<a href="https://biblicalmissiology.org/blog/author/adam/" target="_self">Adam Simnowitz</a>

Adam Simnowitz

Adam Simnowitz is a minister with the Assemblies of God. He lives in Dearborn, MI. He holds a M.A. from Columbia International University from their College of Intercultural Studies. His thesis is available on this website: "Muslim Idiom Translation: Assessing So-Called Scripture Translation For Muslim Audiences With A Look Into Its Origins In Eugene A. Nida's Theories Of Dynamic Equivalence And Cultural Anthropology: https://biblicalmissiology.org/2016/03/21/muslim-idiom-translation-assessing-so-called-scripture-translation-for-muslim-audiences-with-a-look-into-its-origins-in-eugene-a-nidas-theories-of-dynamic-equivalence-and-cultural-anthro/

5 Comments

  1. Aaron M Shryock

    Thanks, Adam, for your kind words about my chapter in the book.

  2. Adam Simnowitz

    Ant, thank you for so quickly responding. Your affirmation that the Son is eternal is extremely reassuring and greatly appreciated.

  3. Ant Greenham

    I want to offer my clarification (since I wrote the editorial comment concerned) in response to these remarks: “Finally, the editorial comment regarding the “father-son role, between the older and younger generation… provides the basis for the analogical use of Son in Bible translations” (94, 425) is in need of clarification. As written, this comment is not according to the witness of Scripture that the Son of God is eternal (e.g. John 17:5, 24; Heb 1:8-10; 7:3) and runs counter to the parts of the book that refer to the “eternal Son” (e.g. 12, 20, 64).”

    Of course, the Son is eternal. As you point out, Scripture is very clear on that. However, the question is, How does one communicate the eternal relationship between God the Father and God the Son using a human analogy? No human father-son relationship is eternal, yet father-son language is what Scripture uses, even though it breaks down in every human situation: No human father-son setup captures God’s eternal nature. However, this analogy is the essential and indispensable way the Holy Spirit chose to communicate the (eternal) divine relationship. My comment should thus be understood in terms of role (or function) within the Godhead, not as an attempt to liken the Creator to the (temporal) creature ontologically (as if God the Father is older than God the Son). And the reason I italicized the word role in my brief comment was to make that point.

    Additionally, I had Patrick Krayer’s discussion on pp.143-45 in mind when I penned my comment in both places. The father-son role is indeed transcultural (i.e., universal), despite all the anthropological examples Krayer assembles to suggest it is not.

  4. Adam Simnowitz

    Aaron, your contribution, “The Translation of the Names of God in the Chadian Arabic Old Testament” (ch. 12) is outstanding. Showing the similarities between the Chadian Arabic version and the Sharif Bible in Arabic is essential to any understanding of the liberties taken by the translator(s) of the Chadian. Your thorough research is evident throughout your article; it is extremely informative; and lays before the reader the non-negotiable importance of properly translating the names of God in the OT. Much thanks!

  5. Aaron M Shryock

    Thank you for this review, Adam!

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: