The Spanish Bible

by David W. Cloud

Through the years I have received considerable correspondence from men regarding the Spanish Bible situation. The standard versions used among fundamental Spanish churches are the 1909 and 1960 editions of the Reina-Valera. These are twentieth-century revisions of the Cassiodoro de Reina Bible edited and reissued by Cipriano de Valera in 1602.

The problem is that the Valera, at least these editions, is not entirely pure. While we praise the Lord that the Valera is not strictly a Westcott-Hort Bible, it does contain some significant departures from the KJV Received Text. (In a comparison of the Valera against 800 passages which are corrupted in the Westcott-Hort text, Rex Cobb found 55 omissions, additions, or questionable changes in the 1909 Valera and 75 in the 1960. The Valera does not contain such key Westcott-Hort corruptions as the omission of "God" in 1 Tim. 3:16; "b1ood" in Col. 1:14; "only begotten son" in Jn. 1: 18: and the Trinity passage in 1 John 5. It must be noted that this brother did not count the passages in which the Valera follows an edition of the Received Text different from the one underlying the KJV. For revision purposes, I believe it is important to count these.)

Recently I received some correspondence on this matter from a concerned reader, and have decided to print my reply for two reasons: First, I want to publicly present my opinion on this matter. Second, I want to give some information on the subject to our readers. I talked recently with some men who have had dealings in Spanish and who did not know much about the subject at hand. I think every man involved in any way with Spanish-speaking people should know these things and be involved, at least in prayer, in seeking the perfection of the Spanish Bible.

My position is this: While I can’t say what the exact solution to the Spanish Bible problem is, I do know there is a problem that must be addressed. I am convinced that the KJV and the distinctive edition of the TR underlying it is the preserved Word of God, and one way or the other the Spanish Bible needs to be brought to this Touchstone.

A difficult matter

I realize this is a difficult matter.

First, it is difficult because the 1909 and 1960 Valera are standard Bibles among the Spanish-speaking churches. Missionary Rex Cobb notes this problem in Omissions, Additions and Questionable Changes in the Spanish Bible: "We do not want to cause any Spanish speaker to lose faith in the best Bible he has, but at the same time we believe that God wants His word to be perfect in every language." We agree. (Rex Cobb, 3420 Guthrie, El Paso, Texas 79935; Cobb is a graduate of the Baptist Bible Translators Institute in Bowie, Texas, and has translation experience in the Zapotec language)

Second, it is difficult because of the variety and strength of opinions among fundamental men. Some want to see the Valera revised. Some claim they don’t see any problems with the 1909 or 1960 Valera. Others say all editions of the Valera are hopelessly corrupt and nothing but an entirely new translation will solve the problem. There are several variations on these main themes. The fact that there are differences of opinion, though, should not deter us from pursuing this matter.

It is true in general that the Bible version and translation issue is probably the most difficult, divisive issue a preacher can deal with. Does that mean we should cease striving for textual purity? Not on your life. The Lord Jesus Christ said, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by EVERY WORD which proceedeth out of the mouth of God" (Matt. 4:4). We must care about those words, and we must give our people those words!

"the Bible version and translation issue

is probably the most difficult, divisive

issue a preacher can deal with."

I know what it is to strive for a pure Bible, not only in English but in other languages as well. When we arrived in Nepal in early 1979, we encountered a corrupted Bible. We wanted to produce a concordance, but we quickly learned that the standard Nepali Bible was to corrupt for this. It would have been a waste of time to put the effort into producing serious Bible study tools; based on a corrupt version of Scripture.

My first attempt to correct that problem was to approach the Bible Society of Nepal (a branch, at that time, of the Bible Society of India, and a member of the United Bible Societies). I attempted to get them interested in producing a sound Nepali Bible. (This reveals how ignorant I was in those days!) After several months of dealing with their deceit and hypocrisy, I woke up to the fact that the United Bible Societies are apostate.

The result of that little foray into the ecumenical Bible translation world was the writing of Unholy Hands on God’s Holy Word: A Report on the United Bible Societies (available from Way of Life Literature, 1219 N. Hams Road, Oak Harbor, Wash. 98277 for US $5.00 postpaid.) Because of my dealings with the head of the Bible Society of Nepal in these matters he became my enemy and attempted to have me kicked out of the country. He also told terrible lies about me and slandered me across the land.

