In June 2024, Jehovah’s Witnesses introduced their latest scriptural offering, the revised New World Translation Study Bible, released across multiple languages worldwide. Published by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, this edition comes with a host of study aids, updated language, and a clear intent to serve their global community of roughly 9 million members. While its accessibility and ambitious rollout are notable, a closer look at this work raises significant questions about its reliability as a faithful representation of the biblical text. This article dives into the specifics of the 2024 releases, their features, and their broader implications as of February 28, 2025, with an eye toward its claims of accuracy and usefulness.

The 2024 Releases: Scope and Scale

The 2024 New World Translation Study Bible debuted in six languages during the “Declare the Good News!” conventions in June, targeting diverse groups from Armenia to Panama. Here’s how it unfolded:

1. Armenian (Eastern Armenian)
   • Released June 28 near Yerevan to 6,155 attendees, this full Bible hit digital platforms immediately, with print copies promised later. It serves about three million speakers, including 10,550 Witnesses.
2. Icelandic
   • Launched June 28 in Reykjavík with 1,312 present, this complete Bible was available in print and online right away for Iceland’s 395 Witnesses and 390,000 residents.
3. Ngangela
   • Released June 28 in Angola, this partial edition (Matthew, Luke, Acts) went digital instantly, targeting a smaller Angolan community with plans for more to come.
4. Ngabere
   • Unveiled June 30 via streaming to 2,032 in Costa Rica and Panama, this single-book release (Matthew) was printed and digitized for 216,000 speakers, including 877 Witnesses.
5. Two Additional Languages
   • Details are sparse, but these releases round out the six, likely aimed at niche linguistic pockets consistent with the Witnesses’ outreach.

The effort is impressive in its global reach, no doubt. Digital access via jw.org and the JW Library app, alongside free print distribution, reflects a well-oiled operation. But scope alone doesn’t guarantee substance.

Features: Tools with a Tilt

The 2024 Study Bible isn’t just a text—it’s a package. It includes study notes, footnotes, marginal references, and digital extras like audio, videos, and images. The language has been tweaked for modern readers while claiming fidelity to the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek originals. Here’s what stands out:

• Study Notes: These unpack historical and cultural details but seem heavily shaped to reinforce Witnesses’ teachings—like their stance on God’s name or the afterlife. They’re less about exploration and more about affirmation.
• Footnotes: Offering alternative renderings and textual notes, these could be helpful but often justify questionable translation choices rather than wrestle with them.
• Marginal References: Useful for connecting ideas, though the links predictably steer toward Watch Tower doctrine.
• Media and Tech: Maps, timelines, and app features are slick, no denying it. They make the Bible engaging, especially for younger users or new converts.
• Language Updates: The text aims for readability, but some shifts feel more like adaptation to fit a narrative than a reflection of the source.

On the surface, these tools promise depth. Dig deeper, and they reveal a curated lens that prioritizes a specific viewpoint over open inquiry.

Claims vs. Reality

The Witnesses pitch this as a precise, accessible Bible for study and outreach—tied to their 2024 growth (300,000 baptisms, 21 million at their Memorial). They’re not wrong about its utility for their purposes. The notes and references equip members to defend their beliefs, like rejecting core Christian doctrines or emphasizing an earthly hope. The multilingual push aligns with their mission to preach globally.

But here’s the rub: accuracy matters. The New World Translation has long been flagged for rendering choices that diverge from mainstream scholarship—like inserting “Jehovah” into the New Testament where the Greek doesn’t support it, or tweaking John 1:1 to downplay Christ’s divinity. The 2024 edition doesn’t seem to correct these; it doubles down with study aids that defend them. For a work billing itself as a “translation,” that’s a problem. It’s less a window into the original texts and more a mirror reflecting Watch Tower theology.

The partial releases—like Ngangela and Ngabere—hint at pragmatism, starting small to test the waters. Fair enough. But if the foundation’s shaky, expanding it doesn’t fix the cracks.

Practical Impact

There’s no denying the 2024 Study Bible’s reach. By February 28, 2025, it’s a staple in Witness homes, Kingdom Halls, and door-to-door work. The digital rollout was swift—Armenian and Icelandic users had it instantly, and Ngabere congregations got print copies fast. It’s free, too, which amplifies its spread. For a group logging 7.5 million Bible studies in 2024, this is jet fuel for their engine.

Yet, its strengths double as weaknesses. The reliance on tech excludes those without access—think rural Ngangela speakers. And while the Witnesses see it as a tool to clarify truth, its slant risks misleading readers who don’t cross-check it against other sources. A study Bible should illuminate scripture, not dictate it.

