I can t understand Jeffro77 s first objection Nowhere do I see a claim in the text that anyone other than the committee are the authors of their translation The committee do announce explicitly that a privilege was granted to them They are not thanking men for this We have to adopt a scrupulously NPOV in quoting the donor of that privilege It is a notable item of Jehovah s belief that all the books of the Bible have a single author in contrast to mainstream Christianity that acknowledges a number of authors at different times But I choose to say a heavenly Author not the heavenly Author to avoid getting into loaded and POV consideration of that Author being unique or not Capitalising the A in Author is I think a reasonable concession to the same convention of capital G for God and Author is true to the source In case you still disagree let s invite more voice s to help To Jeffro77 s second objection it is clear that Jeffro77 takes inspired to mean divinely informed and that Jeffro77 deduces from known dates of publication that Jehovah s Witnesses include their own translation NWT among the 1 300 or 1 800 uninspired ones I have no argument against that logic However it may be too near WP SYN because the Jehovah s Witnesses may not intend or even be aware of that argument s logic Unless someone provides an source that says explicitly that the NWT is among the uninspired translations we may not generate our own criticism this way However the categorical claim by Jehovah s Witnesses about a remarkably large number of translations on which various faiths rely is notable in our survey of criticism of the NWT Can this be said better