the earth’ or ‘upon the earth’. Greek epi – preposition. Here, with genitive, so over, upon. But note v13 referring to every creature upon the earth (gen) and on the sea (gen). If New Jerusalem descends following the marriage of the Lamb (Rev 21), perhaps they do reign on earth. Regarding ‘as kings’ note the prophecy at Isaiah 32:1 A king will reign for righteousness and princes will rule for justice. One king, many princes. Interpretation!
See also: Rom 5:14,17,17,21,21, 6:12, 1 Cor 4:8,8, 15:25, 1 Tim 6:15, Rev 5:10, 11:15,17, 19:6, 20:4, 6, 22:5 from basileus; to rule; to reign

2 Timothy 2:12 if we go on enduring, we will also rule together [as kings]; if we deny, he will also deny us;

Kings might be an implied role but it is not explicit. See also 1 Cor 4:8 from symbasileuo to reign together, co-reign

Romans 3:24 ‘…and it is as a [free] gift that they are being declared righteous’

Tautology. A gift is not a gift if it is not free. If it has to be paid for, it is not a gift.
Better: freely by his grace (NIV), by his grace as a gift (ESV).
See also: Matt 10:8,8, John 15:25, 2 Cor 11:7, Gal 2:21, 2 Th 3:8, Rev 21:6, 22:17

Revelation 7:15 That is why they are before the throne of God, and they are rendering him sacred service day and night in his (temple – naos, sanctuary, divine habitation (KIT), not hieron, complex incl. courtyards); and the One seated on the throne will spread his tent over them.

This great crowd is in the presence of Jehovah, in his sanctuary, in heaven, wherever and whatever that proves to be. Not in earthly courtyards - the Greek does not support this.

Revelation 15:4 ‘Who will not really fear you, Jehovah, and glorify your name, for you alone are [loyal] (hosios (adj), holy, pious, godly, beloved of God - Str 3741)? For all the nations will come and worship before you, because your righteous decrees have been revealed.’
For you alone are holy (NIV, NLT, BLB, NKJV et al).

The cross reference from 15:4 is to Jeremiah 3:12: “‘“Return, O renegade Israel,” declares Jehovah.’ ‘“I will not look down angrily on you, for I am [loyal],” declares Jehovah.’ ‘“I will not stay resentful forever…”’ Does not the more common rendering of ‘merciful’ (NLT, ESV, BSB, KJV, et al) make more sense? 3741 has eight instances, 3742 hosiotes (n) has two (Lu 1:75, Eph 4:24) 3743 hosiós (adv) (1 Th 2:10).
Note: hosios refers to that which is intrinsically holy - such as Jehovah. The more common word translated 'holy' is hagios, something that has become holy through the application of holy spirit, that has been consecrated for holy purposes. Holy ones, saints and the like.

Revelation 17:14 These will battle with the Lamb, but because he is Lord of lords and King of kings, the Lamb will conquer them. Also, those with him who are called and chosen and faithful [will do so].
…and those who are with him are called, chosen, and faithful. (NKJV)

That humans will participate in slaughter from heaven has no scriptural basis.

1 Timothy 5:20 Reprove before all [onlookers] those who practice sin, as a warning to the rest. But those sinning, rebuke before all, that others also may fear (BLB)

I believe the whole congregation is here referred as per several translations.

Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good. And what is Jehovah requiring of you? Only to exercise justice, to [cherish loyalty] (hesed, favour, good deed, kindly, loving kindness, merciful, mercy, pity, reproach, wicked thing), and to walk in modesty with your God!
…and to love kindness (NWTR, ESV, NASB etc) …and to love mercy (NIV, NLT, BSB, KJV etc)

2 Corinthians 5:20 Therefore, we are ambassadors [substituting] for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us. As [substitutes] for Christ, we beg: “Become reconciled to God.”
Therefore we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making this appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ: Be reconciled to God. (BSB)

Substitute – one that takes the place of another; a replacement
Ambassador – an authorised messenger or representative
Humans can represent Christ – they can never, individually or collectively, replace him! Any suggestion to the contrary is blasphemy. But Jesus did substitute himself for us when he bore our sins so that we could become righteous in God’s sight (v21).

1 Corinthians 11:28 First let a man approve himself [after scrutiny], and only then let him eat of the loaf and drink of the cup.

