After having researched my beliefs of 45+ years, finding so much was really different than what the Bible context really taught, I decided to "read" the Bible for for the first time to see what it really was saying, taking off the "blinders" of the WT. I began reading the Greek Scriptures first. I used the New World Translation, knowing if we were to ever reach our grown children, I would need to use that translation to prove anything. I have found much comfort in my readings, but one thing really stood out in contrast to what I had been brought up to believe. The NWT wasn't the honest translation I had believed. Two of the most outstanding contradictions I found are the use of "Jehovah's name" in the Greek Scriptures and the non-use of brackets [ ] for words that are NOT in the original writings. These two things really can change the meaning. Even if they do not change the meaning from what was originally intended, we aren't given the choice to make up our own minds what the writer was saying, but rather, the WT decides for us.
My husband and I have been having a discussion with a very dear friend (who left the WT over 30 years ago) on the honesty of the NWT. He feels it is a terriffic translation. Recently I sent him this information. The following are but just a few scriptures using the name "Jehovah" which are not quotes from the Hebrew Scriptures. When you read the context, it seems to possibly be referring to Jesus. Mark 5:19,20;Acts 2:21; 4:12,30; 8:25; 10:33; 12:24; 13:12, 44-48; 14:23; 15:35,36; 16:31,32; 18:25; 19:17-20; 1 Thess 1:3,8; 4:14-16; 5:2,23; 2 Thess 2:1,2,13; 3:1; 2 Tim 2:18,22.
Rom 10:9-15 is a scripture I have always used to show the need to preach about Jehovah's name, but in reading the context, it really seems to be talking about Jesus. I had a hard time fitting the context with using Jehovah's name, until I read 1 Pet 2:3. In the reference NWT, there is a footnote to this scripture, which I think might explain the confusion in Romans. It is talking about using "Lord" instead of "Jehovah", even though it is a quote from Psm 34:8. In part it says, "Peter is not here making a formal quotation, but merely borrowing O.T. language, and applying it in his own manner." Could Paul be "borrowing O.T. language" in Romans 10:13?
There are quite a few more Scriptures, where it is questionable who is really being referred to, "Jehovah" or "Jesus". In the book, Jehovah's Witnesses Defended, by Gregg Stafford, on page 32-35, he lists 61 scriptures where there is no quote from the Hebrew Scriptures, but the context indicates the reference is to "Jehovah", and another 83 scriptures where there is no quote at all, but the "NWT used the divine name in the NT simply on the basis of their interpretation of the context, is their prerogative as translators."
I always was led to believe the NWT only used "Jehovah's name" where there was a quote from the Hebrew Scriptures. The above book also says that the "NWT did not clearly communicate the fact that not all uses of the divine name in NT were based on O.T. quotations or paraphrases. Still, in view of the space they have devoted to explaining their use of the divine name in the NT, I am not sure that even this would be a legitimate argument." I found this admission very disturbing.
The other "huge" problem I found within the NWT is the "non-use" of brackets [ ]. According to the forward of the Reference Bible and the Kingdom Interlinear (KIT), brackets would be used any place words were added to help in the understanding. Unfortunately, many, many words are added, without the use of these brackets, leading the reader of the NWT to assume what they are reading is what is actually written. A check in an interlinear clears up much. Even checking the original Greek in the KIT, will tell this.
In the book of John, the words "in union with" are added in 7 scriptures, and another 13 times throughout 2 Corinthians, Colossians, and 1 John. The word "other" has been added in Rom 8:32; Phil 2:9 and Col 1:16-20. "In relation to" has been added in Mt 5:19 and Col 1:20. These and many more places, you'll find words inserted, that are not in the original writings, giving a biased rendition.
I thought for 45+ years, the other translations were biased, but not the NWT. I suppose they are all biased in one way or another. Even the three different interlinears we have vary in their translating different words. We now have a Bible with 8 translations, plus several others. Between these 10 translations, we can get a better idea of what is being talked about, when a question arises.