Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Setting the record straight
Christina Wrote:I entered 2 chapters of Murdock, Etheridge & Bauscher into essay rater, and the result was the same for all 3: "Unoriginal Text Detected", it looks like those AENT stats that Bauscher posted are worthless <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->

Shlama Christina,

good idea on testing out the other versions available. i wonder who Murdock and Etheridge were plagarizing?

this said from experience: always best to take note of the three fingers pointing back at you before you level an accusation against a brother, or else, i've found, you usually end up getting it shoved back in your face....

may righteousness and peace come to reign in this situation, and soon!

Chayim b'Moshiach,
Shlama Christina,

Nice try, but no cigar. Essay rater will almost always find a phrase here and there identical to another text. What it does is it scores on plagiarism
from 0 to 100%. Then you need to see where the text is that it says was plagiarized, which is given as a web address. Murdock's certainly is posted on a web site; so is Etheridge; so is some of mine, on my web site, and on
Andrew's was located at, only it pointed to Murdock's and Younan's files, and it did so for every one of over 60 chapters, with a high plagiarism score for every one, and a zero overall score, due to the high plagiarism score. Those stats are only available in the full version of Essay Rater.

You are shooting a 30 odd six without a scope from the hip.

Andrew does not deny that he copied Murdock and Younan's files (prepared by Larry Sheets). He just says it was not plagiarism. If you can show me in his book, anywhere, that he claims to have copied Murdock and Younan for his translation, I will retract the charge. "Weaving both sources" together "in some cases" does not cut it. "Comparing them" does not work, either. He copied them wholesale, and revised selected names and titles, and modernized the thee's and thou's in Murdock, essentially leaving 90-95% intact, verbatim. That is plagiarism, because he did not give proper credit to his sources; he implies by his refusal to accredit them in his book, that he actually translated the NT himself and consulted the others in the process. That is dishonest.

We can talk about "MARI means Murdock,Andrew,Roth and Younan", all day long, but that is not explained in his book; certainly not up front in the intro.
He may have stated that here, but he has not published his posts in the book, so that will not suffice.

Sorry this has caused so much pain, but it is the truth.

I bear no ill will to Andrew or anyone else, only a desire for forthrightness,truth, honesty and peace, so help me God.

Get my NT translations, books & articles at :
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m --> and
I also have articles at
Hello Rafa,

I have his book. No one has yet quoted the words in his book that say his translation was actually Murdock's and Younan's work; that's because those words
cannot be found. Andrew has cleverly concealed the truth by dancing around it with words like, "I compared them" and "I weaved both together in some cases" and "my mentors". Nothing in the book lets the reader of his book know that his book is primarily someone else's translation. That is plagiarism. It has nothing to do with permission from Paul or anyone else. Plagiarism is not copyright infringement; it is taking credit for what someone else wrote or produced, even if it is a small quotation.

Andrew reproduced two translations wholesale without attribution. By refusing to give credit to the proper sources of his translation, he has committed plagiarism on a very large scale, unlike someone who takes credit for occasional quotations or ideas. He has practically reproduced the translations of two other men and put his name on them and publishes and sells them, and has the audacity to advertise this volume as "the most definitive English translation of the Aramaic NT in 2000 years."

If you don't see the dishonesty of that, you are truly a blind person, and we have nothing more to say on the subject.

Where is the love of the truth on this forum?
Get my NT translations, books & articles at :
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m --> and
I also have articles at

oy....when this first came up i entered some of my own personal translations into the essayrater system, and came back with unoriginal source flags. now it comes up again, and this time i happen to have an account with them, so i try it once more... i entered only a handful of verses of some of my personal translations -- like 10 -15, and it cited plagarism on my part at around 30%. 30% for only that amount - although admittedly i have a streak for more literal renderings, so i usually don't end up with translations that sound like the smooth English we find most versions. i can just imagine what it would have said if i had been more conformative and included whole books...

anyhow, it told me i plagarized from Murdock,from the same site that Andrew's version is being flagged on, and i can attest with clear conscience that i don't use Murdock's translation when i happen to be translating -- i don't even own a copy of his work!

so i'm thinking that when it comes to something like the Scriptures, such a tool as the essayrater is not as trustworthy a witness as one might first think. there is just too much similarity available in translating a text to use it that way. i think it best to lay the whole thing to rest and be careful that we don't wrongfully accuse another based on a computer program's circumstantial evidence.

for all who'd like to see it for themselves but don't have an account, below is what shows up when you do the check (this is what i received when i put my handful of verses into the rater, so you can know i wasn't lying):

Citation audit
A part of your paper is matching some text from the Web. Please make sure that this text is properly referenced.

