11-28-2012, 02:54 PM
We really don't need to revisit this whole supposed "plagiarism". When I read the AENT introduction I get the impression that he used them as base texts and cross checked the Aramaic to make any updates he saw fit. When I look at the actual text I can see where he missed cross checking the Aramaic, and I also see evidence of how he actually did not use a simple word processor replacement as is typical of Sacred Name Bibles (otherwise some words would not be as they were). Of course, you would need to own an AENT and have read the entire thing to find all of these instances, and also to see that some of your copying and pasting without referencing from this forum to form this document is actually now incorrect in subsequent editions.
But this thread is about AENT errors. Not the use of other people's public domain texts, nor of theology. Let's stick to discussing the Aramaic and it's translation as presented in this volume's current printing.
But this thread is about AENT errors. Not the use of other people's public domain texts, nor of theology. Let's stick to discussing the Aramaic and it's translation as presented in this volume's current printing.
ScorpioSniper2 Wrote:Even if I disagree with him, he does seem very sincere about his beliefs. I respect that about him.Yeah, I don't always agree with him either, but from conversing with him and such I have always gotten the impression of both humility and sincerity. Which, sad to say, is somewhat difficult to find amongst those claiming to be "nazarene/netzari/natsari/natzraya" etc.