The Fenton Bible in PDFs is available here:
http://saxonmessenger.christogenea.org/ ... bible-pdfsI have perused the Fenton Bible on a few occasions, but I have not read it through. From what I have seen, however, while Fenton had a few good ideas, and for those he is loved by many CI adherents, he made just as many serious errors.
For instance, his rendering of
elohim in the 82nd Psalm is disgraceful. Okay, if your only perspective is the Old Testament it is fine, but through the understanding which our Savior has provided - which is the best way to understand the Old Testament (Paul: "but we have the mind of Christ", 1 Cor. 2:16), it is terreible. It is terrible because Christ Himself referred to the 82nd Psalm when He said "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" as it is recorded in John 10:34.
Now while the Hebrew word
elohim may be understood to mean
judges, and there are clearly places where it should be, yet if Christ interprets it as gods in this Psalm (the words are not to be confused in Greek) then how could any man following Christ interpret it as
judges? So for this I believe Fenton fails, and this is one example: that he did not consider the greater judgment of Christ in order to gain a better understanding of Scripture. [I do not think I am perfect, and I too have surely made errors, but I pray that I did not miss anything so obvious!]
Where Fenton did do well, I have acknowledged him in my notes, where he correctly understood Paul's "works of the law" phrase to be referring to the rituals, which can also be demonstrated from other Biblical literature (LXX, DSS).
I know very little of Moffat, outside of the few times Comparet quoted him. The only Bible I ever read before I did my own New Testament translation was a King James Version. I never consulted anything else when translating, but only the KJV for comparison when I wrote my translation notes (which are unpublished but are being incorporated for the most part into my podcast commentaries).
It is my opinion, examining the Old Testament, that as many insights as possible, and especially a comparison of those older versions such as the Septuagint, Josephus, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, is absolutely necessary. But the best way to understand the Old Testament, again, is through the lens of the New (see my paper,
On Biblical Exegesis, for a lengthy discussion).
It is also my opinion concerning the New Testament (and I can prove it in many places), that nearly all modern translations will correct the errors of the King James Version where it does not affect the doctrines of the particular translator, and then they will follow the errors of the King James Version (or even exacerbate them) where they are agreeable to their own doctrines.
Hope this helps somewhat.