Why Multiple Editions of the RVG?
- Emanuel Rodriguez
- Mar 27
- 20 min read
Updated: Mar 29
By Pastor Emanuel Rodriguez
Multiple revisions and editions of just about every book that ever existed are normal. Bibles are no different. All Bibles go through multiple editions, including the KJV as we will discuss in just a minute. Yet somehow the Reina Valera Gomez (RVG) has been heavily criticized for what is a normal procedure with every Bible version in history. Let me explain why these complaints are unwarranted.
The Multiple Editions of the KJV
A common misconception is that the King James Version (KJV) has not gone through revision and that there is not much difference between the first KJV Bibles that came off the press back in 1611 and the ones we use today. This is not true, however. There have been editions of the KJV where changes were made in the years 1613, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1629, 1630, 1633, 1634, 1637, 1638, 1640, 1642, 1653, 1659, 1675, 1679, 1833, 1896, 1904. A complete list of editions of the KJV since 1611 can be found in the late Dr. D. A. Waite’s book entitled Defending the King James Bible.
Of these editions, 4 of them were considered more significant than the others. These 4 editions are considered by some scholars to be actual revisions due to the amount of changes made. The first major edition was published by Cambridge University Press in 1629. Concerning the changes made in this edition:
“The editors made more changes to the text than any other set of editors. By my count (counts of this sort always have an element of roughness), they introduced 221 readings, of which 199 became standard. In terms of frequency, this is roughly one new reading every five chapters. They also confirmed a further 59 variants from the first edition found in some of the earlier editions. The spelling of names if largely but not entire a scholarly matter. They introduced 178 spellings, of which 157 have become standard, and they confirmed a further 34. Overall, 493 changes were made, of which 447 (91%) became standard.” P. 83-84, A Textual History of the King James Bible, by David Norton
The second major Cambridge edition was published in 1638. According to David Norton (in his book quoted above), 235 changes were made. 224 of them became standard. Most of these were changes of spelling. Two of the editors involved with this revision were actual King James translators: Samuel Ward and John Bois.
The third major Cambridge edition was published in 1762. The chief editor was Francis Sawyer Parris, a recipient of 4 degrees from Cambridge University (B.A., M.A., B.D., and D.D.). He had been involved in proofreading KJV Bibles published by Cambridge since 1743. Many Cambridge KJV Bibles being sold and used today are of this 1762 edition.
The fourth major edition was published by Oxford University Press in 1769. It was edited by a well-respected Hebrew scholar named Benjamin Blayney. Most scholars consider this edition to be THE standard KJV text. Therefore, most KJV Bibles sold and used today are Blayney’s edition. Concerning this standardized text, Blayney stated in a report:
“many errors that were found in former editions have been corrected, and the text reformed to such a standard of purity, as, it is presumed, is not to be met with in any other edition hitherto extant.”
As pointed out, outside of these 4 major editions, there were other editions which dealt mainly with superficial issues such as printing errors, typographical or spelling errors, changes in spelling, new footnotes, new references, new sizes and fonts, new covers, new pictures, new maps, etc.
Word Changes in the KJV Since 1611
However, it should be recognized that there was word changes made in these editions between 1611 and 1769. The most thorough documentation of the changes made in KJV editions is presented in Dr. Laurance Vance’s book entitled The Text of the King James Bible. Dr. Vance points out that some of these word changes were significant. For example, in the 1638 edition:
In Genesis 39:16 “her lord” was changed to “his lord”
In Exodus 15:25 “made a statute” was changed to “made for them a statute”
In Exodus 21:32 “thirty shekels” was changed to “thirty shekels of silver”
In Leviticus 20:11 “shalbe put to death” was changed to “shall surely be put to death”
In the 1762 edition:
In Zechariah 4:2 “were” was changed to “are”
In Matthew 26:75 “words” was changed to “word” (plural to singular)
In the 1769 edition:
In Exodus 23:13 “names of other gods” was changed to “name of other gods”
In Leviticus 11:10 “nor” was changed to “and”
In 1st Kings 2:42 “that on the day” was changed to “on the day” (a word removed)
In 2nd Chronicles 34:10 “mend” was changed to “amend”
Other changes since 1611 include:
In Numbers 6:14 “lambe” changed to “ram”
In 2nd Chronicles 3:10 “place” was changed to “house”
In 2nd Chronicles 32:5 “prepared” was changed to “repaired”
In Ezra 2:22 “children” was changed to “men”
In Ezekiel 44:23 “men” was changed to “them”
In Ezekiel 46:23 “new” was changed to “row of”
In Hosea 6:5 “shewed” was changed to “hewed”
In Mark 5:6 “came” was changed to “ran”
In Mark 14:36 “that” was changed to “what”
In 1st Corinthians 9:24 “price” was changed to “prize”
There are many more changes like these thoroughly documented in the books entitled The Text of the King James Bible by Dr. Laurance Vance and A Textual History of the King James Bible by David Norton.
