Thanks for checking in here. I also doubt that many folks will actually read all the way down here. But, if they do, I will make my response simple. Your plea for civility and sticking strictly to the text is not reflected in your book. Secondly, just because one hispanic man said that the word verbo is a catholic word will not convince most people.Thirdly, the fact is Valera did not say that using SEÑOR was okay. He said it was catering to the superstitious and carnal traditions of the errant Jews, when holy men of God in the Scriptures did not have the same problem.

This is Robert Breaker III. Since it seems my book started this whole blog, I’ll ask anyone who’s read this far to check out my new website at:

http://www.rrb3.com

There you can get all the facts, presently “nicely” without “namecalling,” so there is no “confusion,” as Mr. Gomez accuses me of.

On my website, you’ll find out more about THE 1602 PURIFIED, the version Mr. Gomez used before he decided he’d get a name for himself by making his own version. And you’ll be able to read the entire book about the Gomez, so you can see the context, as well as the evidence about that version.

I’ve briefly looked through this site and the less than cordial postings, and was reminded of the following Bible verses in 1 Peter 3:13-16, which state:

“And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good? But and if ye suffer for righteousness’ sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ.”

It appears someone has forgotten these verses!

My desire is to preach the truth from a pure Spanish Bible. That’s why I use the 1602 Purified, and not the Gomez Version (which said it was okay for a man to marry his own daughter in the first edition which I have on my shelf!). Nor do I use the Mora and Pratt 1865 Spanish Bible. (I don’t know why they call it a Valera 1865, when it’s a REVISION of the 1602 Valera. And yes there was a second edition with 50 changes. I have it on my self. And even on the spine it has an error, spelling the spanish word “edición” as “edicieón”).

The 1602 Purified is the purest Spanish Bible around and it reads closely with the original Valera of 1602 (Closer than any other). It’s the work of my home church in Monterrey, Mexico, which with prayer and fasting for almost 20 years now, under the leadership of Pastor Raul Reyes, has been purifying the original 1602 with the KJV, TR, Hebrew Masoretic, and many other protestant reformation bibles before 1602. Dr. Ruckman even supported this work financially, which is interesting. (I have proof on my website).

The church’s desire was to remain as close as possible to the original 1602 Valera. I have a copy and have gone through all the versions extensively (1543 Enzinas, Pineda, 1569 and 1602 originals, 1865, 1909, 1960, and many more). I believe the 1602 PURIFIED is the purest Spanish Bible today.

If you don’t believe me that the 1602 Purified is the purest Spanish Bible, then get a copy and study it out yourself. My website will give you a ton of information, and also will tell you how to get a copy for yourself.

It’s a shame the Spanish Bible Issue is more about Politics than Purity. Let’s quit the name-calling, and start looking at the text itself!

The original 1602 Valera uses the word “Palabra” in speaking of Jesus Christ in John chapter one. The 1865, 1909, 1960, Gomez, and all catholic Bibles use the corrupt Catholic word “Verbo” from the latin vulgate reading of “verbum.”

I had a hispanic guy call me on the phone the other day, saying, “I read through the Gomez and looked it over, but when I hit John 1:1, I knew it was a Catholic bible, cause it said, “Verbo.” As a catholic before I was saved, I was taught Jesus is the Verbo, and that Verbo means he’s the God in “action.” But I see that Jesus is really the “Palabra,” (the older protestant word) because he’s the Word of God, just like the bible is the word of God. And they are both eternal, both life, both everlasting, etc. So which version is really a VALERA version in this verse? The 1602 Purified, of course.

That’s just one of many countless different SPANISH SPEAKERS who’s given us a testimony.

Unlike the 1865, 1909, 1960, Gomez, etc., our 1602 Purified also uses the correct word “SEÑOR” instead of Jehova in all but four places. Why? Because Valera said it was okay to use it in his preface of the original 1602! Also, because the KJV uses LORD (notice it’s all in capitals). And, because there are a plethora of older spanish Bibles (pre 1602) that do the same. Most importantly, because SEÑOR is a TRANSLATION of the Hebrew word, and not a TRANSLITERATION of the word. And, it also keeps Jehova Witnesses from being able to make new converts.

