Would Jack Hyles Support the 1960 Reina Valera If He Knew...

Written by Pastor Emanuel Rodriguez

In this video clip, the late Jack Hyles, in a spirited defense of the King James Bible said, "Phooey on the Revised Version! Phooey on the American Standard!" The crowd loudly expressed their agreement with thunderous Amens.

Yet, I find it interesting how many ministers in the Spanish-speaking world, who looked up to Jack Hyles, and may had even been trained for the ministry in his institution, use a Bible in Spanish that was revised with the same Revised Version and American Standard Version that Jack Hyles "phooeyed on".

The evidence for the influence of the Revised Version and the ASV in the 1960 revision of the Reina Valera is undeniable when one of the 1960 revisers, Dr. Jose Flores, revealed:

"One principle added to the first list of the RV 1960 revision committee was that wherever the RV (1909) Version has departed from the Textus Receptus to follow a better text we did not return to the Receptus. Point 12 of the working principles states: 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 1901, The Revised Standard Version of 1946, and the International Critical Commentary." El Texto del Nuevo Testamento, by Jose Flores, p. 323

Photo evidence of the statement by Dr. Jose Flores

Too bad Dr. Hyles is not around anymore. If he was, I would have loved to have sent him this quote by Dr. Jose Flores. I would have loved to ask Dr. Hyles what he thought about this statement and the process by which Eugene Nida and the American Bible Society (today called the United Bible Society) revised the Reina Valera.

I could be wrong, but considering the very strong statements Dr. Hyles made in the video clip above, I doubt he would respond the way many of his admirers who use the 1960 Reina Valera do. Many of them argue that many souls have been won with the 1960 Reina Valera so it's not a problem. But is that line of reasoning correct? Is that consistent with what Hyles taught concerning Bible versions? Many people have been saved with Critical Text English Bibles. Does that justify the use of corrupt Bibles when a better option like the KJV is available? Is it right to dismiss the effort to conform the Reina Valera Bible to the KJV and Received Texts, which is what we did with the Reina Valera Gómez, simply because many souls have been saved with the 1960 RV? Would Jack Hyles agree with that? Would Jack Hyles support the 1960 Reina Valera if he knew that it incorporated the very English Bibles that he said "phooey" on? I wonder.

The internal evidence of the implementation of these Critical Text English Bibles is easily seen. Here are just a few examples:

Scripture Verse	King James Version	Revised Version	Reina Valera 1960	Reina Valera Gómez
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.	He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the aspect of the fourth is like a son of the gods.	Y él dijo: He aquí yo veo cuatro varones sueltos, que se pasean en medio del fuego sin sufrir ningún daño; y el aspecto del cuarto es semejante a hijo de los dioses.	Respondió él y dijo: He aquí yo veo cuatro varones sueltos, que se pasean en medio del fuego, y ningún daño hay en ellos; y el parecer del cuarto es semejante al Hijo de Dios.
Matthew 5:22	But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment	but I say unto you, that every one who is angry with his brother _________ ______ shall be in danger of the judgment	Pero yo os digo que cualquiera que se enoje _____ _______ contra su hermano, será culpable de juicio	Mas yo os digo que cualquiera que sin razón se enojare contra su hermano, estará en peligro del juicio
Matthew 15:8	This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.	This people honoureth me with their lips; _____ ___________ ____ _______ _______ ______But their heart is far from me.	Este pueblo de labios me honra; __ ________ ____ _______ Mas su corazón está lejos de mí.	Este pueblo se acerca a mí con su boca, y de labios me honra, pero su corazón lejos está de mí.
Mark 1:2-3  (Note: the quotes in verses 2 and 3 are not from the same prophet, Isaiah.  Verse 2 quotes Malachi 3:1 and verse 3 quotes Isaiah 40:3.)	As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.	Even as it is written in Isaiah the prophet, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, Who shall prepare thy way;  The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make ye ready the way of the Lord, Make his paths straight	Como está escrito en Isaías el profeta: He aquí yo envío mi mensajero delante de tu faz, El cual preparará tu camino delante de ti.   Voz del que clama en el desierto: Preparad el camino del Señor; Enderezad sus sendas.	Como está escrito en los profetas: He aquí yo envío mi mensajero delante de tu faz, El cual preparará tu camino delante de ti. Voz del que clama en el desierto: Preparad el camino del Señor: Enderezad sus sendas.
Mark 2:17	When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.	And when Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of a physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners ____ _____________.	Al oír esto Jesús, les dijo: Los sanos no tienen necesidad de médico, sino los enfermos. No he venido a llamar a justos, sino a pecadores ____ ________________.	Y oyéndolo Jesús, les dijo: Los sanos no tienen necesidad de médico, sino los enfermos: No he venido a llamar a justos, sino a pecadores al arrepentimiento.
Mark 11:10	Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna in the highest.	Blessed is the kingdom that cometh ____ _____ ______ ___ ______, the kingdom of our father David: Hosanna in the highest.	¡Bendito el reino de nuestro padre David que viene! ____ ____ ________ _____ _______ ¡Hosanna en las alturas!	¡Bendito el reino de nuestro padre David, que viene en el nombre del Señor! ¡Hosanna en las alturas!
Luke 2:22  (Note: According to Leviticus 12 the purification process was only for the mother, not the child. The process required a sin offering.  Sin offerings were for sinners.  Jesus was not a sinner.  He did not need any purification.  To include Jesus in the process would make Him a sinner, which is blasphemous.	And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;	And when the days of their purification according to the law of Moses were fulfilled, they brought him up to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord	Y cuando se cumplieron los días de la purificación de ellos, conforme a la ley de Moisés, le trajeron a Jerusalén para presentarle al Señor	Y cuando se cumplieron los días de la purificación de ella, conforme a la ley de Moisés, le trajeron a Jerusalén para presentarle al Señor
Ephesians 3:9  (Note: Omitting “by Jesus Christ” takes away a clear presentation of the deity of Christ)	And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:	and to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which from all ages hath been hid in God who created all things ____ _______ _______	y de aclarar a todos cuál sea la dispensación del misterio escondido desde los siglos en Dios, que creó todas las cosas ____ ___________	y de aclarar a todos cuál es la comunión del misterio escondido desde el principio del mundo en Dios, que creó todas las cosas por Jesucristo
1 Peter 2:2  (Note: Adding the words “unto salvation” teaches that salvation is a process; salvation by works)	As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:	as newborn babes, long for the spiritual milk which is without guile, that ye may grow thereby unto salvation	desead, como niños recién nacidos, la leche espiritual no adulterada, para que por ella crezcáis para salvación	desead, como niños recién nacidos, la leche no adulterada de la palabra, para que por ella crezcáis

