Lies Against the Reina Valera Gómez

by Pastor Jonathan Everhart

We love all our Spanish-speaking brothers. I don’t care what version you use; we love you. I use the Reina Valera Gómez, but I would not even be in the ministry were it not for some great men of God who use the Reina-Valera 1960. I thank God for those men. Some of God’s greatest servants use the RV-1960 and other versions like the Purificada. He has His hand on them in a powerful way. So, what I am going to write about is nothing personal. It is not an attack on the Bible version you use. I just want to give you some knowledge so that there is a clear understanding about what the Reina Valera Gómez Spanish Bible is. I write these words not to divide, but to clarify truth in love.

The doctrine of Bible preservation is really the heart of the entire Spanish Bible issue. The Bible tells us:

“I will worship toward thy holy temple and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.”  Psalm 138:2 (KJV)

The Word of God is above all. If God has magnified it above His name, then surely it is above my name and your name. It is above the name of your ministry. It is above all.

God has promised to preserve His Word. Who would dare deny that everything He does is complete and perfect? If He magnified His word above His own name, why would He throw it away to be subject to time and chance? What kind of guarantee is that?

Some believe that there are no complete or perfect Bibles, yet thank the Lord they have “most of it”. That is nothing more than leaving the preservation of Scripture to chance. If that were true, we could have potentially lost half the Bible or maybe even all of it. My friend, God keeps His promises.

I am writing about false ideas that have been spread about the Reina-Valera Gómez. My purpose is not to convince you. It is not to give my opinion. It is simply to leave you with the knowledge of what the RVG (Reina Valera Gómez) is and what the RVG does not represent.

There have been so many false things said about the RVG and even about the RVG Bible Society. As Dr. Humberto Gómez once told me, “Telling a lie would not make sense if the truth were not perceived as dangerous.”

I would encourage anyone who is looking into the Spanish Bible issue to look beyond the slander and do their own research. Opinions of others only get you so far and can be misleading. The RVG project is a transparent work and the members of the RVG Bible Society love it that way.

The First Lie: “There is no need for a revision.”

Well, maybe there’s not a need if you don’t have a problem with Critical Text, bad readings, and inaccuracies in your Bible.

It is important to understand that the Textus Receptus is singular and not plural. God gave us one Bible. If you do not understand this you may think that the motive is simply to make the Spanish Bible like the King James Version, because that is the English Bible we use. Understand this, it’s not about the English. It’s about purity, doctrine, and the correct underlying text. There are many editions of the Textus Receptus. There is Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza, and others. Each had multiple editions. Beza’s fifth edition was almost the entire basis for the King James Version. We need to understand that the Textus Receptus editions were a process of improvement over time, collating and confirming the correct manuscripts and readings. God has given us Scripture over the course of time, and it was always by a process. It was almost complete with Beza’s fifth edition. It was the translators of the King James Version who completed this collation of all the right readings. And so, what Erasmus began in Greek, the King James Version translators finished in English. The King James translation is more than just a translation. It is a fulfillment. It is a completion of a divine process, fulfilled by the providence of God.

The words providence and miracle are synonymous in many ways. They are both supernatural. The only difference is time. A miracle happens in a moment. Providence is often just a miracle that happens over the course of time. It is the hand of God.

Dr. Edward Hills stated:

The King James Version ought to be regarded not merely as a translation of the Textus Receptus but also as an independent variety of the Textus Receptus.

Some don’t understand this, and they try to pick and choose between different editions of the Textus Receptus for the basis of their translation. They are simply ignoring the process and playing with history. This leads to problems with translations. I’ll give you an example. Erasmus’ first two editions of the Textus Receptus were missing 1 John 5:7, the most powerful verse about the doctrine of the Trinity. We need that verse in our Bibles. This is why translations such as Trinitarian Bible Society’s new Spanish revision fall short. They don’t follow the underlying text of the King James Version. Some readings of the editions of Textus Receptus read like critical text Bibles, because it’s the same reading found in some corrupt manuscripts. The later editions of the Textus Receptus purged these readings out. When man begins to judge which words of Scripture belong and which do not, he places human reason above divine revelation. That is not scholarship; that is rebellion against the Author. We should only use the final edition of the Textus Receptus, the underlying text of the King James Version. Anything less than this will have errors.

If I were to write a book, how wrong would it be to print my rough draft or translate from it? We should use the final copy.

For brevity, I am just going to give you this one quote here. It stands alone and is enough, but there is a mountain of evidence to further confirm this. This is a smoking gun. Jose Flores, a consultant for the translation of the RV1960 wrote:

One principle added to the first list of the Reina-Valera 1960 Revision Committee was that wherever the RV (1909) version has departed from the Textus Receptus to follow a better text [Critical Text], we did not return to the Receptus… in cases where there is a doubt over the correct translation of the original, we consulted preferentially the English Revised Version of 1885, the American Standard Version of the 1901, the Revised Standard Version of 1946, and the International Critical Commentary.

