Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Does Crawford MS contain original aramaic Revelation?
I agree that Crawford Revelation isn't the original. I think Crawford Manuscript dates back to around 12th century AD. But I consider Crawford Revelation far more superior to Greek Manuscripts and Harklean Version. And I don't believe it is a translation of Greek. Crawford Revelation clears so many confusions Greek manuscripts has.

Dave Bauscher points out several interesting points in his translation of Crawford Revelation. Here are 2 examples from Crawford Revelation (Taken from Dave Bauscher's book).

1. (Revelation Chapter 5:1) - "And I saw in the right hand of him who sits upon the throne, a scroll inscribed from
the inside and from the outside, and sealed with seven seals." (Bauscher's Translation)

Dave Bauscher points out that "Sealed seven seals" in Aramaic is ?Tabaya taba shaba?, which is really a play on words and poetic in Aramaic.

2. Aramaic words for ?Demon? are at least two: ?Shada? and ?Daywa?. Greek has
only one word for ?Demon ?( daimonion ?Daimonion?). In Revelation, the Greek has but one
word, daimonion, where the Aramaic has both ?Shada? and ?Daywa?. (See 9:20 &
18:2 as here). The Harklean Syriac Version (translated from Greek) has only ?Daywa? in
Revelation. If The Crawford were a translation of Greek , as is commonly supposed, why would it use
two different Aramaic words for the same Greek word?

Messages In This Thread
Re: Does Crawford MS contain original aramaic Revelation? - by konway87 - 12-01-2010, 08:00 PM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)