As I see it, there are not many downsides of the fields of Bible and ancient Near East, however, they are a magnet for really crazy ideas and products (everyone knows of the crazies that come out of the woodwork when you talk about the Bible, but if you’ve done any Google searches on “sumerian” or other ANE terms it’s not long before you find stuff on bizarre cults and ufo abductions).
The ARTB restores hundreds of specialty ancient words missing from other versions. Each English word matches a unique Hebrew root and the Strong’s number 99+% of the time. The text format even captures the double word use unique to biblical Hebrew.
Basically, the person (yes that word in in the singular) who produced this translation dusted off his/her (is Frances a guy or girl?) Strong’s concordance and matched up every Hebrew/Aramaic root in Strong’s with its supposed English equivalent.
As all of my students know very well, Strong’s concordance is useful for two things: a door stop and providing my printer with recycled paper (every time the students want to get my blood pressure up they tell me that they arrived at a definition for their translations by looking at Strong’s).
I could go on for quite a while about the myriad of fallacies that lie behind this “translation” but I think already I’ve tipped my hand at what I think of it.