A Warning to Manny Rodriguez About the Gomez and Those who Embrace it.

by Robert Breaker

A little while ago, I wrote an article about the "lies" that I've seen over the years encompassing the Gomez Spanish Bible.  In response to that article, Missionary Manny Rodriguez wrote the following rebuttal:

The Rantings and Raving of Robert Breaker

I encourage you to read it for yourself, as it gives the mindset of a modern Gomez defender.  For he talks about loving his version and not attacking, but you can clearly see the vicious, anti-Christian, vindictive spirit in which he writes all throughout his writing, not to mention the continual name-calling and the "holier than thou" attitude (Where is the charity?).  Without a doubt, it's easy to see that Mr. Rodriguez is in the flesh and not in the Spirit of Christ.

He entitled his article: "The Rantings and Ravings of a Frustrated Critic of the Reina-Valera Gomez Bible."  But I'm not ranting, nor raving.  Nor am I frustrated.  I'm only questioning the veracity of the statements made by men who defend that modern version.  And I'm looking at their text to see if what they claim about it is true.

Manny, however, in his article has accused me of lying, while attacking me personally and lying himself about me and what he thought was the truth. (And in his defense, maybe he thought it was the truth.  The facts are--it was not!)  I could not believe how many things he said that were out of context or were twisted to look like a lie.

My Daddy used to say, "There's simply no substitute for clear and affective communication."  Obviously this is the entire problem, as there has been none of this from Mr. Rodriguez, for his writings portray a man who appears to desire only to attack and put down without coming to a full understanding of the facts at hand.  The truth is there are indeed many lies which have accompanied the Gomez Spanish Bible.  I dealt with those in my article.  It can be found at:


I will now briefly deal with the lies that Mr. Rodriguez put forth in his article against me.  I do so not to justify myself, rather to show the truth, for what Manny wrote about is shameful.  It's not true at all.  

First, I'm not ranting and raving as he infers.  I simply put forth some things that I've seen personally seen, read, and heard that appear to be outright lies from the Gomez crowd.  As a Christian, this bothers me, for we Christians should be active in telling the truth, and not saying things that are untrue.  I'm not the only one bothered.  Many other Spanish-speaking people have contacted me who have looked at the Gomez and have said they don't believe it's a good translation, and they are concerned over some things that they too look at as lies from those who defend that translation. 

I have then only sought to open the line of discussion.  Little did I know it would lead to more outrageous claims against me from Manny.  I hope to clear the air with this article.

I am indeed questioning Mr. Gomez and his version of the Bible.  I do not deny this.  According to Manny in his articles and writings, there is nothing wrong with this, as he says that is something they encourage.  But it's hard not to see Mr. Manny's emotional attachment to that version, and his frustrated and angry spirit with me for doing just that.

Manny begins he article by saying it's not worth it to rebuttal my article.  But then he does so.  Why?  If I'm not worth it, why waste his time? 

He then deals with some of what I said, but not all.  And once again he lies in saying I was kicked out of my old home Church.  He further gives false information about wanting to join his church as well.

The facts are as follows.  My wife got saved on the Mission field, and we wrote about it in our prayer letter.  We thought people would like to hear about it.  It turns out some did but others did not.  And those who didn't, became quite irate about it, and began to attack us.  (You'd think "Christians" would be glad to hear about someone's salvation). Some went so far as to tell my wife, "You were already saved, you just DIDN'T KNOW IT!"  This is eventually why we LEFT our old home church.  We left of our own accord.  The Mission Board called us later and said we had 90 days to leave them.  If you want to call that being "kicked off of our Mission Board," help yourself.  But we were not kicked out of our old home church or "disciplined" by them.  There were no "dishonest practices."  (Manny has still not told us what those were. He can't as there are none). We left of our own accord over a doctrinal issue, one in which we feel we did the right thing, as those at our old church appear to us to be preaching something DIFFERENT from what they used to preach.  (The issue is over salvation.  They used to preach salvation by FAITH alone plus nothing minus nothing, and that faith only in the shed blood of Jesus Christ.  It appears now to my wife and I that they, like many in modern Christianity, are now turning to the new gospel of begging, or inviting Jesus into your heart or life, for they are now saying you are saved by your asking God to save you.  But where is the blood in this?)

To read why we left our old home church, click here: WHY WE LEFT OUR OLD HOME CHURCH

Again, the main reason for us to leave was the issue of salvation.  We believe a Sinner is saved by FAITH IN THE BLOOD alone, and not by ANY OTHER WAY.  But we learned that this was not what others at our old home church believed.  For this reason, we told the assistant Pastor Mr. Donovan in person, "We wish to leave this Church and leave it quietly!"  And that's exactly what we did.  We had an understanding that we would not attack their ministry and they would not attack ours.  And I kept quiet for several years. (But because of them speaking out against us, I reluctantly put on my website exactly what happened and why we left that church.)  We later gladly left their mission board after they told us we had 90 days to make other arrangements. And, I made it a point to thank them cordially for their helping us through the years.  I also asked them why they desired us to leave, and they would not answer.  So we left.  And they were even gracious enough to give us a few more days than the original 90.  For this we were truly thankful.

Later, we heard that people from that church were talking against us and lying about us. One source said they claimed we had, "Gone off the deep end," whatever that means.  Someone else from that Church later told us that they had heard that I called Dr. Peter S. Ruckman, our old Pastor, a "HERETIC."  That's a lie. I never said that!  But, I did write to Mr. Ruckman twice, asking him what he had against me.  In one of his return letters, Mr. Ruckman wrote exactly what Manny put in his article, which he cited from me.  However, what Dr. Ruckman wrote is most certainly NOT true.  Not a word of it is true!  I have no idea where he got his information.  But it is NOT TRUE what he wrote to me.  Yet, Manny does not point out this fact.  Is it because he wants so badly to believe that it's true?  By spreading this false information, he is inadvertently misleading others as well. (If it is true, why on earth would I put it in my prayer letter?  I included it in my prayer letter to show people how others were lying about us.  It appears they still are.  Further, I made it a point not to mention who wrote me the letter in my printed and distributed prayer letter.  My intention was to show people what was said about us, but not who said it.) 