Don’t Multiple Editions and Word Changes Refute the Claim of a Perfect Bible?
Proponents of the KJV should not be alarmed by the fact that there were significant word changes made between 1611 and the 1769 standardized edition of Blayney. Many KJV advocates live in denial of the reality of significant word changes made in KJV editions because they haven’t taken the time to process such things intellectually. They don’t know how to reconcile these facts with their convictions. Some think that this contradicts our belief in the perfect preservation of the word of God as it stands in the KJV today. It does not, however.
The word “perfect” is a nuanced word. Words often have multiple meanings.
The 1828 Noah Webster’s dictionary defines the word “perfect” as:
1. Finished; complete; consummate; not defective; having all that is requisite to its nature and kind
2. Fully informed; completely skilled
3. Complete in moral excellencies.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines the word “perfect” as:
Free from any flaw or defect in condition or quality; faultless
The word “perfect” is presented with different meanings in the KJV also. For example:
2 Timothy 3:16-17 “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.”
Here the word “perfect” is used to mean “thoroughly furnished”. This means the individual is complete in the sense of being fully equipped or having everything the person needs to succeed.
James said:
James 1:4 “But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.”
Here the word “perfect” is used to mean both entire and wanting nothing. Something can be perfect in the sense that it doesn’t lack anything that it ought to have. I believe there is nothing lacking in our KJV. I don’t even believe there is anything that is lost in translation between the original autographs and the KJV. I don’t believe this because of some sort of double inspiration. I believe this because of the logic of faith based upon the biblical doctrine of providential preservation. I also believe this because of an understanding of the accurate and meticulous translation of the KJV.
No other Bible in history can boast of a superior display of linguistic expertise and scholarship. No other Bible in history has been more vetted and scrutinized than the KJV. No other Bible in history has proven itself more than the KJV. No other Bible in history has been more successful and produced more fruit, which confirms its quality and excellence, than the KJV.
This is why we make no apology whatsoever for our use of the KJV to ensure textual purity and accuracy in the RVG.
There are 3 types of errors that occur in Bible translations:
1. Textual
2. Translational
3. Typographical
Typographical errors would deal with superficial issues such as printing errors, spelling, word order, etc. These are insignificant. Just because a Bible may have typographical issues does not take away from how pure that Bible may be textually.
Textual errors are the most serious kind of error. Textual errors have to do with variants due to the Bible version’s underlying basis. The main problem we have with the other Bibles is their corrupt textual basis in the Critical Texts. There are over 8000 major textual differences between the KJV and Critical Text based Bibles, which affect doctrine according to the late Dr. Jack Moorman’s research presented in his book entitled 8000 Differences.
The KJV is perfect, and has been perfect since 1611, in regard to being 100% free from any type of Critical Text based corruption. No amount of typographical, or even translational, changes has any bearing upon the textual purity of the KJV.
Translational errors are mistakes not because of a corrupt underlying basis (Critical Texts) but simply because they were translated wrong. For example, take note of Daniel 3:25.
Daniel 3:25 “He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.”
Most other modern Bibles translate the last few words as “a son of the gods”. There is a huge difference between “a son of the gods” and “the Son of God”. Although the underlying words in Aramaic (bar Elohin) could be translated either way, both renderings cannot be right in Daniel 3:25. The context of the story demands that it be translated as “the Son of God”. Translating it as "a son of the gods" yields a serious doctrinal error, according to the context, and takes away the glory that belongs to God and gives it to the Devil. (For an in-depth explanation of Daniel 3:25 see the following article here.)
