I'll take a stab at it.


First of all, the first translation you post is the "odd one out" in that it is the only translation (of all the ones in your link) that uses "would not have been", essentially setting the fictional scenario in the past.

All the others put it in more or less present: would not be, would not even be, should not be.


Again, the first part of the first translation you used (BBE) puts it in the past, with if he had been on earth, while all the others use if he were on earth. I will therefore be using the second translation.


If he were on earth.

If I say "If you were a millionaire, what would be the first thing you buy?", am I essentially saying "If you used to be a millionaire..."?
No. I am speaking of a current, though hypothetical situation.
Generally this type of past tense (yeah I don't know all the correct grammatical names for these things) is used whenever one is speaking of a hypothetical/fictional scenario, set in the present.

"If you had the power to fly, where would you go?"
"If you were invisible...what would you do?"
"If only so-and-so were still here..."
"If I had a million dollars..."

These are all speaking of the present. "If I were king, I would do this". But you aren't saying that if you used to be king, you would do *this*; you're saying that if you were currently king, you would do *this*.
(I just noticed that I used a were in the last part of the previous sentence. Even though I also used the word currently, the word were plus if (if were) turns it into a hypothetical scenario.)

This can, I guess, also apply to the past, as in "If I were king, I would have done this and that". But that actually doesn't sound right. You'd probably have to add "If I were king [back then/at that time], I would have..."

However, the more common translation of that verse uses would not be, without the vital have been that would have set it in the past. As it stands, it speaks of the hypothetical present/future.

So: "For if he were on earth", (hypothetical situation) "he would not be a priest at all" (establishes the setting in the hypothetical (present I think? Or future. Either way...)).

You could also look at it like this: "If he were on earth/If I was a millionaire", "he would not be a priest at all/I would totally buy that villa".
Again, I'm not saying that if I used to be a millionaire, that I'd buy that villa; because how can I buy that villa if I only used to be a millionaire? I have to be one in the present.

Essentially it's "If he were currently on earth (a hypothetical scenario, as he was no longer on earth), he wouldn't be a priest".

If I were in America I wouldn't be an American.

Interesting twists these translations take. I think one must look at the original words used in the original language, M's explanation does make a lot of sense. If that verse is the basis of the entire documentary, I would say that the author needs to do a little more research before trying to disprove a historical figure's existence.