Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
AENT 5th Editions Errors and Suggestions
#10
I really think Roth and Baruch need to focus more on the translation itself than the appendix and footnotes like they seem to be. Don't get me wrong, footnotes are great (even if I disagree with them)! I care more about the translation itself though, the translational errors that have been brought out and the theological bias that can be seen within it must be excised from the AENT before focusing on other things. I don't want to see someone's theology in the text unless it is in the text. This is a literal translation, and should stay as such in as much areas of the translation as possible. I understand, they're human, but they should learn to manage the human error as much as possible. I'm speaking less about the honest mistranslations and typographical errors and more about the theological bias.

The AENT is less interpretive than Bauscher, Lamsa, and Alexander, but Roth still needs to try to be the better man and LIMIT his theological interpretation of the text to the footnotes section. A translation is only the Word of God as long as it agrees with the original text (whether you believe it to be the Greek or Syriac). I don't want the Word of God mixing in with the word of man in areas when this can be avoided. Just based on what I've seen in this list, I don't think I'm going to buy this disappointing update unless my current AENT ends up falling apart. I don't just want a better study Bible, I want a better translation! The updates should have been in order to make the translation better.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: AENT 5th Editions Errors and Suggestions - by ScorpioSniper2 - 12-18-2012, 10:23 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)