(Disclaimer: This transcript is auto-generated and may contain mistakes.)

Hey everyone this is Pastor Bruce Mejia here from First Works Baptist Church in El Monte, California. I just want to make a video regarding a question that I get frequently asked whether from people who visit our church or from listeners online and that is in regard to the Spanish version of the Bible and more specifically what my thoughts are on the reign of Valera in 1960. Now let me just start off by saying that our church is a King James only church and what that means is that we believe that the King James Bible is the perfect inerrant word of God for the English speaking people and with that being said we actually also reject all modern versions of the Bible. You know when I say modern versions I'm referring to the NIV, the ESV, the New King James and any Bible of that sort that would use whether exclusively or in part the critical text for its translation and the reason we believe the King James Bible is the word of God is because we believe that it's remained faithful to the original Hebrew translation of the Old Testament and of course the Texas Receptus of its translation of the New Testament and so we not only reject all modern versions of the Bible in English but we actually reject them in any language because of the fact that we believe that the word of God should be in every language and with that being said you know there are versions out there in different languages that are just as bad just as perverted as the ones found in English okay and in particular what I'm referring to is the reign of valera 1960. Now one of the reasons I also want to make this video is because the 1960 is probably one of the most popular versions that people like to use in every Christian denomination and I'm referring to you know Baptist, Pentecostals, I've known apostolic people who use it, I've known you know Jehovah's Witnesses, even Catholics who like to use the reign of valera 1960 but this is a perversion of God's word and in this video I'm going to explain to you why I don't use the 1960, why you shouldn't use it and I'm going to refer you to some of the versions in Spanish that you could use that are great versions of the Bible but before I get into that let me just give you a concise history of the Spanish Bible so that you understand where we got it from why is it called reign of valera okay there's a man by the name of Francisco de Encinas who did one of the first translations of the New Testament into Spanish in 1543. Thereafter you have a man by the name of Juan Perez de Pineda who took that and revised it and published his own in 1556 in Geneva, Switzerland. Thereafter you have a man by the name of Casiodoro de Reina who actually did one of the first canonized versions of the Bible into Spanish both Old and New Testament in 1569. This Bible is known as la biblia del oso and the reason they called it la biblia del oso or the Bible of the bear is because of the illustration that was placed on the front cover of a of a bear eating honey out of a tree. This was the picture that was placed in the front cover and this was a great Bible in fact you can still find it online today and it reads like the King James Version of the Bible and this man was used greatly of God to create that translation and many people appreciated him for that. In fact they referred to him as the Moses of the Spaniards because of the great exploit that he did in bringing the word of God to the Spanish-speaking people. Well thereafter you have a man by the name of Cipriano de Valera okay and what he did was basically take the works of Casiodoro and he built upon it. He published his own version after that the first edition of the 1602 okay which is known as la biblia del cantaro or the Bible of the pitcher the vase okay so this these two men were very instrumental in translating the word of God into the Spanish into the Spanish language. This is why every version that you hear about in Spanish is is most often referred to as a Reina Valera. Reina because of Casiodoro de Reina, Valera because of Cipriano de Valera. Well thereafter you have the 1865 you have the 1909 and even today we have versions such as the 1602 purificada and the Reina Valera Gomez. Now which one's the right one to use? Well they're all good versions of the Bible to use okay now they do have issues in those Bibles and they're they're still incomplete okay but I believe them to still be the word of God and what I would compare it to would be the versions that came prior to the authorized version in 1611 because of the fact that prior to 1611 you had great Bibles that were published in English such as the Bishop's Bible, the Geneva Bible, the Coverdale all of these Bibles were building upon one another until they reached that culmination of a perfect Bible in English which is what we have today as the King James version of the Bible. Well in like manner we see the same thing in Spanish the 1569 is a great Bible the 1602 is a great Bible the purificada is great 1865 all the way up into the Gomez these are great Bibles to use are they incomplete yes but you know what they're doing they're still building upon another now the only difference would be is that you know we don't have a culmination of a perfect Bible in Spanish as of yet okay but we still have great versions in Spanish of times past such as the 1569 the 1602 and what I particularly like to use which is the reign of ler Gomez right now notice that as I mentioned these versions of the Bible you know from the 1569 all the way even up to the Gomez one version that I did not mention that you should use is the 1960 version of the Bible why is that well because I don't believe that the 1960 is a Bible that was building upon the works of the past it's actually a corrupt version of the Bible that has no place in any Christian church any Baptist church for that matter because of the fact that it reads like the modern versions of today okay it reads like an NIV reads like a New King James it reads like an ESV and so on and so forth now you say well you know all these Spanish Bibles are bad and you know so I'm just going to go ahead and stick to the 1960 you know the 1569 has issues the 1602 has issues the 1909 has issues so I'm just going to stick to the 