A Broader Concern

This release isn’t just a book; it’s a statement. The Witnesses want it to anchor their faith and preaching for years. That ambition’s clear in the fanfare—Governing Body members like Geoffrey Jackson and David Splane fronting the launches. But a Bible’s worth isn’t in its hype or its features—it’s in how true it stays to the text it claims to represent.

The 2024 Study Bible excels as a Witness resource. As a scholarly one? Not so much. Some of Its aids are biased, its text polished but problematic at times. For those seeking the unfiltered word, it’s one must wade through some theological bias. The Witnesses might view it as a triumph; others might see it as a missed opportunity to wrestle honestly with the scriptures they hold dear.

Evaluating the Translation of the 2024 New World Translation Study Bible

The 2024 New World Translation Study Bible, released by Jehovah’s Witnesses in June 2024, reflects a meticulous effort to present scripture in a way accessible to their global membership. Built on the 2013 revision, this translation carries notable strengths alongside clear weaknesses when measured against the Hebrew text of the Old Testament and the Greek of the New Testament. Jehovah’s Witnesses excel in several areas: their handling of the soul, Sheol, and Gehenna aligns with the originals—Genesis 2:7 (“man became a living soul”) matches the Hebrew nephesh as a living being, not an immortal entity, while Sheol and Gehenna denote the grave and destruction, not eternal fire. Their use of Jehovah in the Old Testament, as in Psalm 83:18 (“you whose name is Jehovah”), faithfully restores the Hebrew JHVH, present over 6,800 times. Additionally, their rendering of ecclesia as “congregation,” seen in Matthew 16:18 (“I will build my congregation”), captures the Greek ἐκκλησία (ekklēsia)—literally an assembly of people—better reflecting its meaning as a gathered group rather than the institutional or architectural sense “church” often carries, though “church” remains a valid choice. These decisions hold firm. Yet, the translation falters elsewhere, particularly in the New Testament, where theological assumptions occasionally override linguistic evidence. What follows is a thorough assessment of key examples, grounded in the original languages, to spotlight both its accuracy and its oversteps without undue sensationalism.

The insertion of Jehovah into the New Testament stands out as a prominent misjudgment. At Matthew 4:10, the NWT reads, “Jehovah your God you should worship,” where Jesus cites Deuteronomy 6:13. The Greek, however, is κύριον τὸν θεόν σου (Kurion ton theon sou), “the Lord your God.” No surviving Greek manuscript of the New Testament contains JHVH or a form like Iehova. Jehovah’s Witnesses argue that Jewish NT authors, raised on texts like Isaiah 42:8 (“I am Jehovah, that is my name”), and Jesus, as God incarnate, would logically use Jehovah, especially given promises such as Joel 2:32 (“everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved”), mirrored in Romans 10:13. In the first century C.E., the Jewish taboo against pronouncing God’s name wasn’t fully fixed, and Jesus condemned traditions that voided God’s word (Matthew 15:6). This reasoning carries weight—why would Jewish writers, steeped in the Hebrew Scriptures and Septuagint, abandon a name central to their faith? Yet, the Greek evidence is unambiguous: Kurios (Lord) prevails, likely following the Septuagint’s substitution of JHVH with Kurios, a practice NT authors adopted. Second-century Christian copyists, distancing from Judaism, may have entrenched this, but they weren’t inspired. Without textual support, Jehovah fits in footnotes, not the main text—a line the NWT crosses despite its plausible intent.

Colossians 1:16-17 reveals another slip: “by means of him all other things were created… he is before all other things.” The Greek πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐκτίσθη (panta di’ autou ektisthē) translates “all things were created through him,” with no “other” present. Adding “other” twice reshapes the verse to suggest Christ, as a created being, isn’t the ultimate Creator, countering Trinitarian views. Their notes tie this to Proverbs 8:22 (קָנָנִי, qanani, “produced me”), implying Christ’s origin, but the Greek of Colossians offers no such hint. This insertion lacks manuscript basis and adjusts the grammar to fit doctrine, though some Christian grammars parsing dia (“through”) as instrumental leave room for discussion. The alteration is clear, if not catastrophic.

John 1:1’s rendering—“the Word was with God, and the Word was a god”—strays further. The Greek ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (en archē ēn ho logos, kai ho logos ēn pros ton theon, kai theos ēn ho logos) means “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” The NWT’s “a god” rests on theos lacking the article (ho), proposing an indefinite sense. Greek syntax, however, allows anarthrous predicates before the verb to denote quality or identity, as here. John 20:28 (ὁ κύριός μου καὶ ὁ θεός μου, “my Lord and my God”) uses the article, yet the NWT accepts Thomas addressing Jesus. “A god” leans on theology, not grammar, though scholars like Philip Harner note qualitative options. It’s a stretch beyond the text’s natural reading.