Perhaps some unnecessary intensification of the approval in order to dissuade through fear the partaking at the remembrance of the Lord’s evening meal?

Romans 8:1 (et al) Therefore, those in [union with] Christ Jesus have no condemnation.

Acts 11:26 After he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year they assembled with them in the congregation and taught quite a crowd, and it was first in Antioch that the disciples were [by divine providence] called Christians.

This is an interpretation of chrematizai in which some scholars suggest divine input but most do not – ‘got the name of Christians’ (Ellicott), ‘given at the first by the inhabitants of… Antioch’ (MacLaren). Barnes discusses possible origins such as by their enemies in derision, themselves, or by divine intimation. Poole is happy with the divine authority. Gill follows Barnes. Cambridge Bible – by the heathen. Pulpit dismisses Jews and derision and suggests the Romans encamped at Antioch or the Greek population. Of all the translations in Bible Hub, only Smith and Young include divine origins.

Acts 8:36 Now as they were going along the road, they came to [a body of] water, and the eunuch said: “Look! Here is water; what prevents me from getting baptized?”

Lit – they came to water… here is water. Verses 38 and 39 say that they ‘both went down into the water… up out of the water’. Therefore ‘a body of’ is an unnecessary insertion.

Regarding loyal love Loyal Loyalty KJV 0 0 1984 Reference Bible 42 (8 NT) 4 (2 NT) 2013 NWT 273 (9 NT, add Rev 15:4) 10 (2 NT)
The majority of these additional instances of ‘loyal’ are due to the indiscriminate replacement of ‘loving kindness’ with ‘loyal love’. The Hebrew word is chesedh (Strong 2617) means ‘favour, good deed, kindly, loving kindness, merciful kindness, mercy, pity, reproach, wicked thing. From chacad; kindness; by implication (towards God) piety, rarely (by opposition) reproof; Beauty – favour, good deed(-liness), kindly, (loving-)kindness, merciful (kindness), mercy, pity, reproach, wicked thing. ‘The Hebrew word checed is a rich and multifaceted term that encompasses the ideas of love, kindness, mercy and loyalty. It is often used to describe God’s covenantal love and faithfulness towards His people. In human relationships, it can refer to acts of kindness and loyalty that go beyond duty or obligation. ‘Checed’ is a central theme in the Hebrew Bible, reflecting the character of God as compassionate and faithful.’ (Berean Strong’s Lexicon) It seems that both loving kindness and loyal love are acceptable translations of this word. So why the change? What was the motivation behind this act of wholesale substitution? The GB demand unquestioning loyalty to their doctrines, policies and leadership. Those who query their position, even sincerely, are made to disappear! I wonder if it is part of the propaganda?

Colossians 1:15-18. . .He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. 17 Also, he is before all [other] things, and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist, 18 and he is the head of the body, the congregation. . .

At least the square brackets feature in NWTR. Note Heb 1:3 – ‘He (Jesus) is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact representation of his very being, and he (Jesus) sustains all things by the word of his power. And after he had made a purification for our sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high’. Also 1:10 ‘And: “At the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands…”’. A quote from Ps 102:25-27 verbatim. The Psalmist applies these words to Jehovah but the author of Hebrews applies them to Jesus. So apart from himself what things did Jesus not create? Xref is to Lu 11:41-42 where ‘other’ is twice inserted, and used as justification, but neither verse has a Greek corresponding word. ‘Every()thing is clean for you’, ‘Mint, rue and every () herb’ – other seems superfluous.

Heb 1:8 But about the Son, he says: “God is your throne forever and ever, and the sceptre of your Kingdom is the sceptre of uprightness (NWT)
Your throne, God, is forever and ever; (NASB)
Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; (NIV)
Psalm 45:6 Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; (NIV)
Your throne, God, is forever and ever; (NASB)
God is your throne forever and ever; (NWT)

To fit their theology regarding the nature of Jesus, this verse in Hebrews has been changed as above. Alas, it is a quote from the Psalms so this has been changed too! Barnes – ‘Unitarians proposed to translate this, ‘God is thy throne;’ but how can God be a throne of a creature? What is the meaning of such an expression? Where is there is one parallel?’ According to the interlinear ‘O God’ is in the Greek vocative case – addressing – whereas NWT puts it in the nominative.