The 54 translators of King James (which dwindled down to 47) was the greatest collection of linguists and scholars ever assembled for the purpose of translating God’s words. The work that they did between 1604 and 1611 was so meticulous and thorough that you are going to have a hard time challenging their work and proving your argument to be more credible than that of the king’s collection of translators.
Even considering the significant word changes mentioned earlier, these changes were not really significant in regard to affecting anything doctrinally or even sense-wise. The same thing can be said in different ways. The goal of the translator is to pick the way that says it the best. The more precise, the better, but even if a change of wording is made to say something better or more precisely, it doesn’t necessarily mean the way it was rendered before it was changed was necessarily corrupt or wrong.
Verbal Equivalence vs. Verbatim Identicality
This is what is called Verbal Equivalence. Anyone who is bilingual understands verbal equivalence even if they may not quite call it that. Verbal equivalence is defined in a book entitled The Myth of Verbatim Identicality:
“We define verbal equivalence to mean when the reading in a particular document or verse has the same substantive doctrinal meaning as the reading in another document or verse even if the readings do not have verbatim identicality. For there to be verbal equivalence, the words do not have to be verbatim word for word identical, but the words have to have the very same substantive doctrinal meaning.” P. 8, The Myth of Verbatim Identicality, by Bryan Ross and David Reid
The author further explains:
“There is no difference between verbatim identicality and verbal equivalence with regard to degree of purity, accuracy, or meaning. The difference is simply that verbal equivalence recognizes that two different readings can have the same substantive doctrinal meaning even though they do not use the same exact words because there is more than one way of expressing the same thing. God, as the author of language, can express the exact same meaning using different words.” ibid
Understanding the difference between verbal equivalence and verbatim identicality will help the Bible-believing Christian to understand why the KJV can still be considered perfect when it comes to textual purity and translational integrity despite word changes amongst multiple editions.
Verbal equivalence is not to be confused with dynamic equivalence. Dynamic equivalence totally ignores any attempts to precisely represent the wording of the underlying basis into the target language and instead focuses on just getting the message across. This is a dangerous method of translating because if one translates what they believe to be the message behind the wording without any regard to the actual words, yet their interpretation of the message is wrong (or theologically biased) then they will become guilty of translating their misinterpretation rather than God's words. Hence, corruption.
I believe in word for word translation (aka formal equivalence) wherever a word for word equivalent is possible and necessary. What I mean by “necessary” is that the identical rendering from one language to another does not diminish from making sense to the target audience. Anyone that is bilingual understands, however, that word-for-word renderings (verbatim identicality) is not always good or even possible. Sometimes a word-for-word translation is painful to the ear of the target audience. Have you ever heard a migrant say something in your language that sounded very awkward although you knew what he was trying to say? The migrant may had been struggling to say things in English in the way that he would say it verbatim in his first language, but it just doesn't sound right in the ear of the fluent English speaker. The fluent English speaker will immediately recognize that there is a better way of saying it that comes across right. The same can be said vice-versa. This is where verbal equivalence rather than verbatim identicality is in order.
Therefore, wherever a word-for-word rendering is not possible or the best choice of wording for the target audience, verbal equivalence is sufficient. One only has to look at the difference of wording whenever the New Testament quotes passages from the Old Testament to see that verbal equivalence is sufficient in the eyes of God who inspired the Scriptures and invented languages.
The overall point is that although there have been many word changes in different editions of the RVG, this should not alarm anyone. Many of the changes made were not significant in terms of purity. Many of them were simply a better way to say the same thing. It is part of the revision process. This is normal procedure. This is a good thing. The goal of the RVG was the same as that of the KJV; textual purity and the most precise and sensible presentation possible of God’s words into the receptor language.
Since Reina and Valera
1960 proponents like Calvin George believe that complaining against the multiple editions of the RVG is some kind of argument against it. Yet they fail to see the hypocrisy of their argument. The Reina Valera Bible that they use and defend is not the original one. It is the one revised and published in 1960. That’s over 3 and half centuries after the first revision of Casiodoro de Reina’s 1569 text produced by Cipriano de Valera in 1602. If the RVG is to be discredited for having multiple editions, than they need to stop using the Reina Valera Bible altogether because it has been through many editions and revisions since its original release.