So there’s my 2 cents worth. I’m not interested in arguments. You can (and you probably will) write whatever you want about me. I’ll probably not even read it. I have too much to do than argue about all this. There’s souls going to hell! And someone needs to win them! That’s what we’re trying to do. We just want to make sure we win them with a pure word of God, and that’s what we have in the 1602 Purified.

My new website once again is: http://www.rrb3.com

Click on the flags to enter, and then go to SPANISH BIBLE ISSUE. You’ll be glad you did! You’ll find a lot of truth there!

Thanks for reading this, and may the Holy Spirit lead you into all truth. (John 16:12-13)

2.- I think that the purpose of the debate is to open possibilities of knowledge, considering the point of view of others and questioning our own knowledge. But in matter of faith it is hardly to be open to explore our own beliefs, when we have come to be sure of this, then debate turns in a dispute. The idea comes to be something like this: “I want to prove that you are wrong and I am right” with such point of view there is no possibility of debate but a dispute. There fore no kind of godly edification. I do not want you to stop from debate, but I think the level of this can be high, spiritual.

3.- I believe in the inspiration and preservation of the word of God, the Holy Bible. And it is a matter of Faith in God promise: “The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand forever.” Isaiah 40:8. The word of God was inspired by him trough the autograph, and preserved trough copyist. On this, however, are different positions about the preservation of God´s word. And I will expose what I believe.

A) God Inspired the autograph but God used the autograph not as a secretary or as instrument, like a man use a pen for write, but God used the autograph as a person, using his skills, knowledge, reason, emotions, and sometimes of course reveling things directly. Other times they were move to a searching and consulting other writings. They ways in which God´s word was wrote shows that God use many ways to give it, but always use the men as a whole persons, not as a merely instruments of writing. For Instance Ezra quote other writings that may be used of him for write Chronicles. 1Chr 29:29. The prophet Daniel made a research of his own and made a narration of how God answer his pray. Dan 9:2-3, 21-22. Luke says in his gospel: “It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus”. Lc 1:3. And in the introduction of Acts, Luke says: “The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, af all that Jesus began both to do an teach.” Acts 1:1. So we can see how God use the person, and inspire him to write, but God not always dictate HIS WORDS. God cannot be tied of hands in his ways to inspire his word and cannot be conceived as a merely dictator.

B) The facts shows, with out doubt, in the many copies of the Scriptures that the word of God has been preserved. No other Book has this record of preservation trough the years. But NO ONE of the copies are exactly alike, The fact that a Masorah exist shows the fact of different lectures, the Fact that exist majority text of the New Testament but no one exactly alike shows that God preserved his WORD, but not the EXACTLY WORDS. It is true that some, few, corruptions were copied and introduce in the text, but God has give us the understanding to identify this corruptions. The fact is that Erasmus and then others made a CRITICAL WORK in constituting the called “TEXTUS RECEPTUS” from the majority text. Even the Vulgate version was consulted. THAT IS A FACT. And the FACTS confirm my Faith and the promise of God. No other Book can show these amazing facts of preservation, and the facts cannot deny the God´s promise of preserve his word.

C) You have the right to believe that God always dictate WORDS, I believe that God inspire also WORDS, God use his servants to write not a dictation always but an inspired words also, and words are objective signs of mental subjects, ideas, concepts, psychic tracks. Where did God perform the inspiration?, in the hand? Or in the mind and spirit of his servants? I believe that God also inspire ideas and concepts and guide then the men to write using their culture, skills, and knowledge. God can do that. See how Paul says by inspiration of his own: “But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: if any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be please to dwell with him, let him not put her away”. 1 Corinthians 7:12. Also see 1Cor 7:40: “But she is happier if she so abide, after my judgment: and I think also that I have the Spirit of God”. Did God dictate these words or inspire these words? From where these words came? Of course from God´s Spirit, but God´s spirit use the thoughts, feelings, spiritual maturity of Paul to write this. Are this Paul´s words or God´s words?, Both, God use the words of Paul to express his words. That is inspiration. Not dictation.