Heb 1:6 But when he again brings his Firstborn into the inhabited earth, he says: “And let all of God’s angels do obeisance to him.”

Proskuneo (4352) to fawn, crouch to prostrate oneself in homage (do reverence to, adore) – worship – Strong. Times 60 but NWTR changes 18 into ‘obeisance’. Do the angels do obeisance or do they worship God’s firstborn? Yes – it’s the same! Check the cross references. Again – is this the second ‘and again’ linking the third argument of the passage or referring to Jesus’s second advent?
HELPS – properly to kiss the ground when prostrating before a superior; to worship, to adore, do obeisance. NWT translates this word as obeisance when it refers to Jesus, worship elsewhere. Interpretation! Mt 2:2 the astrologers came to do obeisance (to the child Jesus). Mt 4:9-10 do an act of worship to me. Go away, it is Jehovah your God [Lord the God] you must worship. Same word, different translation. On what basis, other than theological bias?

Acts 20:28 …the congregation of God which he purchased with the blood of his own [Son] (NWTR).

Does God purchase the congregation with the blood of his own son or with his own blood, given that ‘Son’ is not in the Greek and thus inserted into the English? A very difficult passage. Is it the church of God (tou theou) or the church of the Lord (tou Kyriou)? Scholars argue both ways. Ignatius and Tertullian both go with ‘blood of God’. I think I am inclined to accept NWT even though this is not how the Greek manuscripts read. ‘with the blood the own – dia tou aimatos tou idiou’. However note this…
Zechariah 12:10 …and they will look to the one whom they pierced… (NWT) …and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced… (KJV) They will look upon me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn… (NIV). Clearly a prophetic reference to the manner of Christ’s death but this passage in Zechariah begins ‘A pronouncement: The word of Jehovah concerning Israel…’. So who is ‘me’ in v10? Rather than tackle this admittedly challenging piece, they simply change ‘me’ into ‘the one’ and hope nobody notices. Note John 19:34,37 (quoting Zechariah); Rev 1:7. All clearly refer to Jesus, so who is the ‘me’ in Zechariah? At least NWTR has ‘Son’ bracketed to alert the reader to a potential difficulty but the brackets have been dropped in NWT so how would the average reader know?

John 17:3 This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you… (NWTR).
This means everlasting life, [their coming] to know you… (NWT).
And this is life eternal, that they should know thee… (ASV).

A rare case of the 2013 edition being better than the previous, although ‘their coming’ is rather superfluous. Is everlasting life the result of knowing God or knowing about God? There is a big difference. The verb is in the subjunctive which implies personal, relational, or experiential knowledge, not just intellectual knowledge. It expresses potential, possibility or purpose rather than a statement of fact. Copilot suggests ‘that they may know you’ as a more precise rendering of ina ginoskosin. One can know quite a lot about other people, for example, from their biography, but we can only truly know someone by being with them, talking to them, sharing life’s journey; laughing together, crying together. This is why the 1984 version is hopelessly wrong. Believing God exists, that he is the creator of the universe, living a good life, performing ecclesiastical rules and rituals, even performing powerful works perhaps, are not substitutes for knowing God.

Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to his disciples: “If anyone wants to come after me, let him disown himself and pick up his torture stake and [keep] following me. (NWT) Or ‘and [continually] follow me.’ (NWTR)

The verb ‘to follow’ here is in the imperative mood and would normally be translated simply as ‘follow me’. ‘Keep following me’ is also in the imperative so both versions are grammatically correct. However NWT is once again an outlier, with the vast majority of Bibles going with the simpler ‘follow me’. I suppose it comes down to interpretation and what the translators are wishing to highlight – the following or the eternal nature of the following. (See further examples below).