1960 but that's not a that's not a good way to approach the Spanish Bibles okay because that would be like someone who started using a bishop's Bible in times past and because there was it was lacking because it wasn't complete that they said well I'm just going to stick to the Latin Vulgate I'm going to stick to the Bible that the Catholic Church uses you know stick to the Bishop's Bible stick to the Geneva Bible stick to the Coverdale Bible right well in like manner we should stick to these versions of the Bible because these are great versions to use you see well I don't agree with that illustration you know I don't think that's a correct comparison to compare the versions that came prior to 1611 for the King James and to compare the 1569 Bible 1602 1909 as if they are the ones who are coming prior to the culmination of a perfect Bible well here's the thing the men who actually translated the Spanish Bibles they saw it that way in fact Cipriano de Valera who did the revision of la vivila del oso the 1569 specifically put first Corinthians 3 6 on the front cover along with the illustration of the pitcher or the vase and it reads I have planted Apollo's water but God gave the increase and what he was insinuating was that you know basically Cacio d'Oro was the one who planted the seed and he was just coming to water it okay he was just building upon what Cipriano or excuse me what Cacio d'Oro had already done in times past he was building upon it and in fact in the preface of the 1602 he encouraged others to finish what he did not and to make sure all critical texts of men were removed so they would read entirely with the Texas Receptus so even he knew that his 1602 was incomplete they were still waiting for that perfect Bible to come and he understood that he was just building upon what another man had laid down in the work prior to him until they reached that perfection okay you say what about the 1960 what's wrong with it well the 1960 is a byproduct of the british and foreign bible society and the american bible society okay and in fact uh let me quote let me give you a quote from a man by the name of Eugene neither who was a representative of the american bible society for the 1916 he specifically said this the better educated people naturally tended to desire more radical changes while the lesser educated were basically suspicious of alterations what is he saying well the 1960 was a bible that was translated for scholars by scholars okay and he's saying that the better educated ones you know these scholarly types were the ones who wanted this bible to be translated and to be changed radically whereas the lesser educated you know the more common people they were actually more leery of these alterations that were being made to the bible and um and so this goes to show you said why were they leery of it well because of the fact that they had good bibles prior to that why did they need a 1960 in fact let me give you some more proof there's a man by the name of Jose Flores who was a consultant on the project of the 1960 and in his book if texto del nova testamento that was published in 1977 he specifically says this on page 22 it states point 12 of the working principle states this in cases where there is doubt over the correct translation of the original we consulted preferentially the english revised version of 1885 the american standard version of 1901 and the revised standard version of 1946 and the international critical commentary so what is he saying he's stating that when they were revising or improving upon the 1569 the 1602 and when they would come across a word or translation where they felt it wasn't true to the original they wouldn't go to the original to find out what it really said what they would do instead was go to the english revised version of 1885 the american standard version the revised standard version of 1946 and the international critical commentaries all perverted versions of the bible why not go to the original why not go to the king james version of the bible instead they want to go to these modern versions in order to correct what these men had worked on in times past now why is that well keep in mind that the better educated naturally tended to desire more radical changes and so how are they going to get that radical change by referencing these modern perversions of the bible rather than the originals uh the texas receptus or even the king james version of the bible okay now the 1960 has a lot of problems all right one of the problems is the fact that the 1960 just completely removes hell from the old testament and it actually removes it approximately about 60 percent of the time in the new testament now this is a big problem okay why is that well because of the fact that the doctrine of hell is an important doctrine in the word of god and using ades or using ceol is not a correct word to use to explain the doctrine of hell he said well people in spanish know what that means well not necessarily and let me give you an illustration let me give you an example about a year ago i went soloing with one of my members uh here in our city and we knocked on the door of a spanish-speaking lady who was in a who was in her 70s i began to give her the gospel she actually invited us into her home and as i was presenting the gospel to her the the second point that i was making about hell she actually interrupted me and said hold on a second do you really believe there is hell and i said absolutely she said does the bible teach that hell exists and i said yes and i took her to the bible in spanish and i just showed all the verses that confirmed the doctrine of hell and she says that's interesting because i've read my bible for years and i've never heard about hell in my bible and i asked her what kind of bible do you have and she pulled out a 1960. well thankfully she rejected that bible and she adhered to what i had which is a gomez and she ended up getting saved and so this is an important doctrine this is not something well you know it says ceol here and ades here and infierdo here and not here you know no you know that is an important doctrine that should not be messed with and that just goes to show you that the 1960 reads just like the niv the esv and all these modern perversions of the bible