4.- I know that exist perversions of the Word of God. For instance I can say that I have see a supposed purified Bible, not the Valera1602 purificada, but another that says that JEHOVAH is the name of the calf of gold that Israel made in the wilderness, and says this is the name of a false God, and that the real name of God is “Eyeh Asher Eyeh” and they say the Tetragrama, the 4 letters for God´s name is False and a corruption of the Scribes in the exile in Babylon. The Bible it self and the facts of its preservation shows this belief is a “fable” The Critical Work help us, guided by the Bible it self, to identify the corruptions. It is not an easy work and of course not finished work, but helps us. I do not expect you to share this point with me. But I believe this.

5.-God can use what ever he wants and who ever he wants to preserve his word. Before Erasmus (Catholic Scholar) prepare his Critical Text (that is what he did, a critical work) out of the few manuscripts he has of the Byzantine family, that later became to be the Textus Receptus, other prepare good text of the New Testament in Greek, for instance the Complutensian Polyglot, and many others revised these works, and refine the text. Most of them were Catholics (liberals, humanists). Even we know now that the first work of Erasmus used also the Catholic Vulgate. Why we tie the hands of God?. God use before other people for his purposes, he uses the Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, Darius, etc. even he use the wicked prophet Balaam for express his words, even when then this wicked Balaam give a bad advice for make sin Israel and that brings the wrath of God. God may not be agree with this apostate institution (Roman Catholic Church), and will judge it for its bloodshed, but God can use men from this institution if he wants. By the way I have followed some reads in the KJV and most of the times the Byzantine text follows the Latin Vulgate. For instances none of the Few Byzantine text own by Erasmus had the text 1 John 5:7, and Erasmus then have to put it on his text translated out of the Vulgate because of the critics that he received, because his first work did not have the words of the “coma Ioaninus”.

Thanks for commenting. However, I must say, you bring up way too many issues to comment on. What would be the most important concern you have of the many you mention here? Are you mostly concerned about the “fighting” as you call it, and the negative affect it might have on lost people? Is that why you wrote? Maybe you thought you could get us to stop?

Well, healthy debate is not only part of the culture of liberty, but is also part of Bible culture. Doctrine must be discussed and debated for people to understand it well. I think it is healthy to have debate. Some debate can go too far. When people resort to name calling and such, I don’t think it is very helpful. However, it IS helpful to put out an idea for debate, so as to sharpen our arguments for what we believe is true.

As for the Bible issue, you have not made clear your doctrinal position on preservation. You seem to be saying that you believe in “conceptual preservation,” that God preserves the concepts of His inspired Word, but not the literal words. I ask you then, what does the Bible teach? Doesn’t the Bible teach that God will preserve his “words,” and even the jots and tittles? Are those jots and tittles preserved in all of the Bibles, or just the good ones? or just popular ones? Do you really think that God preserved his Word through an institution that systematically killed good Christians and also purposely perverted copies of the Word of God?

