When translators create a new version, they use various types of documents to bring the message from one language to another whose readers they are targeting. In the process, they must make decisions as to the best wording that their potential readers will be able to comprehend. This can cause a shade of difference in meaning from version to version. Errors are inevitable, despite the sincerity of the translators. Denominational bias may occur, either intentionally or unintentionally. The following analysis of a portion of Numbers 15: 38 is an example of what can occur. In some cases, the variation of words and their meanings may appear to be minimal.

The King James Version is used here as the basic version. Four words from this version (underlined in the rendering below) head each list. Following them are the words used by forty-one other versions. A summary of the number of times each word is used is given. Following this is a conclusion.

Following is a list of the translations of the four words in the King James Version. The number of versions using the various words is stated. There is no distinction given between singular and plural words.

It is noted that all the Jewish versions use the color blue. Most of the ecumenical, Catholic, and Lutheran versions use violet. Most of the others use blue. Is this coincidence, or is there a definite pattern and reason? In Esther 8: 15, it is stated that the royal colors are blue and white. The ones which referred to violet above have also used violet here, as well. There is a relationship between blue, purple, and violet. Does it matter which color, or any other color, should be used? When one considers that the verse being discussed above is part of a commandment given by Yahweh, it is evident that there can be only one, not a choice of three, that should be stated. Thus, there has to be a change made by ancient translators or copyists. The changes are so subtle that they can be missed by the average Christian. This probably was not done by a Jewish rabbi or scribe because the Jewish versions use blue.

There are also variations with the other three categories of words used. The only true Jewish word is tzitzit. The other words are interpretive translations. One interesting word used is ribband (with two b's). This is a nautical term meaning "a lengthwise strip following a vessel's curves and bolted to its ribs, to hold them in place until they receive the planking or plating." There is an archaic word, riband (with one b), which means "a decorative ribbon". This word is an earlier form of ribbon. There is obviously a spelling error. It is strange that two versions of the Scriptures have not had this error corrected. All the other words can be checked in a dictionary to see the different shades of meaning. Which one is right?

What was the purpose of this thread or string and tassel or fringe? The answer is found is Numbers 15: 39. "... and you shall see it, and shall remember all the commands of Yahweh, and shall do them, ... ." There is no reference as to the shape and form of these, as some Jewish or Messianic groups avow.

The woman with a blood issue (Matthew 9: 20, 21) and other sick people (Matthew 14: 35, 36) recognized the healing powers that were represented in this part of Yahshua's garments. These two instances of the fulfillment of Malachi 4: 2 in reference to "with healing in His wings." These people remembered the meaning of the tassels and tzitzit.

There appears to have been changes in this passage over the centuries. Translators seem to have had problems with it and made interpretations, some of which may not give the true meaning. When one recognizes the true meaning of this passage, along with those above which refer to the healing of the sick, one should examine the importance of keeping the commandments. How can they all have been eliminated by the death of Yahshua? Have the changes caused Christians to forget the commandments of Yahuweh? Are Christians and Jews missing something in their interpretations of the Scriptures? This may be another example of replacement theology.