Greetings , I am a very unlearned member. Maybe someone can clarify for me this area of scripture. In Acts 10: 28 The interlinear says "It is unlawful for a man Yehudean to associate with a man foreign who is not a son of his tribe".
My questions are these.
Does "Yehudean" mean Jews (a general term as I understand it for "son's" of Israel... Jews). If so, what is the "son of his tribe" that is referred to in the Interlinear. There are twelve "tribes" of Israel, Surely separation from the other 11 tribes is not meant here?.

I have a NT English translation (Janet Magiera version of the Peshitta). In this verse she uses the word "race". Not a good choice of word  in my opinion. Cornelius,  the Centurion and his associates are Gentiles and Simon Peter and his friends are Jews. All one race, are they not?. Is "race" being used as a modern idiom. Wrongly! Is there somewhere in the Tanakh that says Jews should not associate with anyone else other that the sons of Israel? And, What is the "understanding" of Aramaic to English for this verse??

Thanks David Welford

Great day Peshitta enthusiasts.  The Peshitta has a totally rare (and awkward) reading (or mistranslation?) in Acts 23:10, Acts 23:23, and Acts 23:31.  The Peshitta literally reads "Romans" in those verses, while all known Greek and Latin copies read "soldiers."

Isn't it awkward and redundant to read "Romans" in those passages, since everybody knows that the soldiers involved were Romans ?!?  Brooke Foss Westcott also uses this point to suggest that the Peshitta was "translated," stating the following.

"The Acts are more loosely translated (Wichelhaus, p. 86); but it is to be remembered that the text of the Acts presents more variations than any part of the New Testament. The Epistle to the Hebrews is probably the work  of a separate translator. (Wichelhaus, pp. 86 ff.)  4 That it was made at some place out of the Roman Empire is shewn in the translation of "stratiotai" by "Romans" in Acts xxiii. 23, 31. [Cf. Acts xxviii. 15: Appim Form.] But this is not the case in the Gospels, which, as I have conjectured, were translated earlier, and in Palestine. Cfi Wichelhaus, pp. 78 ff." (A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament, 242).

Whoever created this website, "https://www.thearamaicscriptures.com/" just thought I'd let you know that the last word in John 5:27 (diyna) is improperly joined to the first word in John 5:28 "d'bareh".

Also, I noticed that among over half a dozen Aramaic translations of John 5:27-28, there is a huge divide on whether the clause ܕܰܒܪܶܗ ܗܽܘ ܕܶܝܢ ܕܐ݈ܢܳܫܳܐ should be translated "because he is the son of man" (like the Greek, at the end of John 5:27), or "But that he is the son of man..." at the start of John 5:28.

Shouldn't the word "deyn" be translated there?  Incidentally, for you Peshitta primacists reading this, Brooke Foss Westcott cited this very thing (it appears) to claim that the Peshitta was revised in the 4th century against Greek copies.  He wrote this:

"It is clear from the consideration of readings (e.g. John v. 27 f.) that the text of the Peshito underwent a decisive revision in the 4th century by comparison with the Antiochene Greek copies." (A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament, 242).

How does the Peshitta read?  Does this work as a translation from the Aramaic?:

37-38. Now on the great day, which is the last (day) of the feast, Yeshua was standing and he cried out and said, 
"If a man thirsts, let him come to me!
And drink, anyone who believes in me!
As the Kethaba have said, 
"rivers of living water will flow from her midst."
['flow' is derived from the same root as Yordanan, which means 'Flowing.'-PY]
39. And he said this concerning the Rukha that they, those who believe in him,
were about to receive. 
For the Rukha was not yet given, 
because Yeshua was not yet glorified.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
For Luke 11:41, does this work as a translation from the Aramaic?:
Nevertheless, anything that you have, give it in righteousness,
and behold, everything will be clean to you.

If not, how about, 'make it righteous'?

1 Timothy 2:11-12 (NASB-1995) 11A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.

1 Timothy 2:11-12 (Magiera) 11A wife should learn in quietness with all submission 12for I do not allow a wife to teach nor to be presumptuous over the husband, but she should be at peace. 
 
1 Timothy 2:11-12 (https://theholyaramaicscriptures.weebly) 11The woman, in quietness, should be learning in all subjection. 12For, a woman to teach, I don’t permit, and not to be headstrong concerning the gabra {the man}, but rather, to be in silence.
 
I have several questions concerning these two verses.
 
1) Is the Aramaic for “woman” and “wife” (in each of the verses) the same word with different meanings depending on context?
--> In Magiera’s translation the “wife” (or “woman”) isn’t allowed to teach her “husband” or her "protective male" (possibly her father) but there does not appear to be any prohibition to her teaching in a church setting.
 
2) What is the correct phrase in verse 12, “exercise authority”, “be presumptuous”, or “headstrong”?
---> It seems to me that “authority” is probably an incorrect translation since 1 Timothy 6:16 uses another word than is used in 1 Timothy 2:12.
 
3) What is the correct noun in verse 12, “man”, “husband”, or “protective male”?
 
The implications of the correct meaning of these two verses can hardly be overstated. I am interested in what you guys think.
 
Keith

I would like to hear various opinions on this question:  There are various Greek loan words in the Peshitta.  Examples are pentecosta (Acts 2), namosa, Christiana, etc.  These words beg several questions.  Were they in common usage by Jews in the 1st century?  Were they put into the Peshitta text later?  Why were words like Shavuot, Oreta, Meshikya not used in their place?  This should be especially important for Peshitta primacists.  All viewpoints are welcome and will be helpful to me.  Thank you.

Hey everyone,

Who here knows who translated the Eastern peshitta on this website,

https://theholyaramaicscriptures.weebly.com/

It looks like a very thorough project, but there's no information on who actually did it, their theological background, etc. I saw it linked to Christian Nash's Facebook, and I also did see a COE page link to back to it, which is good, but I'd still like to know more info! 

If there's another thread about it that I missed on here, please direct me as well, as I was not able to find anything.

This is the whole Bible translated from Jesus’ and 1st century Israel’s native Aramaic in a downloadable E Book for Kindle, Nook, I Book and other digital book readers for just $12.99. There are no notes in this edition. The translator is convinced that the 1st century Peshitta New Testament is the original God written scripture, and the 1st century Old Testament Peshitta is the best representation and unedited version of the original Old Testament, unlike the doctrinally edited Massoretic Hebrew Bible commonly translated into English and other languages over the past 1000 years. Codex Ambrosianus, the world’s oldest complete Semitic Bible manuscript (6th century AD), is the basis for the Old Testament translation.

http://www.lulu.com/shop/david-bauscher/...61061.html

Have a gander at my new web site my son Luke and daughter Julia helped me publish. Some of the purchase links are not working yet. If you want to make a purchase, go to the bottom of the home page and click on the link that says:
CLICK HERE ....spotlight/gbauscher.

https://aramaicnt.wordpress.com/

I just released my translation of the Peshitta Bible- Old and New Testaments in 6x9 hardcover. Have a look.

http://www.lulu.com/shop/david-bauscher/...ex3AtRvspA