After ending my brief relationship with the Bible Society, I began praying earnestly and with tears that God would raise up some qualified men who could produce a sound Nepali Bible. Eventually and after much difficulty this was brought to pass. The first edition of the new Nepali New Testament was printed in 1993 and is being used and revised.

Anything worthwhile is worth striving for, and that certainly includes the pure Word of God.

If I were doing missionary work among Spanish-speaking people, I would do everything in my power to see the Spanish Bible corrected and perfected.

There are some efforts in progress to revise the Valera. The Global Bible Society (1625 Woodcrest Rd., Hagerstown, Maryland 21740) has been attempting to undertake such a project since 1991. I talked recently with Pastor J. Paul Reno, who has been seeking to coordinate this project, and he said that they have not made much progress. Pastor Reno has suffered health problems which has limited his own efforts in this project, and it seems that many of the men involved have not given the active participation necessary to go forward.

The Trinitarian Bible Society (217 Kingston Road, London SW19 3NN, England) announced their intention in 1993 to revise the Valera. Though I have written to Trinitarian, at this writing I have not received a reply as to the nature of this revision.

If I were a Spanish-speaking pastor I would take a careful look into these projects to see if I could he1p or support them. Such efforts cannot succeed without participation by concerned men.

Then there is the version being printed by the Broken Arrow Baptist Church of Pearce, Arizona (Pastor Clyde Thacker, P.O. Box 469, Pearce, Ariz. 85625). They have completed a Spanish-English parallel edition of John and Romans, and their goal is to have the New Testament in print in early 1994. If I were a Spanish-speaking preacher I would check into this project. According to Pastor Thacker, the version that is being printed by Broken Arrow is an ancient Received Text Spanish Bible which has been checked out and updated linguistically. I might add that though I called Pastor Thacker and requested more information about this project, I have yet to receive anything.

Missionary John Sawyer, editor of The Martyrs Bible Series, has looked into this matter carefully and advises returning to the text of the Valera as it existed in its early editions. (The Martyrs Bible Series include modern spelling editions of Tyndale's translation,the Matthew's New Testament, and the Geneva New Testament of 1557. These helpful volumes are available from J.B. Printing Ministries, 1367 Woodville Pike, Milford, OH 45150.) In a recent letter he made the following observations:

It is my humble opinion that the text of [the Valera of] about 1865 is about as error free as you are going to get. For someone to try to come up with a new translation is to ask for trouble, and when you multiply the effort by many hands, you are going to have the mess we have in English. There are more than 20 countries that speak Spanish and every one of them is nationalistic. lf you reproduce a good Bible from history it will not be based on present personalities or countries and it will be basically the one that the fundamentalists are using now.

In 1984 I bought a Valera 1602 in London and also a 1569 De Reina (before they were reprinted in facsimile). The only things I remember wrong in 1602 were the use of the word "pentence" for "repentence" and "of Christ" missing from Rom. 1:16. The difference I remember between the De Reina and the Valera was about one word per chapter in the New Testament. ...

I would like see the Trinitarian Bible Society restore the full text of the Valera 1865 and not mess around with a new translation. ... To put it in the most simple terms, I think they could put back what was taken out the past 100 years, and it would be fine (John Sawyer, 6514 E. 55th St., Tulsa, Oklahoma 74145).

Though I cannot yet make a dogmatic recommendation of any of these projects, if I were a Spanish-speaking person or missionary I would not be satisfied until I had a truly pure Spanish Bible.

Some have charged that "you King James men" only care about the English language. It is not true. I know many KJV men who care deeply about the condition of Bibles in other languages. I know that I do. During our years in South Asia, I did everything in my power to stand for the pure Word of God in Asian languages.

When I visited Czechoslovakia two years ago, I spent part of my time examining the Czech and Slovak Bibles. I sat with several pastors and had them go through the existing versions in these languages as we compared them to the critical texts.

I wanted to know the state of the Bible in the lands where I am working to produce sound literature.

I was interested, by the way, to find that not one of the church leaders I met in eastern Europe knew ANYTHING about the textual background and condition of their Bibles. How could they? Who has taught them? Is this not what we must do? Is it not a priority in missionary work to be certain that our Bible is pure? I think it is a copout for men to avoid this issue because of the problems it inevitably causes.

"Through the years I have noted a strange

inconsistency in the position of some men

when it comes to Bibles in other languages."

 

The very first thing a preacher needs to know is the condition of the Bible he will be using. If the Bible is corrupted, we cannot fight the enemy effectively. Yes, people can be saved through impure Bibles;

we saw many saved in Nepal through an impure Bible. (Even most impure Bibles contain some pure teachings; you can preach the gospel from a Catholic Bible.) That same Bible, though, was one of our greatest frustrations when it came to discipling those Christians and building strong churches.

