AENT Errors

[Luc Lefebvre]

Yeah, but this is not new information. I've read AENT since it was first released, and Roth has explained basically everything you just said in his introduction. But at the same time, I think you're right in that it was partially rushed. I also think his intention was primarily the commentary and that Younan and Murdock were used as a last minute decision of "let's turn this commentary into a study bible". After all, Andrew wanted to just post it up on his website until Baruch convinced him to publish it instead. So right from the get go I think it was primarily a Netzari Study Bible as opposed to a scholarly Peshitta translation. But it's popular and I regularly meet people who use it, and since Andrew does want to work with the Body to make it better (he admits his own shortfalls and encourages people to be critical in the introduction as well) that's why I'm doing what I'm doing. Plus, it was my introduction to the Aramaic, so I have a soft spot for it, even if I don't always agree with him.

And I definitely agree - it will be nice if one day it becomes a true Eastern peshitta in every sense of the word without any typographical or major translation errors. I know for the Aramaic text he just grabbed what was available for free use, but maybe he could try and get the Mosul edition of the Peshitta that's been transliterated into Hebrew characters already by the Bible Society in Israel? But then the text would need an in-depth run through to ensure that the English matched up with any small varients that may appear in this version compared to what was worked from in the past for Murdock's, Younan's and then his own translation.