There were editions of the Reina Valera Bible published in 1708, 1806, 1832, 1850, 1858, 1861, 1862, 1865, 1866, 1869, 1874, 1877, 1883, 1886, 1890, 1905, 1909, and the list goes on.
Instead of criticizing the RVG for its multiple editions, Calvin George and his disciples ought to be thanking us for producing a revision of the Reina Valera Bible that corrects the very serious textual errors that exist in his corrupt Critical Text revision. The 1960 RV incorrectly translates Daniel 3:25 to say “a son of the gods” instead of “the Son of God”. The 1960 RV incorrectly translates Mark 1:2 to say “Isaiah the prophet” instead of “the prophets”, which neglects the fact that Isaiah was not the only prophet quoted in the passage (the other was Malachi). The 1960 RV omits the words “without a cause” in Matthew 5:22, which makes Jesus a sinner for getting angry. The 1960 RV incorrectly translates it as “their purification” instead of “her purification” in Luke 2:22, which makes Jesus impure and a sinner. The RV1960 omits the “Lord” in Luke 23:42. The RV1960 omits “by Jesus Christ” in Ephesians 3:9, taking away the deity of Christ from this verse. The RV1960 adds the words “unto salvation” in 1st Peter 2:2, teaching salvation as a process requiring works. And the list of inexcusable corruptions go on and on. (See documentation that proves this all over our website, especially here.)
The 1865 Valera Fiasco
Another group that criticizes us for having multiple editions of the RVG is the few remaining supporters of the 1865 Valera. Now this group is so diminished and irrelevant that I try my best to avoid mentioning them. I don't want to be a bully and they have done so much to hurt their own cause that I don’t believe there is really much of a need to take them to task anymore. But something worth pointing out in relation to the subject at hand is how this group at one time initiated their own revision of the 1865 edition of the Reina Valera Bible. It was done under the leadership of the late Jeff McArdle. They published their first and only edition in 2005. They made only 50 changes, albeit good changes.
For example, in 2nd Samuel 21:19 they added the words “the brother of” to match the KJV. Without the words “the brother of” the original 1865 edition read like the modern corrupt Bibles in English like the RSV, ASV, NIV, etc. which force it to say that Elhanan slew Goliath. Of course, 1st Chronicles 20:5 confirms this to be an error by naming the actual giant that Elhanan killed which was Lahmi, not Goliath. Everyone in every children’s Sunday school class of the earliest ages on up know that it was David that killed Goliath, not Elhanan. So this was a good change!
After publishing this first revision they lost their backbone, however, and began to second-guess the 50 changes. So they then voted to undo those good changes. No further plans were set in motion to correct the very real problems that exist in the 1865 text. This revision project was almost finished before it even got started.
They tried to justify their failure to finish what they started by inventing a new doctrine that concludes that since we are living in the so-called Laodicean age, everyone without exception is apostate by default, even Bible-believing Christians. Therefore, it is impossible for anyone in the last days to produce a good Bible according to the theory. Yet, anyone with common sense saw through this private interpretation of the word of God and the 1865 crowd lost all credibility. The movement pretty much died from there. (You can read of their downfall here.)
Today the few remaining supporters plan to print the original 1865 edition without the 50 changes. This is a terrible idea because pretty much no one will want to use a Bible that says Elhanan killed Goliath instead of David (among other errors that we document here.) Hardly anyone wanted it with the changes. Less will desire it without those few improvements. The sad thing is that they fail to see the damage they did to their own cause by dropping the ball while blaming their demise on us.
What this group and others like them are not understanding is that the multiple editions of the RVG speak to our transparency and honesty. That’s why God continues to bless the RVG despite all the opposition. God blesses honesty. Honest people correct mistakes. They don’t twist the Scriptures to invent a whole new doctrine to create an alibi for their negligence to correct errors.
The Multiple Editions of the 1602 Valera Purificada
Yet another crowd that criticizes the RVG for its multiple editions is the group that uses the 1602P. The loudest of this group is disgraced PBI graduate Robert Breaker (for more on Breaker click here and here). This group has all but crucified Dr. Humberto Gomez for producing multiple editions.
Their criticism against the RVG for its multiple editions started back when they published their first completed Bible, consisting of both Old and New Testaments, back around 2007 or so. Back then they weren’t anticipating that they also would have to make significant changes which would result in multiple editions.