Web source:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""> ... k_luke.htm</a><!-- m -->

Consider using one of the following pre-formatted references or write your own reference in using the appropriate format:

MLA: "Murdock Translation - Luke." Insert Name of Site. 14 September 2009 <>.

APA: Murdock Translation - Luke. (2009, May 11). Retrieved September 14, 2009, from <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""> ... k_luke.htm</a><!-- m -->

Chicago: Murdock Translation - Luke, <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""> ... k_luke.htm</a><!-- m --> (accessed September 14, 2009).
Guys, can you let it go? We've beaten this subject into the ground, and neither side has been willing to listen to the other from the beginning. Just drop it.
OMG I can't believe this useless argument has been resurrected. Seriously Bauscher let it go & get a life!
Shalom, Shlama, Salaam & Yiasou.
30% is not a red flag as far as Essay Rater's plagiarism score is concerned. Some of my chapters as well as those of other popular translations may show a 30%
score, but usually multiple sources on several different Bible web sites come up, and there is no one source pointed to. That is normal and to be expected.

Not the case with AENT; the avg. plagiarism score is much higher (about 75%) and the sources are consistently the same site and the same files on that site.
And Essay Rater gives a conservative number; a manual count shows a much higher correlation of 90-95%. It also consistently rates AENT at 0% overall, for every single
one of 60 chapters. That is due to the unacceptable plagiarism scores in every case.No one needs a program to compare AENT with Murdock and Younan. All one needs is eyes that see. It is quite plain that AENT is copied from those translations, and no one here is ready to deny that.

This has nothing to do with Paul giving permission to Andrew, nor has it anything to do with what Andrew said on this web site to members.
That is all irrelevant. It has to do with the book itself, and what he did not put in it- clearly stated credit to the proper sources of almost all of the translation.

Give it up, Christine? What, I cannot defend myself against your accusations against me?
You don't have to read my posts, but you can't help yourself, can you, Christine?
I have not posted here for many months, and I came back to see some ridiculous statements about me, and I have responded to balance out the lopsided perspective I see coming out of this forum.

I have a wonderful life, Christine. Why are you so emotionally invested in Andrew? Is he your hero? I am sorry to report what he has done, but I and others confronted him
here and elsewhere about this matter. Albion Guppy was, by far, his biggest fan, and he questioned him about his sources. Andrew refused to answer when asked, "How much of this translation is your own work?" Albion became suspicious, and rightly so. He and Ryan Dooley were both banned from this forum, and unjustly so, in my opinion, because they dared to challenge Andrew, the Resident Scholar Emeritus.

By that time, the book had been published. I obtained a copy, and Albion asked me to review it, which I did.

I couldn't believe what I saw.

I did an extensive manual examination of AENT and I certainly prayed about what to do. I did not want to review his book, as it might appear self serving, so I engaged Andrew here first. I, of course, got nowhere with him. I sent some analysis to Ryan, who posted his own review on Amazon, armed with some of my files of my manual analysis. He had a hard time keeping his review on the Amazon site; it appeared someone was taking it off every time he posted it. Albion also posted a review and had the same trouble. Ryan had also posted a review of my translations, and his reviews are still there on Amazon.

So I posted my own review and have updated it. It has remained there. Needless to say, Andrew and I have had our run-ins before all this, and I frankly became suspicious of him a long time ago, but I was not prepared for what I found when I read his "translation". I could not believe that he had copied almost every word of Murdock and Younan and had searched and replaced names and titles, along with the thee's and thou's, etc., of Murdock. The only book I saw that he had translated himself was Galatians.
I will not comment further on that.

Even more amazing is the extent to which people defend his deed and even promote it.

How can you call yourselves his friends? You don't care about Andrew, not if you excuse his sin or turn blind eyes to it.

Pr 27:6 Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.

I may be the only friend Andrew has.
God knows my heart.
Get my NT translations, books & articles at :
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m --> and
I also have articles at
*Yawn* <!-- sSleepy --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/sleepy.gif" alt="Sleepy" title="Sleepy" /><!-- sSleepy --> . Since you obviously have no self control, I'll have to put a stop to this myself. As of today this thread is locked. Goodbye.
Shalom, Shlama, Salaam & Yiasou.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)