Three more examples (of many) of stated continuance that are not in the Greek text. These from the Sermon on the Mount:
Matthew 5:43, 44 “You heard that it was said: ‘You must love your neighbour and hate your enemy.’ 44 However, I say to you: [Continue to] love your enemies and to pray for those who persecute you…
Greek - agapate tous echthrous hymon (love the enemies of you). As they were hating their enemy it was impossible for them to continue doing something that they were not currently doing.
Matthew 6:33 “[Keep on, then, seeking] (Seek) first the Kingdom and his righteousness, and all these other things will be added to you.
Greek – zeteite de proton ten basileian (seek but first the kingdom). Again this seeking was an activity, a mindset, that they needed to embrace. They had not been seeking up to that point.
Matthew 7:1, 2 “[Stop judging] (Judge not) that you may not be judged; 2 for with the judgement you are judging, you will be judged, and with the measure that you are measuring out, they will measure out to you.
Greek – Me krinete (not judge). When saying ‘Stop’ the inference is that they had been judging, an inference that is not in the Greek. Jesus is not accusing his listeners of judging. He simply points out that they should not judge due to the awful consequences of so doing.

Ephesians 4:8 For it says: “When he ascended on high he carried away captives; he gave gifts in men.”

Men – anthropois – is in the dative case, hence ‘to men’. What were those gifts? V11: apostles, prophets, evangelisers, shepherds, teachers, to readjust and to minister, to build the body of Christ.

Psalm 130:4 For with you there is [true] forgiveness…

Surely Jehovah either forgives or he does not forgive? A prototype for us to follow.

Matthew 5:3 Happy are those conscious of their spiritual need…

Lit poor in spirit – ptochoi to pneumati. Whilst NWT is not wrong per se, neither is it translation. The translators have strayed into interpretation and secreting such into the word of God is not the right thing to do.
Blessed – makarios. Happy is a temporal state, blessed is permanent. We can be happy but not blessed. We can be blessed whilst not being happy. They are not synonymous terms.

1 Timothy 2:4 whose will is that all [sorts of] people should be saved and come to an accurate knowledge of truth. (NWT) all [sorts of] men (NWTR). Who wants all people to be saved… (NIV).

Greek pantas anthropous – all men. So why have the translators of NWT decided that God’s will is not that all men (people) be saved but that only ‘all sorts’ of men be saved? Jehovah populated the ark with all sorts of animals, suitable for his post-diluvian breeding programme. The vast majority were swept away in the flood. Humans, made in the image of God, are not unreasoning animals. God’s will is that everyone be saved but perhaps the elitist views of WTS do not allow for this.
Note too Jo 1:7 (that all might believe, enlightening every man - v9), Jo 12:32 (all I shall draw), Ro 5:18 (judgement for all men, justification for all men), 1 Cor 9:22 (to all I have become all), 1 Tim 2:1 (supplications… concerning all men), 1 Tim 4:10 (saviour of all men, especially faithful ones), Tit 2:3 (saving all men), 1 Pet 2:17 (honour all [men]). Other examples - Matt 9:35 curing every disease and every softness (sickness), 1 Tim 6:10 root of all evil is [money] An example of revision - 1 Pet 2:1 all sorts of backbiting (NWTR) – all backbiting (NWT).

Titus 2:13, 14 . . .while we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and [of our] [the] Saviour [of us], Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to set us free from every sort of lawlessness and to cleanse for himself a people who are his own special possession, zealous for fine works.

Lit. kai doxes epiphaneian tou hemon megalou Theou kai Soteros Iesou Christou – and glorious appearance of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ. Question – one person or two? NWTR appendix 6E argues, entirely on a tenuous point of grammar, that this is two persons – our great God, and Jesus Christ. Elllicott, Pulpit et al state that the grammar is ambiguous and that, whilst this is not incorrect, so too does it support the idea of just one person – our great God Jesus Christ. Second question – should our beliefs be based on a point of technicality that very few of us fully understand? The vast majority of JWs reading that appendix will glaze over and lose the will to live! Putting aside other peoples doctrine and agenda, what is Paul actually saying in this verse? The key word is epiphaneian – manifestation, appearance (of a divine being), sudden insight, understanding. Specifically, the advent of Christ (past or future) – Strong 2015. It appears six times in scripture. At 2 Tim 1:10 it refers to a past event (probably his baptism), but all the others refer to his future presence, coming, advent, parousia, whatever you wish to call it, the event about which his disciples questioned him – when will be the sign of your presence? Are Christ’s followers expecting a manifestation of God, the Father, Jehovah? Nowhere in scripture is this taught, yet by insisting that this verse refers to two persons, WTS implicitly, (unwittingly?), promote this idea. What do you believe?