The fact is that the Valera in its ccmmonly printed editions today is not pure enough. That is easy to demonstrate even to a non Spanish-

speaking person. It definitely needs some significant correcting.

Please understand that I am not referring merely to words in the Valera which could be translated differently, or to words which have become antiquated. I am referring chiefly to actual textual corruptions in the version. I agree with Rex Cobb in this: "No one who understands the nature of languages would expect that the Spanish and English Bibles would be exact1y alike, and any attempt to make them read literally the same will do harm to the Word of God. However, if the English says, ‘gospel of Christ,’ and the Spanish says, ‘gospel’ as in Romans 1:16, then I believe we have a problem to deal with."

There are many places where the 1909 Valera departs from the KJV Received Text, and there are some plainly erroneous translations of the Received Text.

The KJV Received Text

should be the standard

I specifically compare the Valera to the "KJV Received Text." Some would point out that certain of the textual differences in the Valera can be found in editions of the Received Text other than the one underlying the KJV. They would argue that since these readings are found in at least some editions of the TR, we should not be concerned about correcting them. I don’t agree.

Many of our readers will understand that there are several editions of the Received Text. There are different editions in Greek, and there are different editions represented in the translations. Prior to the translation of the KJV there was in Greek the Erasmus text (1535), the Stephanus (1551), and the Beza (1582), including several editions of each. The KJV translators perused the Greek texts mentioned, as well as many other versions and resources. They leaned heavily upon the work of their learned forebears, the men who produced the Tyndale, Matthew’s, Taverner’s, Great, and Geneva Bibles. The KJV is thus founded upon a particular independent variety of the TR.

There are four main reasons why I believe this variety of the TR, the KJV- TR, should be the Touchstone for all translation work. (1) We must have an absolute standard, and to open the text up for further revision at this point in history is to produce the confusion we see all around us in the Bible world. The KJV text is not a text in transition, whereas the preceding editions of the TR were. The hour leading up to the KJV was one of transition and purification, but that hour has passed. God obviously put His stamp of approval upon the KJV-TR and allowed it to be published and translated throughout the world in a manner unprecedented in history. At this confused, weak, apostate hour in history are we going to perfect the Bible? I say not. That has already been done, and our part is to lean upon that perfection. (2) The unique position the Authorized Bible has had in the past 400 years of history forces me to bow before its authority. (3) The importance of the English language in Bible preservation during this era forces me to see God’s hand in a unique way in the production of the English Bible. That is why I would correct any other language version with the KJV-TR. (4) The unique and thorough revisions the English Bible was brought through from Tyndale to the KJV force me to see the superiority of the KJV-TR. This was an unprecedented purification process.

When someone says, "You are fighting for the superiority of one mere translation in one mere language," I realize they do not understand - or refuse to recognize - the true history of the English Bible.

I am thus convinced the KJV-TR is the edition of the TR we must follow in all translation work. I am convinced this is the Touchstone, the perfect, preserved Word of God.

Problems in the Valera

Consider some examples of corruptions in the 1909 Valera:

"Of God" is omitted in Matthew 2:12. "Draweth nigh unto me with their mouths" is omitted in Matthew 15:8. "Jesus" is omitted in Matthew 24:2; Luke 9:43; Acts 3:26; Acts 9:29; and some other verses. "Yet found they none" is omitted in Matthew 26:60. "From the door" is omitted in Matthew 28:2. "As they went to tell his disciples" is omitted in Matthew 28:9. Mark 1:2 in the Valera reads:

"Isaiah the prophet" rather than "the prophets" as in the KJV. This results in a lie, because Mark was quoting two different prcphets, not just Isaiah. The KJV is correct; the Valera is wrong. "To repentance" is missing in Mark 2:17. "Whole as the other" is omitted in Mark 3:5. "With tears, Lord" is omitted in Mark 9:24. "In the name of the Lord" is omitted in Mark 11:10. "But he answered nothing" is omitted in Mark 15:3. "In spirit" is omitted in Luke 2:40. "Be of good comfort" is omitted in Luke 8:48. "The prophet" is omitted in Luke 11:29. "Lord" is missing from Luke 23:42 (and other verses). "That one whereunto his disciples were entered" is omitted in John 6:22. "My Father" is changed to "the Father" in John 6:65; 8:28; 8:38; 14:28 and 16:10. "Of the Lord" is omitted in Acts 7:30. "Christ" is omitted in Acts 15:11; I Corinthians 9:1 and other places. "After this manner" is omitted Acts15:23. "Of Christ" is missing in Romans 1:16. "Freely" is missing in Romans XX:32 and I Corinthians 2:12. "Fasting" is omitted in I Corinthians 7:5. "Corrupt" is missing in II Corinthians 2:17. "By Jesus Christ" is missing from Ephesians 3:9. I Peter 2:2 says Christians "grow unto salvation." "Of God" is omitted in I John 3:16. Revelation 18:20 reads "saints and apostles" instead of "ho1y apostIes."

