08-08-2014, 11:55 AM
So I've received a response to my inquiry about the list of leading language scholars and Bible students.
"I couldn't begin to list all the contributors to the AENT... I've retained some key contributor email since 1998 (over 16,000)...for personal reasons many have chosen to be anonymous and refused credits... many including myself view the AENT as an "open source" project for the benefit of the Body of Mashiyach... some brothers invested years of research that I distilled into single footnotes... we've had tremendous support and input from nearly everyone at peshitta.org and personal letters from the COE... it doesn't get much better than that... but I'm hoping to interview some of the contributors going forward.
No 6th Edition on the horizon."
So there you have it, for what it's worth. I know support for this project was big here back in 06-08, which is likely the reference being made to here. I was unaware of any COE recognition of sorts. If anyone from the COE is reading and can confirm that, that would be awesome.
It's too bad no 6th edition is on the horizon though, otherwise with all the feedback that's been compiled by myself and others could put the open source project idea to the test. I've always thought as well that an awesome idea would include multiple viewpoints on the same topic when it came to the footnotes, a very Jewish thing (Rabbi so and so says this, but Rabbi so and on disagrees and says this). This would be extremely useful when it comes to Sacred Name issues, divinity of Mashiach, and places like Colossians 2:15 where bias enters the text and Michael Roods dubious understanding of it is used as an explanation (Tim Hegg does a much better job exploring the issue here). But I will say that I agree with the remark that contribution to footnotes has been made by many people, because knowing Andrew's tone and theology in some of his other books, there is sometimes a distinct turn from that in the AENT footnotes. The theology and contributions is nonetheless no where near as balanced and unbiased as I would like to see though.
"I couldn't begin to list all the contributors to the AENT... I've retained some key contributor email since 1998 (over 16,000)...for personal reasons many have chosen to be anonymous and refused credits... many including myself view the AENT as an "open source" project for the benefit of the Body of Mashiyach... some brothers invested years of research that I distilled into single footnotes... we've had tremendous support and input from nearly everyone at peshitta.org and personal letters from the COE... it doesn't get much better than that... but I'm hoping to interview some of the contributors going forward.
No 6th Edition on the horizon."
So there you have it, for what it's worth. I know support for this project was big here back in 06-08, which is likely the reference being made to here. I was unaware of any COE recognition of sorts. If anyone from the COE is reading and can confirm that, that would be awesome.
It's too bad no 6th edition is on the horizon though, otherwise with all the feedback that's been compiled by myself and others could put the open source project idea to the test. I've always thought as well that an awesome idea would include multiple viewpoints on the same topic when it came to the footnotes, a very Jewish thing (Rabbi so and so says this, but Rabbi so and on disagrees and says this). This would be extremely useful when it comes to Sacred Name issues, divinity of Mashiach, and places like Colossians 2:15 where bias enters the text and Michael Roods dubious understanding of it is used as an explanation (Tim Hegg does a much better job exploring the issue here). But I will say that I agree with the remark that contribution to footnotes has been made by many people, because knowing Andrew's tone and theology in some of his other books, there is sometimes a distinct turn from that in the AENT footnotes. The theology and contributions is nonetheless no where near as balanced and unbiased as I would like to see though.