Many more examples can be given but for this article I thought 10 should be enough to prove the point. Many more examples of places in the 1960 Reina Valera that were changed to conform to corrupt Critical Text based English Bibles can be verified in the documented evidence all over our website (www.sociedadrvg.com), especially here.

The Revised Version of 1885 (originally released in 1881) was the English Bible based upon the corrupt Greek New Testament of Benjamin F. Westcott and Fenton J. A. Hort. They made this text to replace the Textus Receptus, which was the N.T. basis for both the King James Bible and the original Reina Valera Bible (in the main). This is why if you would check out the original Reina Valera Bible as released by Cipriano de Valera in 1602 you would see that it reads like the KJB in all the places mentioned in the chart above.

Westcott and Hort's hatred of the TR was obvious.

“I had no idea till the last few weeks of the importance of texts, having read so little Greek Testament, and dragged on with the villainous Textus Receptus… think of that vile Textus Receptus leaning entirely on late MSS; it is a blessing there are such early ones.” Life and Letters of Hort, by Arthur Hort, vol. 1, p. 211

Another person who worked with Westcott and Hort on the Revised Version was a Unitarian named George Vance Smith. Unitarianism is a modern day revival of the ancient heresy known as Arianism. Unitarians, like Arians, deny the Trinity and the deity of Christ.

Thousands of ministers all over Europe protested the involvement of this heretic on the Revised Version committee. When an attempt was made to have Smith removed from the translation committee, it was prevented by Westcott and Hort. 

A.G. Hobbs, in the foreword to the Centennial Edition of Dean Burgon’s Revision Revised, wrote:

“[Smith’s participation in the communion service] led to a public protest signed by ‘some thousands of the Clergy.’ The Upper House passed a Resolution that ‘no person who denies the Godhead of our Lord Jesus Christ ought to be invited to join either company to which was committed the Revision of the Authorized Version of Holy Scripture: and that it is further the judgment of this House that any person now on either Company should cease to act therewith.’ This Resolution was also passed by the Lower House. And still they could not get this non-believer off the Committee. Here is a real shocker: Dean Stanley, Westcott, Hort, and Bishop Thirlwall all refused to serve if Smith were dismissed. Let us remember that the Bible teaches that those who uphold and bid a false teacher God speed are equally guilty. ‘For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds’ (2 John 9-11). No wonder that the Deity of Christ is played down in so many passages!”

Many who try to defend the changes made in 1960 in the Reina Valera Bible argue that the Critical Text based changes don't affect doctrine. Yet, George Vance Smith, who was on the committee for the RV, which we have proven is one of the 3 English Bibles that the 1960 Reina Valera was based upon, said that they did.

