Peshitta Forum

Full Version: Does Crawford MS contain original aramaic Revelation?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Thanks for clearing my mistake, Steven Silver. Still, it is very interesting to see "a unique Revelation" coming from Crawford manuscript.
Would not the Crawford Codex be the best candidate to argue for divine preservation? What definite argument is there to say that Hebrews 2:9 is not accidentally corrupted in the Peshitta? Are those grammatical errors certainly errors, or are those just variances that may as well be correct?

Thanks for any answer.
Shlama Khulkon:
The Crawford Codex is an inferior copy of the original Peshitta. Large portions reflect the Peshitta verbatim, but there are variants. The Crawford Codex has not been transcribed yet. The original is at John Rylands University Library .
The Original Peshitta text does not include the Western -5 (II Peter, II John, III John, Jude and Revelation). In my personal opinion the Crawford Codex is not an inspired copy of the Peshitta text The Mingana is in my opinion, as close to the original Peshitta text as you can find today. The Khabouris Codex is also very close to the original text. Again, this is my opinion based on study and comparison of all of the texts in question, not in whole but many samplings from each.

Shlama,
Stephen Silver
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
very interesting. But I am also interested in hearing your opinion about Revelation in Crawford Codex. What do you think about Crawford Revelation?
Andrej Wrote:Would not the Crawford Codex be the best candidate to argue for divine preservation? What definite argument is there to say that Hebrews 2:9 is not accidentally corrupted in the Peshitta? Are those grammatical errors certainly errors, or are those just variances that may as well be correct?

Thanks for any answer.

because that reading of Hebrews 2:9 occurs in many other places, and not just in Syriac. See FF Bruces paper, Textual Problems in the Epistle to the Hebrews," Scribes and Scripture: New Testament Essays in Honor of J. Harold Greenlee [ed. D. A. Black; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1992] pp. 27-39
Stephen Silver Wrote:Shlama Khulkon:
The Crawford Codex is an inferior copy of the original Peshitta. Large portions reflect the Peshitta verbatim, but there are variants. The Crawford Codex has not been transcribed yet. The original is at John Rylands University Library .
The Original Peshitta text does not include the Western -5 (II Peter, II John, III John, Jude and Revelation). In my personal opinion the Crawford Codex is not an inspired copy of the Peshitta text The Mingana is in my opinion, as close to the original Peshitta text as you can find today. The Khabouris Codex is also very close to the original text. Again, this is my opinion based on study and comparison of all of the texts in question, not in whole but many samplings from each.

Shlama,
Stephen Silver
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->

Shlamu ba-shlama,
Stephen, would you not agree that the Crawford codex is better than the Harklean codex which is purely a translation of the Greek?

I found that G.D. Bauscher found many renderings in Revelation to be superior and explaining the Greek, not the other way around.

For instance; The Crawford Revelation says that 'the inner court' has been given to the nations.
The Greek has 'outer court'. That is a useless message since the outer court already was accessable to 'nations'.
Pages: 1 2