“Read it [Gomez Spanish Bible] and see. What is it going to hurt?”
What is it going to hurt? The Spanish RVG Gomez Bible has connections to Ruckmanism. How did all start? A Ruckmanite planted a seed of doubt in Brother Gomez’ heart. It was no surprise to me when Humberto Gomez admitted that the first person to bring to his attention supposed errors in Spanish Bibles compared to the KJV, it was a Ruckmanite by the name of Jack Wood.[1] The late Jack Wood was so much in agreement with Ruckman’s teachings that he was invited to preach many times in Ruckman’s church. The June 2006 issue of Ruckman’s periodical “The Bible Believer’s Bulletin” offers no less than 11 hours of recordings of Jack Wood preaching at past annual “Bad Attitude blowouts” hosted at Ruckman’s church.
A Ruckmanite home church
The home church of Humberto Gomez has been Charity Baptist Church of Beavercreak (formerly Dayton), OH for over twenty years.[2] It is indisputably a Ruckmanite church. Ruckman has preached in Gomez’ home church,[3] many preachers they invite preach for Ruckman,[4] some classes in the Bible institute in his church use some of Ruckman's books as textbooks,[5] the founding pastor (Greg Estep) got an honourable mention in at least three of Ruckman’s books, the present pastor graduated from a Bible institute whose website declares it was patterned after Ruckman's school,[6] there is an evangelist out of Gomez’ church (David Spurgeon) that regularly preaches for Ruckman (including just this year).[7] The tape and book catalog of Gomez’ home church—which was mailed to an acquaintance of mine this year—listed hundreds of sermons and dozens of books by Peter Ruckman.
Other Ruckmanite influence
The influence of Ruckmanism upon Brother Gomez doesn’t seem to end with his home church. Jim Fellure, the person who claims to have encouraged Gomez to proceed with his revision project and promised to publish his New Testament once it was done, has a Ruckmanitish view of Scripture, as revealed in the following statement:
Now if somebody that’s got an unprejudiced view said “alright, that says ‘she,’ the King James Bible says ‘he.’” You know how I know it ought to be? It’s gonna be “he.” I know that. And if the King James Bible said “inspired” or “inspiration” one place and “moved” another place, it ought to be “inspiration” one place and “moved” another place. If the Spanish Bible has “inspiration” in both places it’s wrong. You know. My standard is King James Bible. . . We’re convinced that’s [RVG] the best Spanish Bible available. You say do you believe it’s perfect? No, I believe there’s but one perfect book in the world, and that’s an English King James Bible. [That's Ruckmanism!] That’s the only thing. I don’t believe [the RVG] is perfect. I believe it’s got some human error in it. But I believe it’s the best thing going.[8]
As documented, the Spanish RVG Bible is a product of the influence of Ruckmanism. The acceptance of this Bible is a step towards legitimizing Ruckmanism. Ruckmanism has been dividing American Fundamentalism for over 40 years. In the post I’m responding to, you can see how a respected Spanish-speaking fundamental preacher (Elmer Fernandez) was called a POPE. We must not allow Ruckmanism to penetrate and divide Spanish-speaking fundamentalism!
This is the most transparent "guilt-by-association" argument I have ever encountered. Even the most remote second-hand affiliation with PSR is cause to reject this revision.
Not only that but it is the apex of hypocrisy, because S.M. would have us disregard all connections between the 1960 RV and Eugene Nida, liberals, modernists, apostates, dynamic equivelancy advocates, Westcott, Hort, the UBS critical text, and higher criticism because ------ "God is using it".
I have worked with several pastors in Mexico and many of them seem to hold the RV 1909 has the best translation for Spanish speaking people, sometimes admitting they would accept the 1960 but prefer the 1909 (the 1960 is easier to obtain than the 1909).
My understanding of the RV Gomez version was an attempt to combine translating from the greek as well as from the English KJV to put together an accurate translation (which is very hard to do if you just translate from English to Spanish). I am not sure how much (if any) greek scholarship was really involved.
It is hard to have an honest discussion when people cry for the KJB to be the standard to compare with, but can't decide if it is the 1611 (1st edition, 2nd, 3rd. etc, 1769, or something in between.
Always wondered what some thing of the preserved English translation before 1611 - which one was preserved and how did it become "unpreserved"?
Always wondered what some thing of the preserved English translation before 1611 - which one was preserved and how did it become "unpreserved"?
Any edition would be as good as any other for the purpose of determining what should and should not be translated. For most of us that call ourselves King James Bible Believers, the AV (with the marginal readings included) is the last word on which reading is the right one to translate from, and what meaning or definiton of the original word is the most correct.
How much difference do you suppose there is between all those editions (not revisions)? Can you site me, O, ten passages maybe, that I could compare for myself? Those that do exist (other than the occasional copyists error) don't alter the meaning anyway.
Whatever gave you the idea that the possibility of a Bible, translated without proven error, into any language, from providentially preserved readings in a previous language, would nullify the preservation of the readings in the earlier language? Whoever claimed such a thing? Some under-educated zealot, perhaps? Can you show me where Burgon or Waite, or any Dean Burgon Society member, or even Gipp, Ruckman, or Riplinger ever suggested that the original readings weren't preserved?
It seems to me that those who argue for the inspiration of the original manuscripts only are the ones that deny preservation, because in their view, God inspired a perfect Bible and lost it, and we are still trying to track it down today.
The view you ridicule says God inspired a perfect Bible, preserved it, and renders it in new languages from time to time, in particular those languages (Latin and Greek) that become important enough that they deserve to be called "universal" languages.