Their first printing of the 1602P was of just the New Testament back in 1999. They printed a second edition of this N.T. in 2002. Concerning this 2nd edition, Robert Breaker wrote:
“Their first New Testament was printed in Guatemala in 1999, but had many spelling mistakes, and had to be printed again in a second edition with corrections in 2002, exactly 400 years after the Valera’s 1602 revision.”
Breaker had no problem criticizing the RVG for making corrections while he admits that his Bible “had many spelling mistakes”. Despite the hypocrisy, he obviously was very confident that the first publishing of their complete Bible in 2007 (that’s the date they claim on their website but I think it was later) would need no more revision considering how mercilessly he and his colleagues condemned the RVG for multiple editions.
Then I came out with an article that pointed out that the first publishing of the complete 1602P Bible was still very deficient. A few examples I pointed out were:
The word “heaven” was rendered “heavens” (plural) in Genesis 1:1.
The words “my master” were omitted in Genesis 24:39.
2nd Samuel 21:19 said Elhanan slew Goliath just like all the other corrupt Bibles.
Numbers 21:39 said “seventy and one” instead of “sixty and one”.
Judges 6:31 said “God” instead of “god” in reference to Baal.
The word used for “wife” in the OT was “woman” (mujer) instead of “wife” (esposa), which was inconsistent since they translated “wife” with the word for “wife” (esposa) in the New Testament. This demonstrated to me that they rushed to publish their complete Bible, probably because of all the ground they were losing with the growing acceptance of the RVG which had already been out since 2004.
I pointed out several other things in my article. Obviously, they also eventually recognized these problems because they ended up putting out newer editions sometime around 2016 and again around 2023 with these problems addressed.
That amounts to 2 editions of their New Testament and then 3 editions of their complete Bible. There is a rumor that they are planning yet another edition. (They are welcomed to confirm or deny this.)
The hypocrisy here ought to be obvious. I have yet to hear the 1602P group apologize to Dr. Gomez for publicly crucifying him for producing multiple editions now that they have done the exact same thing. I have yet to see them retract all of their statements against the production of multiple editions of the RVG. Considering how accustomed this group has become to unethical ways to promote their Bible (which you can read about here), I'm not holding my breath.
The Multiple Editions of the RVG
The first edition of the RVG came out in 2004. Dr. Gomez released the first edition reluctantly. He testifies that he wanted more time to proofread it. The first edition was pure textually. All the Critical Text flaws of the 1909 Antigua edition, upon which the RVG was based upon, had been corrected. But as we have discussed in this article, there were other issues that needed to be addressed in regard to word choices. Dr. Gomez was encouraged by a friend named Dr. Tom Gilmore of the Trinitarian Bible Society to publish the first edition because he believed releasing it would attract the attention of more collaborators, supporters, and colaborers.
Dr. Gilmore was right. Many from all over the Fundamentalist world saw the legitimacy of this project and the worthiness of the cause and as a result partnered with Dr. Gomez to aid him in many ways. (I am one of them.) Even some who were skeptical of Dr. Gomez’s work in the beginning were convinced to come on board.
One such individual was Dr. Carlos Donate, a textual expert who was part of the 1602P project. At the time of the release of the RVG’s first edition, the 1602P was sort of in limbo. Leaders of the 1602P project were not communicating with those that supported it or desired to support it. Even Dr. Donate, who not only helped with the revision, but also helped to print the first edition of the 1602P NT in Guatemala, was being ostracized by the leaders of the 1602P revision. Later it was revealed that there was growing turmoil between 2 of the main leaders of the group, Pastor Raul Reyes and former missionary William Park. Since then they have parted ways after a heated dispute over copyright issues.
Due to internal issues that were growing and hindering the project, Dr. Donate left the project and was accepted by Dr. Gomez and his collaborators. Since then he has proven himself to be a major asset.
The RVG revision attracted the assistance of many excellent bilingual missionaries around the world who craved a Spanish Bible that they could use with confidence for their respective ministries. It also attracted men with serious academic credentials such as the late Dr. D. A. Waite, a true Greek and Hebrew expert and the then President of the Dean Burgon Society. Another one was linguist and prolific author David Daniels of Chick Publications, who trained with Wycliffe Bible Translators. Dr. Rex Cobb also joined Dr. Gomez. He is an experienced Bible translator and the Director of the top school for linguistics in the IFB world, Baptist Bible Translators Institute in Bowie, TX. Dr. Louis Tyler, head of the original languages department at the Rio Grande Bible Seminary, also assisted.
