Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Question for Andrew Roth
#14
Shlama Akhi Otto,

If you would be so kind as to send me a pdf of this ONLINE BIBLE/PESHITTA, I will be more than happy to review it and tell you what I think it is. I am having real problems getting their program to work and it is taking too much time for me to do it otherwise. Maybe I chose the wrong download options but the frames and other resources are there, and there is a Peshitta marker, but no access to it. I can keep trying but it will be faster if you just send it to me. Nor do I want to call their tech support and spend a lot more time. But I will absolutely try to help you otherwise.

As I have said, i have these files already and I don't need theirs taking up 12 MB of space on my hard drive nor do I need to see this stuff in ktav ashurri when I can read it in estrangela just fine. For what it is worth though, what I have seen from the module I can access seems very good indeed. I can't of course know or speak to what Bauscher used in terms of online resources. I will tell you that from his previous discussions here, I got the very strong sense his transcription was 100% BFBS 1905 which would include Crawford Rev. In fact I am pretty sure about this.

I understand what you are trying to do. You are searching to in a way validate scientifically Bauscher's non-code beliefs in a "perfect Peshitta' but for my money that perfect Peshitta is the EASTERN 22, and this whole idea of Crawford as some perfect or even original just doesn't hold water. He can think that it is perfect all he wants, but both versions of Aramaic Rev are clearly translational, from the Greek. Gwynn does an amazing job and most seem to neglect the Greek translation he did that proved it on the same volume that he discusses Crawford Rev.

As for the pericopa adultera, well, that story is not even part of the four earliest Greek codices of John so it is not an original story there either, although itit is very satisfying emotionally to read Is it interesting that Gwynn studies two versions of it? Absolutely, and Gwynn himself is the best source for seeing that relationship in a very scientific way. I am looking at a lot of what he is saying there too. I certainly do not disagree in the slightest for the need to look at these things in great detail and continuously. But I am more interested in what is earliest.

As for Khabouris and 1905, yes there are many differences. One look at Stephen Silver's <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- w --> proves this when you look at the color codes he has in the transcription and compare them to the actual pages. I have also documented a ton of these differences, both great and small, between them. Fortunately the vast majority of these variances do not impact on overall meaning, and those that do we have discussed on forum many times over the years.

Akhi khabiba, trust me when I tell you that no one would want to embrace a full perfect 27 book Peshitta canon more than me. I would love that beyond belief. Trimm tried to excite me with this idea somewhat 10 years ago in spite of his admixture of sources in the Gospels, but certainly from Acts through Rev which would include the full W5. But honestly, there is a gap between what I believe in the 27 and what I feel I can prove textually or scientifically if you prefer. At least I can admit it though honestly. Many others simply cannot do so. I want my Nazarene Rev so badly I can taste it, but I can't extend that grace to Crawford as much as it pains me.

I can confirm that there are at least a few differences between SOC 1979 and BFBS 1905--I have seen I think at least three instances of this, but I don't know how many more instances there are and because I don't have their revised 1988 version I don't know if these were corrected. I suspect however that there are more differences though due to SOC as a church following Harkalean tradition which, whatever Crawford Codex might otherwise be, it clearly is NOT Harkalean.

But as I said, send me this version if you can and I will look at it. If you can't, tell me that too and I will try again when I have time. I sincerely want to help you.

Trust me when I tell you I have taken your inquiries in the kind and respectful spirit you have intended. More than that, I appreciate your patience with me as I have sorted this out.
Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Question for Andrew Roth - by ograabe - 11-10-2008, 05:06 AM
Re: Question for Andrew Roth - by Paul Younan - 11-10-2008, 02:57 PM
Re: Question for Andrew Roth - by ograabe - 11-14-2008, 05:13 PM
Re: Question for Andrew Roth - by ograabe - 11-17-2008, 04:47 PM
Re: Question for Andrew Roth - by ograabe - 11-17-2008, 05:08 PM
Re: Question for Andrew Roth - by enarxe - 11-17-2008, 10:40 PM
Re: Question for Andrew Roth - by ograabe - 11-19-2008, 10:17 PM
Re: Question for Andrew Roth - by ograabe - 11-20-2008, 06:22 PM
Re: Question for Andrew Roth - by Paul Younan - 11-20-2008, 07:31 PM
Re: Question for Andrew Roth - by Andrew Gabriel Roth - 11-21-2008, 05:46 AM
Re: Question for Andrew Roth - by ograabe - 11-21-2008, 09:31 PM
Re: Question for Andrew Roth - by ograabe - 11-22-2008, 10:36 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)