1.- I respect both point of view of the subject. I respect the point that stands that the Spanish Bible(Reina Valera) need a kind of purification, even when I am not agree with this point.
2.- I respect the pint that stands that the Bible Reina Valera as it is now or as it has been printed in 1865, is the Word of God preserved in spanish.
3.- I Belive that the Word of God is also preserved in spanish in a good translations like Jerusalem Bible, or Nacar Colunga Bible.
4.- I Know that you do not agree with me in the previous point but I have reasons to Belive that and I will defend my points because I have studied the subject.
5.- It is a shame that I can not read the Bible in Hebrew or in Greek, I would love that even when I have in both lenguajes. I would love to have to say something about the matter, and I would love all Christians could read the Bible in the original lenguajes, but that is not possible for now. Only the Original text were Inspired, the copies were not, but even when certain kind of erors or mistakes were introduced, that does not affected the word of God.
6.- I know that the last point is controversial also but that is the fact, not even all the entire manuscripts are exactly alike, that is a fact.
7.- Translations were made for teach the word of God for the people that were not able to read the original lenguajes, and there are hundreds of ancient translations like the Septuagint, the Phesita, the Vulgate, the Armenian, and these are also witnesses of the preservation of God´s Word, but what those translations shows is that Translation need a kind of exegesis, literal translations can´t be good, does that matter the God of word was changed and corrupted, could be, but what those translations meas is that God Used those for preserve his word in those lenguajes for his people in those lenguajes.
8.- The King James Bible was not the first translation fo the Bible in English but was and is the most used for the Protestan Christians of English lenguaje, the history of the Church of English lenguaje is unique and the History of those that fled to North America from the religios persecution because of his Belive in the Word of God preserved in the King James and the Geneve Bible, shows the Way God preserv his word for the English lenguaje speakers.
8.- The History of the Bible in Spanish is different, and the History of the Protestant churches is Different, we have to understand that, Two different kind of cultures, motives and needs of God´s word. But God Preserv his word in the translation of two Scholars. Casiodoro de Reina y Cipriano de Valera. Even when the pople in Spain and in Latin America, (ancient colony of Spain) did not know about the Bible, because we were under the Power of the Catholic Church. Barely the Bible were owning even in the early 50’s, I have hear how the Christians Protestants were treated in the rural towns in Mexico. They fought to defent their belive in God´s Inspired Word, (The Reina Valera 1909, the only that was available). Do doy think honestly that those people Fought for nothing, for a Corrupt Bible, and that God never blessed them?
9.- I think that the two points of view set out here, are praiseworthy, but that do not are complete, Both do not see the whole social historical background of the Power God working trouhg the Reina Valera Bible (1909 and even 1960) and now Many of the Christians are looking at your Work and look the way you fight between you in this Subject and they are confused and loose hope.
10.- Now the Catholics with their Bibles are saying look how those fight for a “Bible”, and now they Use the Bible for preach and evangelize his own people. How do our fights says something for those that are nos Saved?
11.- I Belive that the KJV is the Word of God in English as much as I Belive the Reina Valera 1856, 1909 and 1960 are the Word of God. I know that you are not agree with me but I have see and Feel the power and the Blessing of God trough this Bibles. Even I saw for first time the Word of God in the TORRES AMAT Catholic Bible when I was 9 years old and this was the only Bible translation in my home and that Version lead me to Christ my Lord and Savior and Now I preach the Word of God.
12.- I have a wide and considerable colection of Bibles in several lengaujes, but specially in Spanish but I Use the Reina Valera 1960 in devotional and personal study of the Bible but I consult other translation even in other lenguajes. But I belive I have the Word of God and I preach it.. I am looking to have the Valera 1856 and the Valera Gomez to study tha subject. and I think I will find the preserved word of God in this revisions also.
your Brother Alex George

And remember what the bear said to the skunk, “I COULD whip you but it wouldn’t be worth the stink.”

This situation exists in Spanish in regards to the word “infierno” and “sepulcro” and “profundo”. Note Job 11:8 and Job 26:6. There is no problem textual or translation at all.

I have already given you the Valera Bible society minutes from 2005. We decided to NEVER make any changes textually. We will answer to God for our decision. You will answere to God for yours. At least I don’t have to spend the rest of my life looking for mistakes. I can preach it with authority knowing that every word of it is pure.

You have admitted that you have already forced on your people 3 or more different Bibles in Spanish. You expect them to submit, but you yourself find fault with the text. I hope you never hold the Bible up and say, “This is the perfect infallible word of God”. You will be lying. Kind of like Calvin George, who said on 114 of his book, “I bleieve that the RV 1960 is the inspired word of God” and in the following sentence said, “But I do not believe that it was inspired by God.”

I actually have more respect for some of the 1960 people, then for you and Gomez. At least they believe that the Book they have in Spanish is perfect and they are willing to defend it. I believe the Book (1865) I have in Spanish is perfect and I am willing to defend it. By your own admission, your book will never be perfect and it will never be finished.

What does the word “hell” have to do with “purgatory”?

You are worried about one reference to “purgación” in the NT when the RV1865 is missing the word “infierno” eleven or twelve times in the OT. Talk about an important doctrine affecting purgatory!