If you find any in Norton's translation, please show it here. And please show the most glaringly biased passage in those other translations you mentioned. I would like to examine them myself. So far, for the complete NT translations, Etheridge seems to have the most true to his source text translation, But, I haven't read through all of his work yet. Paul Younan's renderings here at Peshitta.org is also very true to the text he worked from, but for perhaps one place that is interpretive, rather than literal. Sometimes its hard to tell what the original intent and meaning is in the original language text.
I believe that a translation can be unbiased, if one were to just translate what is there. Perhaps it is the readers biases that doesn't like it a certain way which is a possible rendering? The readers will come to the text with their own biases as well, and we all must guard against that.
We know which is the more original form of the Aramaic NT, because we see were the western versions have deviated from the original form.
Shlama
I believe that a translation can be unbiased, if one were to just translate what is there. Perhaps it is the readers biases that doesn't like it a certain way which is a possible rendering? The readers will come to the text with their own biases as well, and we all must guard against that.
We know which is the more original form of the Aramaic NT, because we see were the western versions have deviated from the original form.
Shlama