We see clearly that both the 1909 and 1960 translations contain Critical Text and the 1960 also has the influence of English translations that are based on the Critical Text. So, there are places where it has the correct underlying text, but the translation follows bad translations. The result is just as bad. That’s why we see the word “buffalo” appear in the Spanish Bible at this time, because the Revised Standard Version says “buffalo”. The 1909 Spanish Bible that they revised, read “unicorn”.

I have never heard anyone say that 1960 is a perfect translation. The argument is “It isn’t that bad.”  or “It’s adequate”. Why would you not want a better Bible?

Imagine saying that about the Word of God, which He magnifies above His name.

“It isn’t that bad.”

I’m not attacking the RV-1960 or the 1909 Spanish Bibles when I say this, and I say this from a place of love. There is clearly a need for revision. This is not my opinion. This is knowledge.

The Second Lie: “It was the work of one man.”

I was told once concerning the RVG that, “I just don’t think a translation should be done by one man.” On the Literatura Bautista website (www.literaturabautista.com), some articles imply that the Reina-Valera Gómez (RVG) translation was the work of a single individual with ultimate authority. This characterization oversimplifies the translation process and does not accurately reflect the contributions of the many individuals involved. Be cautious about what you read regarding the Spanish Bible issue, as much of the problem lies in what is left unsaid. The author of this website has over decades of his life written critical books and articles about men of integrity. Such efforts to disparage fellow believers are, at best, highly unethical. Always keep in mind the source and the perspective it is promoting.

The RVG project is a transparent work, a team effort, involving over 300 men of God from over 14 different Spanish speaking countries. Dr. Gómez has several close collaborators that have been involved with him. He has never made a change by himself. He has always consulted with others. For brevity, I will just name three of his collaborators. These men did not merely endorse the RVG; they actively participated in the revision as collaborators.

Dr. Cobb was a missionary in Mexico for over 20 years. He has experience translating the Bible into the indigenous languages ​​of Oaxaca, Mexico. Dr. Rex Cobb serves as director of the Baptist Bible Translators Institute in Bowie, Texas, where he and his staff train missionaries from around the world in advanced linguistic studies for the purpose of translating scriptures into foreign languages. No other institution in the Independent Baptist world addresses the topic of linguistics more than the Baptist Bible Translators Institute.

Dr. D. A. Waite is a Baptist scholar whose credentials were likely unmatched among Independent Baptists. I’m going to just list these. The number of degrees is impressive and demonstrates extensive expertise. It is extremely impressive.

He earned a B.A. in Classical Greek and Latin from the University of Michigan in 1948; a Master of Theology with high honors in New Testament Greek Literature and Exegesis from Dallas Theological Seminary in 1952; a Master of Arts  in Speech from Southern Methodist University in 1953; a Doctor of Theology with honors in Biblical Exposition from Dallas Seminary in 1955; and a Doctor of Philosophy in Speech from Purdue University in 1961. He holds teaching certificates in Greek and language arts in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and has taught Greek, Hebrew, Bible, speech, and English for over thirty-five years in nine schools. Dr. Waite founded the Dean Burgon Society in 1971. He also served as pastor of a Spanish-speaking church for two years.

Dr. Louis Tyler is a Baptist minister who has taught Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, English, Spanish, German, and Bible. He holds a Bachelor of Science in Education from the University of Texas at Austin (1970) with teaching certification in English, Spanish, and German; the Master of Divinity degree from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (1974), and a Master of Arts in Hebrew (Greek minor) from the University of Texas at Austin (1981), and a Doctor of Philosophy in Foreign-Language Education-Hebrew (Aramaic minor), also at UT Austin (1988). He taught at the Río Grande Bible College in Edinburg, Texas, until May 2023, and served as adjunct professor with Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary of Kansas City, Missouri, until May 2024.

He produced an audio recording of the Bible in Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic and Latin. When he's been in Israel, speaking Hebrew, he's sometimes been taken for a native Israeli. What more could you ask for?

The Third Lie: “It was translated from English.”

What can I say more than this is just simply not true. Now, there are some early missionary translations that were Bibles translated directly from the King James Version into the receptor language. This provided people with Bibles that didn’t have any Bible in their language, but for the highest accuracy in translation, it is always best to use the Hebrew and Greek texts. This is the process used by the RVG, going back to the original languages but also using the King James Version as a guide. Now some have a problem with the fact the King James Bible is used, but they won’t say much about the Revised Standard Version their translation consulted. The RVG stands in the lineage of Reina and Valera yet leans on the underlying text of the King James Version translation, harmonizing beautifully with the purity of the King James Version.

The Fourth Lie: “It is a modern Bible.”