but let me give you some more examples okay and let me just say this is that time will not permit for me to just go through all the tons of examples of errors doctrinal errors heresies you know just uh textual discrepancies within the 1960 glaring weaknesses that should be enough for anybody to see that this bible is not the word of god but i'm just going to give you a couple examples here of the fact that you know the 1960 teaches some pretty bad stuff let me just show you on the screen some of the verses that i'm talking about the reign of elaire 1960 teaches a works-based salvation john 12 47 in the king james version says and if any man hear my words and believe not i judge him not for i came not to judge the world but to save the world so the basic teaching here is that jesus christ when he first came came not to judge the world but to save the world because of the fact that he that believeth not is condemned already because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten son of god so what this is also teaching us is the fact that we have to believe when we hear the word of god in order to be saved okay the reign of elaire 1960 says this what that means is if any man hear my words and doesn't keep them you know keeping the word of god and believing the word of god are two different things okay you know here it's saying if you don't keep it if you don't guard it you know then basically you're not going to be saved this is a workspace salvation revelation 19 8 says and to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen clean and white for the linen is the righteousness of the saints revelation 19 is basically talking about the bride of christ and how the bride of christ obviously is made up of believers those who are saved and the fine linen there is an illustration of the righteousness of the saints that was imputed unto us from jesus christ you know our righteousness are as filthy rags in the eyes of god and therefore when we get saved jesus christ imputes his righteousness unto us the righteousness that's clean and white the fine linen that he gives to us which is the righteousness of the saints the 1960 says this so what is that well it's stating for the fine linen are the righteous acts of the saints the righteous deeds or works of the saints again teaching a workspace salvation revelation 22 14 says blessed are they that do his commandments that they may have right to the tree of life and may enter in through the gates into the city the commandment there is to believe on the lord jesus christ okay the 1960 says what is that stating it's basically saying blessed are they that wash their own robes basically okay well we don't wash our own robes robes are given to us the righteousness of jesus christ is given to us for salvation all right and again it's saying just something completely different than the king james now let me just give you one last one that is a major discrepancy in the bible of the 1960 although this is not a major doctrinal error the fact that they just completely changed the verse should throw out the 1960 jude 22 one of the famous passages of scripture in the new testament states and of some have compassion making a difference okay what does the 1960 say and of those who doubt convince them saying something completely different than the king james version of the bible you say why do you keep referring to the king james bio what well because of the fact that people will say that the 1960 reads just like the king james version well no it doesn't we have a perfect example here where it says something completely different teaching something completely different than what it says in jude 22 of the king james version of the bible so there it is folks you know that should be enough for you to realize that the 1960 is a perversion of god's word and the reason i'm making a big deal about this is because of the fact that unfortunately there are independent fundamental baptist churches who are king james only who will permit a spanish ministry to use a 1960 version of the spanish bible you know the the main pastor is king james only he rejects the niv he wouldn't touch a new king james with a 10-foot pole yet he's permitting his spanish pastor to use a 1960 which reads like the modern perversions of the bible so here are the reasons why people use the 1960 number one either because of ignorance they just don't know the issue they don't understand they never actually studied it out for themselves number two is pride they know that it's wrong but because their fundamental pope may not invite them to come preach for them if they you know drop the 1960 you know then that's the reason why they're going to continue to use it okay pride so ignorance pride and number three is just because they're not saved you know if someone is reading a 1960 and they're just eating it up with fork and spoon and they just think it's the greatest and they think that it reads just like the king james bible and even after being shown the many errors found within that bible they continue to use it continue to love it they're not saved okay and so you say what version should i use well i just named an entire list of them that you can use the 1569 the 1602 purificada you know my preferred version is right here which is the reina valera gomez i think this is a great version to use this is the one that i read from this is the one that i sold with and it's a great version of the bible to use there should be no reason why people would ever decide to go to the 1960 that should be a version that we all reject as bible believe in christians and let me just say this we shouldn't even listen to people who may preach like us and may have our doctrines that preach from a 1960 why is that well because that just shows a lack of integrity on the part of the pastor who's actually using it okay so i hope that helps and if you have any questions about any of that you can email me at fwbcla1 at gmail.com and i'll try my best to to get uh back to a lot of you and and try to answer as many questions as i possibly can but just know this throw your 1960 in the trash reject anything from the 1960 and go with these original these classic versions the 1569 the 1602 so on and so forth all right hope that helped god bless and have a great one