I’m just a layman trying to understand and live my life according to Biblical instruction.  I’ve had a couple of good teachers in this respect.  However, I’ve been in a couple of discussions, or arguments if you prefer, lately that had me looking for evidence to back up what I was saying.  I also checked out other Bibles to see where others were coming from.  That’s why I feel the need to say, it appears that we are in the middle of that period referred to in the Bible where it talks about every wind of doctrine.     

      I read an article recently about modern translations and the errors in the Greek Text they come from.  It seemed to be mostly concerned with the New Testament, but the Old Testament appears to have at least as many and probably more differences than the New.       

      One of the verses that was referred to in the article was Luke 23: 45 “because the sun’s light failed.  The curtain of the temple was torn in two.” –NET Bible     

     The problem I have with this particular version is that “because the sun’s light failed”, reads like a continuation of verse 44.  Or, if you’re reading fast, it looks like it’s saying that the curtain was torn in two because the sun’s light failed.  This bothers me because I know the reason the curtain was torn.  As does probably most everybody, which makes me wonder why it was worded this way.  Someone that has not been taught right could get the wrong idea.     

     To begin with, some are looking for a reason why the sky got dark and would like to contribute it to an eclipse.  I hate to disillusion them but there only two eclipses around the time of the crucifixion that could come anywhere close to causing that kind of darkness, one in Nov of 29 AD which was the wrong time of year for the Passover, and the other was in March of 33 AD.  Right time of year, but when it crossed the longitudinal line that Jerusalem is on, it was about 50 degrees South Latitude, which means it was over the ocean between Africa and Antarctica.  Either way, that rules out an eclipse causing the darkened sky.  Check NASA’s historical records, that’s what I did.  As far as I can see, that leaves only one way that the sky could become that dark, GOD.  As one person put it, GOD darkened the sky so much as to prevent the onlookers from seeing Jesus’ face as He poured out HIS wrath on Him for our sakes.  

      As for the Temple Vail, as much as I like the King James, even it falls short in explaining this.  The Vail was there to separate man, the general public and even all of the priests except the High Priest, a barrier to us to keep us away from GOD.  In symbolism, the Vail is the flesh of Jesus, as his flesh was torn, so was the Temple Vail.  Another thing that is not mentioned is that the top of the Vail was too high for any man to reach, and the Vail was torn in twain from the top to the bottom.  Something only GOD could do.     

      I can understand trying to modernize the words to make it easy for people of today’s society who find it too much trouble to read a dead archaic language such as 17^th century English.  But to water it down to the point of confusion and even changing the meaning altogether is carrying it a bit too far.       

     One of the discussions that I was in had to do with certain verses in the Old Testament.  A particular verse in Genesis where the King James differed from most modern versions in that particular verse.  The same word in contention was used in a number of other verses, some of which appeared to be pretty much the same context.  Yet, they argued that the word there was different.  By changing this one word, not only changed the meaning of the verse, but in my opinion, reduced the impression of GOD from being the all powerful one, to being one that they say GOD said it was this way, the way they interpret it, so that’s the only way it can be.  They seem to overlook one thing, GOD created Adam, not man. The word for man in Hebrew is “ish” as in Brit=covenant ish=man.  British=covenant man.  That word in Hebrew is not ish.  It’s Adam.  Adam is a unique being, and original, separate from everything else.  Which means, there were probably plenty of man-like creatures roaming around everywhere outside the Garden of Eden.  There are still plenty of them walking around today.  You see them everywhere you look, bureaucrats and politicians.      

     The point of this being, GOD could have done it any way he wanted.  There could have been a big expanse of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 to allow all of these other man-like creatures to evolve, or HE could have just made it appear so.  The Bible also says that a day with the LORD is as a thousand years to us.  I haven’t seen anything that says HE didn’t take seven of HIS days.  I know it says Adam was created on the sixth day, but it doesn’t say when on that day, and if it was a day with the LORD, it could very well have been almost to the end of that day.     

     Speaking of versions, in the discussion about the Old Testament, references were made as to what was said in the Septuagint.  One person said what was written in the version he had.  When I looked in mine, it said something different, and the one I accessed on the Internet said something else.  It seems that the New Testament is not the only one that has different versions.  I really wish someone could put it all together and come up with what GOD wants to be said.       

     Some of these later versions seem to be trying to limit or reduce the impression of GOD being all-powerful.