The choice of “torture stake” for stauros at Matthew 27:32 contrasts with the historical σταυρός, widely understood as a cross in Roman execution, per texts like Barnabas 9:8 and archaeological finds (e.g., crossbeam graves). Originally, stauros meant “stake,” and evidence splits—upright poles were used, sometimes with beams. The NWT prefers “torture stake” to sidestep Trinitarian imagery, a defensible stance given the term’s range, though “cross” better fits first-century context. It’s a preference, not a gross error.

Philippians 2:6 reads, “who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God.” The Greek ὃς ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ (hos en morphē theou huparchōn ouch harpagmon hēgēsato to einai isa theō) translates “who, being in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.” “Gave no consideration to a seizure” suggests Christ rejected usurping equality, nudging him away from deity. Harpagmon (grasped) implies something unheld, but morphē theou (form of God) echoes divine essence (cf. Daniel 3:25 LXX). The NWT’s phrasing isn’t far-fetched—some grammars favor an active sense—but “did not grasp” flows truer to the Greek without added spin.

John 8:58’s “before Abraham came into existence, I have been” adjusts ἐγὼ εἰμί (egō eimi), “I am.” The present tense eimi echoes Exodus 3:14’s אֶהְיֶה (ehyeh), “I AM,” linking Jesus to Jehovah’s timelessness. “I have been” softens this, citing tense flexibility, but the Greek’s stark present tense carries deeper intent. The shift aligns with their Christology, though it’s not indefensible per some grammars.

The NWT excels elsewhere. Isaiah 9:6 (“Mighty God”) keeps אֵל גִּבּוֹר (El Gibbor) intact, and Acts 20:28 (“blood of his own Son”) fits τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ ἰδίου (tou haimatos tou idiou), clarified by context. Most verses reflect the originals well—errors aren’t pervasive. Jehovah’s Witnesses aren’t a cult like David Koresh’s; they’re a group with biblical missteps. Christianity’s cult label inflates critiques, but the NWT’s flaws are specific: Jehovah in the NT lacks support, Trinity verses twist grammar, yet much stands solid. It’s a capable translation, marred by targeted choices, not a flood of bias. The Hebrew and Greek reveal a work of skill, worthy of respect despite its stumbles.

Theological Influence at John 14:14: A Textual Departure

A striking sign of theological bias emerges at John 14:14. The Updated American Standard Version (UASV) reads, “If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it,” supported by robust manuscripts like P66, P75vid,* א, B, W, Δ, Θ, f13, 28, 33, 700, and others, as its footnote notes, despite some (A, D, K, L, Π, Ψ, Byz) omitting “me” or replacing it with “the Father” to harmonize with John 16:23. The 2024 NWT Study Bible, however, renders it, “If you ask anything in my name, I will do it,” with a footnote stating, “This reading is supported by some ancient manuscripts and agrees with the wording at Joh 15:16 and 16:23. Other ancient manuscripts read: ‘ask me.’” Their 1984 Reference Bible clarifies their preference for “ask” with A, D, and Italian texts, citing alignment with 15:16 and 16:23, against P66, א, B, W, and others. Jehovah’s Witnesses excel in NTTC, staunchly backing the Alexandrian tradition—Westcott and Hort, Nestle-Aland, and manuscripts like P66, P75, א, and B. Typically, they’d follow this “mountainous evidence,” as P75vid* bolsters “me” alongside UASV and most translations. Yet here, they sidestep it, omitting “me” to avoid implying direct prayer to Jesus, a theological choice over textual fidelity. In 2024, they even obscure the specific manuscripts, a departure from their usual precision. This isn’t ignorance—they know the evidence—but a deliberate lean, subtle yet telling.

* For clarity, the “vid” in P75vid comes from the Latin videtur, meaning “it appears.” Attached to the third-century papyrus P75, it notes that while the manuscript is fragmentary at John 14:14, scholars discern “me” (με) from what remains, bolstered by its alignment with P66, א, and B. This near-certainty strengthens its witness, despite minor damage.