Back in 2010 we released what we hoped would be the final edition. However, the popularity of the RVG continued to grow in leaps and bounds. With the growth, more collaborators came on board which resulted in more scrutiny of the text and more observations were called to Dr. Gomez's attention. Not all observations were legitimate causes for concern. But every now and then details were brought up that called for a second (or third, fourth, or fifth...) look.
Within a 20-year span Dr. Gomez fielded the input of hundreds of concerned individuals around the Spanish-speaking world with observations and suggestions to improve the text. This demand for textual precision from the Spanish-speaking world resulted in the multiple editions of the RVG.
Since then, we formed the RVG Bible Society to assist Dr. Gomez with the RVG and RVG-related projects. In the beginning of 2022 members of the RVG Bible Society unanimously agreed to do one more thorough proofreading of every word of the RVG text. I spearheaded the project. Over 70 collaborators from around the Spanish-speaking world agreed to help. Some of them worked as teams. Others worked alone. Everyone was appointed at least 1 book of the Bible. Some took on multiple books. Every word from Genesis to Revelation was reviewed with a fine tooth comb.
Collaborators sent us their observations in writing via email. Overall, we currently have on file a compilation of over 200 documents filled with proofreading observations. (I plan to one day produce this compilation of notes in book form.)
What I was hoping to accomplish in 1 year developed into a 2-year project. To say that it is the most exhausting project I’ve ever been involved with in all my years in the ministry would be an understatement.
On October 27, 2023 several members of the RVG Bible Society met in a room at the First Calvary Baptist Church of Brownsville, TX (Primera Iglesia Bautista Calvario) where my good friend Samuel Gomez is the Pastor. The men present in this meeting were Dr. Humberto Gomez, Dr. Joe Martinez, Dr. Carlos Donate, Dr. Peter Putney, Missionary Don Rich, Pastor Shane Rice, Missionary Darren Townsend, and myself. We went over observations and argued our points.
All this resulted in the publishing of another edition in 2024, which is the current edition of the RVG in circulation. The changes that were made were in many ways minor, yet still necessary because we desire the best presentation possible of God's holy words.
CONCLUSION
Everyone needs to understand that a thoroughly accurate Bible doesn’t happen overnight. For example, during the course of writing this article, out of curiosity I contacted an Italian Bible translator that I know of named Christopher Yetzer. I asked him how many editions of the Italian Bible translation by the Protestant Giovanni Diodati has there been. He sent me an article that revealed that it has gone through so many editions that I stopped counting the number of editions after 100!
(See the article for yourself at http://chiesabattistadellagrazia.it/en/diodati_en/)
The point is that when it comes to foreign Bible translations that need revision, it is important for Christians to recognize the need for patience. Everyone wants quick results nowadays. Many don’t understand that oftentimes the right results require much patience. Ministers learn this through experience.
The RVG has been in existence for over 20 years now. Yes, it has gone through multiple editions. We don’t deny this nor do we apologize for this. It is normal procedure. It is a tedious task and a massive undertaking. But the work is necessary because as Job said we need God’s words more than we need our necessary food (Job 23:12). Jesus said in Matthew 4:4 “It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.”
Psalms 119:140 “Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.” Textual purity is extremely important. Satan is behind Bible corruption. Therefore, it is a sacred responsibility to ensure textual purity. A totally accurate translation requires meticulous attention to detail. Dr. Gomez and his collaborators have worked very, very hard to provide the best text possible. This should be appreciated, not criticized.
The fact that some would criticize the RVG for having multiple editions demonstrates their desperation to find anything they can to try to discredit what they know is a superior Bible.
To those who support the RVG but are frustrated with the many changes which have been made since 2004, please try to appreciate the magnitude of this work. It was a long time before the KJV text was finalized and standardized, over a century, as we have revealed in this article. But it was worth it! So it is with God’s precious word in Spanish. The over a half of a billion souls on earth today which speak Spanish deserve the best presentation of God's words as possible in their language. The time and effort is justified.
Comments