It’s up for conjecture how “pitilessly literal” the DBH translation is. As is the case with most translations, he imports his own agenda (particularly with rega

It’s up for conjecture how “pitilessly literal” the DBH translation is. As is the case with most translations, he imports his own agenda (particularly with regard to his universalist soteriology). It’s good, but it’s also not as “pitilessly” objective as he may believe it to be. Traduttore, traditore, etc.