(I believe the 1909 Valera is the best Spanish Bible in print. Though the 1960 Valera does correct some problems, it is even farther removed from the TR overall. The 1977 edition of the Valera is farther removed yet, and the Southern Baptist Convention-produced Reina-Valera Actualizada is still yet farther removed from the TR. As would seem reasonable in light of the Roman Catholic-Modernistic influence in Bible translation work in this century, the Spanish Bible has been moving farther and farther from the preserved Text with each revision since the late 1800s.)

Examples of corruption could also be given from the Old Testament. "For thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name" is mistranslated in the Valera in Psalm 128:2 as "above all things." Another is Daniel 3:25 which reads "one of the gods" instead of "the Son of God." Another is II Samuel 21:19 which reads "Goliath" instead of "the brother of Goliath."

These examples were given to me by several Spanish-speaking men over the years, and this is not an exhaustive list of corruptions.

It is enough for me, though, to know that something definitely needs to be done to revise the Spanish Bible.

I have heard some men say that the Valera is even better than the King James Version. While there might be readings in the Valera that are superior to some in the KJV, it is definitely NOT true that the Valera, is an excellent translation throughout. It clearly has doctrinal and textual errors.

Though the years I have noted a strange inconsistency in the position of some men when it comes to Bibles in other languages. If the Received Text is the perfect Word of God, it is inexcusable to promote or defend ANY DIFFERENT READING IN ANY OTHER LANGUAGE. It is one thing to endure a corrupted Bible while we are making every effort to see it revised; it is quite another matter to excuse or defend corrupted texts.

"We need PERFECT Bibles, and I applaud

every man who has zeal for a perfect Bible –

even though he might make some mistakes

along the way. It is only because of the

efforts of such men that the English world

has a pure Bible today."

 

I have met too many preachers who know little or nothing about the textual basis and history of the Bibles they use. Even worse, they don’t seem to care about this and they get a little huffy when you try to delve into the details of the matter. They seem to feel that since the Bible they use is the standard Bible in that particular language it must be the one God wants them to use, regardless of its textual corruptions. They even seem frustrated at the attempts of men who want to produce genuinely pure Bibles in their language.

This kind of attitude makes me sad. We need perfect Bibles, and I applaud every man who has zeal for a perfect Bible – even though he might make some mistakes along the way. It is only because of the efforts of such men that the English world has a pure Bible today.

I repeat my position: I am convinced that the KJV and the distinctive edition of the TR underlying it is the preserved Word of God, and one way or the other every foreign language translation needs to be brought to this Touchstone. Inasmuch as a non-English Bible differs in meaning from the Received Text, it is corrupted.

My apology for bestowing so large a portion of my time on Textual

Criticism, is David’s when he was reproached by his brethren for appearing on the field of battle-‘Is there not a cause?’ -John William Burgon

"No amount of earnestness can be condemned when pleading, on straight lines, the cause of God. ... To employ soft words and honeyed phrases in discussing questions of everlasting importance; to deal with errors that strike at the foundations of all human hope as if they were harmless and venial mistakes; to bless where God disapproves, and to make apologies where He calls us to stand up like men and assert, though it may be the aptest method of securing popular applause in a sophistical age, is cruelty to man and treachery to Heaven. Those who on such subjects attach more importance to the rules of courtesy than they do to the measures of truth do not defend the citadel, but betray it into the hands of its enemies. Love for Christ, and for the souls for whom He died, will be the exact measure of our zeal in exposing the dangers by which men’s souls are ensnared." -George Sayles Bishop, 1885

(This article was featured in Dr. Cloud´s "O Timothy!" magazine, Volume 11, Issue 2, 1994, pages 14-20)

 

Return to www.geocities.com/purespanishbible

 

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1 1