Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament by Jason David BeDuhn, pages 16-17:
"We return to our example, 1 Thessalonians 4:3-6...
"N[ew] W[orld Translation]: For this is what God wills, the sanctifying of you, that you abstain from fornication; that each one of you should know how to get possession of his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in covetous sexual appetite such as also those nations have who do not know God; that no one go to the point of harming and encroach upon the rights of his brother in this matter....
"The KJV, NW, and NASB offer very literal translations...As a result,...the NW sounds stilted and wooden...[Here, BeDuhn compliments the NW for using the term "nations" instead of "Gentiles"...continues...see? He's even-handed, whereas my idea of even-handedness involves slapping the WTS with both hands an equal number of times...] The KJV and NW retain the archaic English word 'fornication', while the NASB uses the modern expression 'sexual immorality', which is generic enough to cover most possible meanings of the original Greek term."
"That's not to say the KJV and NW do no interpreting of their own...The KJV and NW have interpreted the Greek phrase 'en pathei epithumias' (literally: 'in the feeling of desire') to mean 'in the lust of concupiscence' and 'in covetous sexual appetite', respectively. Both of these readings heighten the strength of Paul's rhetoric, making it sharper and more negative. Both translations in this case owe more to the Latin Vulgate than they do to the original Greek. Paul can warn against something without sounding quite so shrill as these translations make him. The NASB is slightly more in line with the tone of the original Greek: 'in lustful passion'."
In layman's terms, the New World Translation, in this case, while accurately rendering the term "nations" when referring to Gentiles, does not stick to the original Greek in saying "covetous sexual appetite". BeDuhn, in short, is saying--and I don't think I'm twisting his words here--that the NWT is using...LOADED LANGUAGE in its rendering. So was the KJV, apparently. So much for not interpreting the scriptures based on preconceived bias, huh?
Although I doze off as I try to read this book on the subway, I found this evaluation by BeDuhn to be fascinating, fair, and revealing as to just how out-of-context the Society is in selectively quoting him in the Bearing Thorough Witness book. He repeatedly acknowledges that they are guilty of biased renderings the same as anyone else.
Will share more as I find it. Fire away.