Some have accused it of being a modern Bible because it uses the standardized Spanish language. They say it’s a “modern Bible” because they want people to think it’s like the modern corrupt Bibles that use dynamic equivalence as its translation process and have the Critical Text for their base. They incorrectly equate the King James English with the old Castilian Spanish. Some do this to promote Spanish versions such as the Purificada or the Preservada, which are very similar translations that use a form of the old Castilian Spanish. There is a historical appreciation for the old Spanish, but it does not serve the Spanish speakers today.  This is an incorrect comparison. The King James Version was translated in early modern English. That is why it is still intelligible to us today. Although there are archaisms in it, the grammar is essentially the same as what we use today.

The same cannot be said for early Spanish. Its grammar differs greatly from today’s standardized form. It developed differently and changed from a single regional language to a poly-regional one with the expansion of the Spanish Empire. It became international. Spanish has been a very organic language, changing significantly over time. Both the KJV 1611 and the RV1602 are a little over 400 years old, but Spanish has undergone a more systematic change in pronunciation, orthography, and grammar since 1602 than English has since 1611.

Spanish was standardized in 1713 with the Royal Academy of Spain. The RVG Spanish Bible utilizes and follows these rules. It is a standardized formal language and serves the Spanish speaking people appropriately. The Purificada and Preservada Spanish versions are a very unnatural read. The RVG is not only pure textually, but also readable.  The Purificada may have cleaned up the Critical Text problems, which is to be commended, but where it fails in comparison to the RVG is readability. The RVG follows standardized international Spanish, and the King James Version follows very closely to standardized modern English.

The Fifth Lie: “It shouldn’t have the name Gómez on it.”

The RVG and Dr. Gómez have both been criticized because this revision bears his name. He has been accused of being prideful for this. I have had people tell me “I just don’t like him. He’s arrogant and prideful.” The crazy thing is they have never personally met or spoken with him. Everyone that I know that personally knows him speaks of his humility. This accusation implies that for a person’s name to be on a Bible is something unusual. Let’s take an honest look at this. Here is a list of some Bibles that bear the name of the person in charge of that translation.

• Ostervold Bible (French)

• Smith-Van Dyke Bible (Arabic)

• Tyndale Bible (English)

• The Luther Bible (German)

• The Diodati Bible (Italian)

• The Coverdale Bible (English)

• The Taverner Bible (English)

• The Reina-Valera 1960 Bible (Spanish)

• The Almeida Bible (Portuguese)

• The King James Bible (English)

I’m sorry, I just don’t see the problem with a third name added along with Reina and Valera. Throughout Scripture, God often weaves the names of His servants into the story of His work, not to exalt them, but to magnify His faithfulness through them. As Paul wrote, “I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.” And so it is with the RVG translation work: a testimony not to a man, but to the God who gives the increase.

Speaking about the RVG, someone once told me, “A man shouldn’t put his name on the Bible.” The problem with this accusation is Dr. Gómez didn’t put his name on the Bible. He didn’t even propose it. Early in the revision process at a meeting, Dr. Gómez presented the question, “What are we going to call this Bible revision?” It was the men at this meeting that proposed and decided that it should be called the Reina-Valera-Gómez.  This meeting took place at Iglesia Bautista Libertad in Matamoros, Mexico in 2008.  Several men of the RVG Bible Society were present in this meeting, including Manny Rodriguez, Dr. Jose Martinez, Dr. Carlos Donate, Samuel Gomez, Manuel Gomez, Shane Rice, and Lacy Wheeler.  Other notable men in attendance were Dr. D. A. Waite, Dr. Mickey Carter, Dr. Phil Stringer, Michael Lemma, and Dr. Stephen Zeinner.  There were many preachers from all over Mexico and Latin America in attendance.  Dr. Jose Martinez stood up and publicly expressed his support for having Dr. Gómez’s name on it.  Everyone in attendance was in unanimous agreement.  Not one person objected. It was the men at this meeting that proposed and decided that it should be called the Reina-Valera-Gómez.

I was speaking with Dr. Gómez the other day and he told me he offered this: If someone didn’t like the name then he would give them permission to take his name off, if they would just use it. But the thing is, even if you took the name off it, it would still be called the “Gómez Bible”. It’s just an excuse. If you don’t want to use it, just say so.

Dr. Humberto Gómez has dedicated much of his life for this translational work. He has endured criticism and slander for this Bible. Let me state this clearly. Any man that is willing to risk it all for the purity of the Bible I will wholeheartedly stand with. I stand with the name Gómez. I stand with Dr. Humberto Gómez.

Much has been unfairly said about the RVG, Dr. Gómez, and the RVG Bible Society. Yet for those willing to look past the noise and slander and seek truth, you will find the most priceless Spanish treasure buried under these false ideas. There has never been a more accurate, pure, and beautiful Spanish Bible, and I am convinced there never will be. To God alone be the glory for preserving His pure Word among the Spanish-speaking nations.