The Spanish RVG Gomez Bible has connections to "Hylesism".
The home church of Humberto Gomez has been Charity Baptist Church of Beavercreak (formerly Dayton), OH for over twenty years. This Church has a Bible institute that uses, as textbooks, works by Jack Hyles (Church Manual)and John R. Rice (The Home) and Jeff Owens (Character). These are all men who would have nothing whatsever to do with Ruckman or Ruckmanism, but have all been associated with Elmer Fernandez at some time. Calvin George has been associated with Elmer Fernandez, particuarly with regard to the Spanish Bible issue. Therefore there is an unmistakeable connection between Calvin George and the RV Gomez.
The home church of Humberto Gomez has been Charity Baptist Church of Beavercreak (formerly Dayton), OH for over twenty years. This Church has a Bible institute that uses, as textbooks, works by Jack Hyles (Church Manual)and John R. Rice (The Home) and Jeff Owens (Character). These are all men who would have nothing whatsever to do with Ruckman or Ruckmanism, but have all been associated with Elmer Fernandez at some time. Calvin George has been associated with Elmer Fernandez, particuarly with regard to the Spanish Bible issue. Therefore there is an unmistakeable connection between Calvin George and the RV Gomez.
It won't do any good WC. There is a lot of folks stuck in a camp mentality like they have the corner on Christianity. I like Dr. Ruckman's stuff and I like Dr. Rices stuff. You can't get too far apart then that. What is going on up at Charity , Beavercreek now a days? I heard about the split a few years ago but, being on the mission field, miss a lot of stuff in American christianity.
I also wanted to let you know I got saved at 27 years of age and when I started to live right, I was praying for my lunch at work and the group of my old drinking buddies took my picture while I prayed. I looked exactly like your avatar, longer hair in the back though.
I agree, When you see how big the need in the world is, it makes our childish loyalty to camps pale in importance.
Where are you a missionary too?
Lviv, Ukraine and the Carpathian Mountains from Warsaw to Budapest, as the Lord opens opportunities. I love the work, it is just the winters are so long. I took an evangelizm trip to near Uzhorad, Ukraine going towards the Romanian border last winter and thought it would be the last time I saw my wife. I had 2 of my boys and an Ukrainian teenage preacher boy. We got 4 feet of snow over night and we were on the south of the mountians. Scary a little but God got us through. Now I stay on the north side of the mountians until March-april when the snow stops.
My wife and I have worked in the Spanish ministry before in San Diego, CA and Tucson, AZ. She is from Mexico and I speak passable Spanish. We found that the RV1960 is very readable and is closer to the NKJV than the KJV. The RV1909 is more like the English Revised Version. It has some archaic words and was written to reflect the Westcott-Hort Greek text and the German higher criticism of the time.
There is also a Spanish NIV (NVI - Nueva Versión Internacional). Like the English NIV, it is easy to read, but loses some of the majesty of a formal translation.
We have not reviewed the recent translation, but it is probably a lot similar to the RV1960.
The 1960 Spanish Bible is not a perfect version! It does not follow the Textus Receptus nor the King James at all. Please read the following quote by Jose Flores, a "consultant" on the 1960 Spanish Bible as he admits the following in his book "El Texto del Nuevo Testamento," published by CLIE, 1977 page 232,
"ONE PRINCIPLE ADDED TO THE FIRST LIST OF THE REINA-VALERA 1960 REVISION COMMITTEE WAS THAT WHEREVER THE REINA-VALERA (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."
For those who know, the RSV in English is a critical text Bible full of doctrinal errors and attacks on the diety of Christ.
To see a list of just some of the errors in the 1960 Spanish Bible, please go to:
You'll find two books by Robert Breaker that give the ecumenical and catholic envolvement of the movement behind the corrupt 1960 Spanish Bible. You'll also find information about the movement for a pure spanish Bible based on the correct texts (Greek Textus Receptus, and Hebrew Ben Chayim).
This is an important issue! Much has been said about it, but few have given all the facts. This website gives the ALL the facts.
Spanish Speaking people deserve a pure Bible, not a perversion based on critical texts and mixed with RSV readings!
A pure Spanish Bible has been complete, the work of Iglesia Bautista Biblica de la Gracia in Monterrey Mexico, and is now available. This version is superior to the 1909, 1865, and even the modern Gomez, as it uses Senor in the Old Testament (like the old Pineda version) instead of Jehova, it does not use the same word for Jesus as it does for Lucifer or Satan (as do the 1865, 1909, 1960, the Gomez, etc), and it does not follow critical text readings.
It also is the work of an Independent Bible Believing Baptist church (not just one man who claims he was the final authority) that prayed and fasted, and with their knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, collated ALL SPANISH BIBLES BEFORE 1909 to give us a true Castellan Spanish Bible, and not a MEXICAN BIBLE like the modern GOMEZ.
Please click on these sites and find out more about the Spanish Bible Issue!
The views and opinions expressed on this web site are not necessarily those of the Fighting Fundamental Forums management. This is an open and unmoderated forum. The content of each post is the sole responsibility of the poster. Participants are expected to follow the simple rules of the forum. Within these wide parameters various views are welcome to be expressed freely.
The college names used on the FundamentalForums.com web site are trademarks of their respective schools. The forums are not officially sanctioned by any of the institutions represented.
Errors in the 1960 Corrupt Spanish Bible that is full of Critical Texts
Linear Mode