Weighing the 2024 New World Translation: A Call for Measured Judgment

The 2024 New World Translation Study Bible, like any translation, bears the fingerprints of its translators’ beliefs. Its errors—such as inserting Jehovah into the New Testament or adjusting Trinity-related verses like John 1:1 and Colossians 1:16-17—are real, rooted in theological leanings, yet often supported by grammars debated even among broader scholarship. But perspective matters. The Bible contains roughly 783,000 words across 31,102 verses in its Hebrew and Greek texts. The NWT’s missteps, numbering perhaps a dozen prominent examples, affect a tiny fraction of this total. To decry the entire work as a theological sham ignores this scale. Hatred for Jehovah’s Witnesses, fueled by their outlier doctrines, has long spilled into critiques that overstate the NWT’s flaws, painting it as a wholesale distortion. Such hyperbole lacks objectivity and mirrors the very bias it condemns.

All translations carry human imperfection. The Catholic Douay-Rheims renders Psalm 110:1 as “The Lord said to my Lord,” but its notes tie it to Mary’s intercession, a clear theological overlay absent from the Hebrew לַאדֹנִי (ladoni, “to my lord”). [A Catholic paraphrastic annotation on Psalm 109:1 (Douay-Rheims numbering). Quote: “The Lord said to my Lord—Christ is exalted, and Mary, His mother, intercedes for us that His enemies be subdued.”]* The New Jerusalem Bible adjusts Deuteronomy 32:8 to “sons of God” from the Hebrew בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל (bene Yisrael, “sons of Israel”), reflecting Septuagint influence and doctrinal preference. These biases don’t render such Bibles useless; they’re tools with quirks. The NWT’s quirks—say, “torture stake” for stauros or “a god” in John 1:1—are more pronounced, but not uniquely egregious. All translators, being human, bring assumptions to the table. To dismiss the NWT as junk while excusing others risks inconsistency.

* Excursion

The Douay-Rheims Bible translates Psalm 110:1 (which is Psalm 109:1 in its numbering, following the Vulgate/Septuagint tradition) as:

“The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou at my right hand: Until I make thy enemies thy footstool.”

This is a fairly standard rendering, consistent with the Latin Vulgate it translates (“Dixit Dominus Domino meo: Sede a dextris meis, donec ponam inimicos tuos scabellum pedum tuorum”). The Hebrew text reads:

יְהוָה לַאדֹנִי שֵׁב לִימִינִי עַד־אָשִׁית אֹיְבֶיךָ הֲדֹם לְרַגְלֶיךָ
(JHVH la’adoni, shev limini, ad-ashit oyvecha hadom leraglecha)
Translated literally: “JHVH [said] to my lord, sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”

The Hebrew לַאדֹנִי (la’adoni) means “to my lord,” a term that can refer to a human master, a king, or, in this context, a divinely appointed figure—widely interpreted in Jewish and Christian traditions as a messianic reference.

Now, the Douay-Rheims Bible, especially in its original 1582 (New Testament) and 1609–1610 (Old Testament) editions, often included extensive annotations by Catholic scholars from the English College at Douai. Later revisions, like Bishop Richard Challoner’s in the 18th century, trimmed many of these notes but retained some interpretive commentary.

End of Excursion

Consider the Witnesses’ approach: when evangelizing, they’ll tuck away their NWT and wield a homeowner’s King James or NIV with ease, adeptly navigating any text to make their case. This versatility is striking. If their Bible were wholly corrupt, such adaptability would falter—yet it doesn’t. They use whatever’s at hand, from Matthew 24:14 to Acts 20:28, to press their message. Should “true Christians” be less resourceful? If the NWT suffices to reach Witnesses—its errors navigable with care—then discarding it entirely undermines the very evangelism it could serve. The handful of flawed verses doesn’t negate the 31,000 that align closely with the originals. Reason demands critique, not caricature.

The 2024 NWT Study Bible is neither flawless nor fraudulent. Its translators’ bias shows, but so does their skill. Against the Bible’s vast canvas, its faults are specks, not stains. Condemning it outright reflects prejudice more than principle. Better to weigh it fairly, use it wisely, and meet its users where they stand—scripture in hand, ready to reason.

You May Also Enjoy

Review of Rolf J. Furuli, The Role of Theology and Bias in Bible Translation With a Special Look at the New World Translation of Jehovah’s Witnesses

About the Author

Online Guided Bible Study Courses

SCROLL THROUGH THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES BELOW

BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM

BIBLICAL STUDIES / BIBLE BACKGROUND / HISTORY OF THE BIBLE/ INTERPRETATION

EARLY CHRISTIANITY

HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY

CHRISTIAN APOLOGETIC EVANGELISM

TECHNOLOGY AND THE CHRISTIAN

CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY

CHRISTIAN DEVOTIONALS

CHRISTIAN FICTION