“Since the publication of the revised New Testament, it has been frequently said that the changes of translation which the work contains are of little importance from a doctrinal point of view; in other words, that the great doctrines of popular theology remain unaffected, untouched by the results of the revision.  How far this assertion is correct, the careful reader of the foregoing pages will be able to judge for himself.  To the writer any such statement appears to be in the most substantial sense contrary to the facts of the case” p. 45, Texts and Margins of the Revised New Testament Affecting Theological Doctrine by George Vance Smith

The Unitarian further elaborated:

“The changes just enumerated are manifestly of great importance, and are they not wholly unfavourable to the popular theology? Many persons will deny this, but it is hard to see on what grounds they do so.”p. 46, Ibid

Unitarian George Vance Smith claimed that the doctrinal changes would eventually defeat fundamental doctrines:

“It is little then to be wondered at, that the doctrinal results of the Revision should be either lightly estimated, or altogether denied. Nevertheless, of one thing we may be sure: in the light of advancing science and historical research the unlovely dogmatic temper will gradually cease to exist, or be ashamed to shew itself.” p. 46, Ibid

In Smith's book, entitled Texts and Margins of the Revised New Testament Affecting Theological Doctrine, he rejoices about numerous changes in the RV where fundamental doctrines were indeed affected and brought into conformity with his Unitarian beliefs.

The influence of heretical Unitarianism continued with the American Standard Version.

Consider the testimony of the American Standard Version translation committee upon the death of committee member Ezra Abbot on March 21, 1884. Ezra Abbot was a Unitarian. The following excerpt from a memorial resolution issued by the committee is clear evidence of this Unitarian’s influence on the translation:

“Always one of the first in his place at the table, and one of the last to quit it, he [Ezra Abbot] brought with him thither the results of careful preparation. HIS SUGGESTIONS WERE SELDOM THE PROMPTINGS OF THE MOMENT. HENCE THEY ALWAYS COMMANDED CONSIDERATION; OFTEN SECURED INSTANT ADOPTION... BUT IT WAS IN QUESTIONS AFFECTING THE GREEK TEXT THAT DR. ABBOT’S EXCEPTIONAL GIFTS AND ATTAINMENTS WERE PRE-EMINENTLY HELPFUL. Several of his essays on debated passages, appended to the printed reports of our proceedings which were forwarded from time to time to the brethren in England, are among the most thorough discussions of the sort which are extant, won immediate respect for American scholarship in this department, and HAD NO SMALL INFLUENCE IN DETERMINING THAT FORM OF THE SACRED TEXT WHICH WILL ULTIMATELY, WE BELIEVE, FIND ACCEPTANCE WITH ALL CHRISTIAN SCHOLARS” Historical Account of the Work of the American Committee of Revision, 1885, p. 68

No wonder Jack Hyles said "Phooey!" These Bibles were corrupted with an agenda to replace fundamental doctrine with heresy. The RSV was nothing but a modernistic regurgitation of the work of Westcott and Hort and Unitarians. Sadly, their fingerprints are all over the 1960 edition of the Reina Valera. We already gave some examples. Here's another one.

The word "hell" is mentioned in the KJV 54 times. (The RVG also says "hell" in all the same 54 places where the word appears in the KJV.) The word "hell" is only mentioned 13 times in the 1960 RV. Are we supposed to pretend that it is a coincidence that the 1960 RV removes the word "hell" and leaves it rendered as a Greek or Hebrew transliteration in all the same places as the ASV and RSV? How dishonest and willingly blind do you have to be to deny all this?

The evidence is irrefutable. No Fundamentalist should want to use a Bible, in any language, that is tainted by the use of corrupt English Bibles like the RV, ASV, and RSV. Like Dr. Hyles said, "Phooey on them!" And phooey on the idea of using these corrupt Bibles to change our Spanish Bible!

This is exactly why we worked hard to go through every word of the Reina Valera Bible and bring it in agreement with the KJB and the Received Texts. The result of this painstaking work is the Reina Valera Gómez Spanish Bible. It should be a no-brainer that anyone who desires to be consistent to their convictions for the purity of the KJB will recognize the need to use a Bible in Spanish, or any other language, that most conforms to the right texts.

If Jack Hyles was still alive today, I wonder what he would think about the fact that some of the men that he trained and mentored for the ministry are inconsistent to what he taught them concerning the KJB when it comes to their choice of Bible in Spanish.

It's easy to shout "AMEN!" with the rest of the crowd when your hero or mentor is proclaiming the truth. It's another thing to actually put what you claim to be in agreement with into practice. It's another thing to use a Bible that actually aligns with what you claim to believe when popularity, support, and fellowships are on the line. That's when we find out what you're really made of. A man of real conviction is willing to pay the price. That requires a backbone.

Not all are compromisers. I thank God for good men that I know who were trained by Hyles' institution who unashamedly use the RVG. These are real men of conviction, who don't just shout with the rest of the crowd, but will take a stand whether the rest of the crowd supports them or not.

I agree with Jack Hyles on this. Phooey on the Revised Version, the American Standard Version, and the Revised Standard Version! And phooey on making Spanish Bibles based on them. Let's get back to the right texts and be true to our convictions. Let's unify around the truth that way when we shout "Amen" we really mean it because it is coming from a place of genuine conviction rather than superficial emotionalism.