Revelation 22:2 On both sides of the river were trees of life… (on each side of the river stood the tree of life – NIV; on either side of the river stood a tree of life - BSB) And the leaves of the trees were for the healing of the nations. (leaves of the tree – NIV, BSB). NWTR ftn lit. tree V14 …that they may have authority to go to the trees of life… (right to the tree of life – NIV, BSB)

One tree, the tree of life that was in Eden, or many trees? One tree on both sides of a river. A conundrum!

Galatians 6:1 …you who have spiritual [qualifications] try to readjust such a man…

The idea of qualifications appears eight times in NWTR. At 1 Tim 3:2 and 2 Tim 2:24 is the Greek word didaktikos 1317 adj. – apt to teach, able to teach; from didaktos 1318 adj. – instructive. At 2 Cor 3:5 is hikanotes 2426 n. ability, competence, sufficiency; from hikanos, of which there are four occurrences of (2425) adj. competent, ample, fit, able. These are found at 2 Cor 2:16, 3:5, 3:6, 2 Tim 2:2. At Galatians 6:1, Paul simply refers to those who are spiritual – pnuematikos 4152 adj. spiritual. So the word ‘qualifications’ here is another unauthorised insertion. I suppose it perpetuates the idea that only those who have been through the rabbinical schools of the WTS are spiritual. It gives their elders a monopoly over everything that happens in the congregation.

Acts 10:36 He sent out the word to the sons of Israel to declare to them the good news of peace through Jesus Christ: this One is Lord of all [others] (NWTR)

This is one that has been corrected in NWT. Jesus really is Lord of all.

Romans 8:1 Therefore those in union with Christ Jesus have no condemnation.

In this one, the word ‘now’ nun has been deleted. ‘Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ’ (BSB). The ‘Therefore’ here refers back to the question ‘Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God, through Jesus Christ our Lord!’ (7:24-25). Through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus we have been set ‘free from the law of sin and death’ (8:2). The WTS teaches that there is no salvation yet for any Jehovah’s Witness. Should we remain in Christ, our salvation is assured, now that we have been rescued.

Romans 8:23 Not only that, but we ourselves also who have the firstfruits, namely, the spirit, yes, we ourselves groan within ourselves, while we are earnestly waiting for adoption as sons, the release from our bodies by ransom.

The Greek here translated release by ransom is apolutrosis – deliverance, redemption, lit. buying back what was previously lost. We are redeemed by Christ now. We are not waiting for the disposal of our bodies. So ‘redemption of our bodies’ (BSB, NIV, KJV, etc).

Romans 8:28 Now we know that God makes all his works cooperate together for the good of those who love God, those who are the ones called according to his purpose;
In all things God works for the good of those who love him (NIV),
God works all things together for the good… (BSB),
all things together for good to them that love God (KJV)

All things to all his works.

Romans 8:29 …because those whom he gave his first recognition he also foreordained to be patterned after the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
For those God foreknew he also predestined… (NIV, BSB etc)

Foreknew to recognition

Galatians 6:18 The undeserved kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with the spirit YOU [show], brothers. Amen.

your spirit to the spirit you show. An attitude or an entity?

1 Timothy 4:1 However, the inspired utterance says definitely that in later periods of time some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired utterances and teachings of demons,

‘The spirit’ changed to ‘inspired utterance’. A message or a person? What is the purpose of the change?
Similarly at 1 John 4:1-6 the phrase ‘inspired expression’ occurs eight times. In NWTR ftn lit. spirit Gr. pneumati. 4151 pnuema – properly, spirit (Spirit), wind or breath. The most frequent meaning (translation) of 4151 in the NT is ‘spirit’ (‘Spirit’). Only the context however determines which sense(s) is meant... when the attributive adjective ‘holy’ is used it always refers to the Holy Spirit. Helps.
Here we have ‘me panti pneumati pistuete…’ (lit. not every spirit believe).
‘The true and false teachers of religion alike claimed to be under the influence of the Spirit of God, and it was of importance that all such pretensions should be examined. It was not to be admitted because anyone claimed to have been sent from God that therefore he was sent. Every claim should be subjected to the proper proof before it was conceded’. (Barnes)
By ‘spirits’ he means those tendencies towards good and evil which may be considered as coming from the supreme power of God, on the one hand, and from the inferior power of the devil, on the other. (Ellicott)
So clearly important to test.