My Father years ago warned me about my old Church and their super critical spirit.  And, his was not the only word of warning.  I also saw over the years their Standard Operating Procedure in attacking other people from that church in which they didn't want to get along with, and their vicious attacks towards others.   And what I saw happening to others scared me.  This is why I made it a point to keep a daily journal of my time in Honduras.  This can be found at:


I kept this journal every day, and you can go and read of my time there up until 2006.  You just can't make stuff like this up!  The journal gives a day by day account of what happened to me while there and what I went through, and what God did with me while in Honduras.  It proves that what was written in that letter which Manny quotes is a lie.  It further must be noted that I indeed pastored a Church in Garcon Point.  I recently even came across an old newsletter that we printed and sent out to every house in Garcon Point, in which I'm listed as "Pastor" of that Church. 

In 2007, we had to leave Honduras.  We couldn't stay there any longer for lack of support, and because we couldn't get my wife's residence visa.  So we prayed long and hard about what to do.  At that time, I indeed called Manny's pastor and we spoke about the possibility of being sent out of his church. We even journeyed to that church in South Carolina and met with the people and the Pastor.  However, we ourselves decided against it, because Pastor Baker told us to go and ask permission from our old assistant Pastor Donovan to join his church.  I did not want to do this, but I called him anyway.  I found that he was on a two week vacation.  I remember then waiting two weeks, and then talking to Mr. Donovan on the phone while I was in North Carolina for a meeting, and asking him if he would be okay with us joining Karl Baker's church.  He said he had no problem with that. 

But my wife and I prayed about whether we should indeed join that church or not.  And after much prayer we decided against it.  One of the reasons was we heard Mr. Baker say a duplicity of things that he thought were salvation, i.e. sometimes he said asking was what saves you, and other times he said that salvation was rather by faith alone in the blood atonement. So which is it?  Not wanting to go through the same thing again that we had just gone through with our old church, we decided against joining that church.  I'm glad we did.  That was our choice, one we made after praying, and talking about this over with several other brothers in Christ.  We did not feel any "heat" nor "run for the border."  We believe we followed the leading of the Holy Spirit of God. 

We must also mention that while at Baker's church, he did ask about the Spanish Bible Issue and I did tell them about it.  They then doubled my support.  Later, while I was in Honduras we were notified that they dropped our support.  I then called them FROM HONDURAS and asked why, and their answer did not compute.  They said, "We only support Missionaries on the field."  I responded, "I'm calling you from the field of Honduras!"  So it did not make sense.  

Around the time we were considering joining Karl Baker's church, I talked to what is now my current Pastor, Bro. Raul Reyes.  He asked us to instead go down to his church in Monterrey, Mexico and be sent from it.  His is the church (Iglesia Bautista Biblica de la Gracia) that is putting out the Valera 1602 Purified Spanish Bible.  We prayed about this, and still believe it was the right decision to join his church. We further strongly believe without a doubt that theirs is the best Spanish Bible available today.  I say this not because someone told me so, but because this is the conclusion I came to after studying all the Spanish Bible texts, including the Gomez.

In Mexico, Pastor Raul Reyes ordained me.  This is something that my old church did not do.  They have a warped view of ordination.  Mr. Donovan told me, "We send you out, and then if you start something, we ordain you."  That's backwards!  I am glad to now be an ordained minister sent from a Spanish-Speaking Church to Spanish-Speakers!

Now, I must address Manny's false idea about what a Missionary is.  It appears through his article, that to him a Missionary is only sent to one place for his entire lifetime.  If this is so, then my question is, "Where was the Apostle Paul sent to?"  The answer is many different places.  For he wasn't called to one PLACE only for his entire lifetime, instead he was called to PEOPLE, and he traveled often.

To say that I'm out of the will of God for leaving Honduras, then, is a very misleading statement, and is used by Manny to try to make people think that God is finished using Robert Breaker.  The fact is, God's using me more now to reach more people with the truth than ever.  It appears, however, that with service for the Lord comes those who desire to attack, ridicule, and seek to discredit you.  

Next, Manny makes readers think that Robert Breaker has a "ton of time on his hands," and is just doing nothing.  I wish that were the case.  Rather, the last two years I've been through a lot of suffering, sickness, death, personal business and more.  And, I'm closer to the Lord now than ever.  I'm thankful for the opportunity to suffer for Jesus Christ's name's sake. I just never thought those who would be persecuting me the most are other Christians!

My father died two years ago, and that left us here in the U.S. with many responsibilities.  I still travel and preach as much as possible, but I have my 91 year old grandmother to take care of as well.  I also do not live in Alabama. 

Now, please allow me to go back to the issue of salvation, as I believe this is very important and indeed the crux of the entire matter.  I have and will always preach that a Sinner is only saved after having heard the Gospel, and then trusting in the shed blood alone of Jesus Christ.  This is Biblical salvation.  The modern gospel being preached today is that a man can be saved "without ever having heard the Gospel" and he can be saved "without even knowing about the blood," just as long as he "asks" God to save him, he's okay.  This is a false gospel and a modern "BLOODLESS GOSPEL" (to quote a phrase coined by Peter S. Ruckman years ago.)

Now, Manny's old Pastor, (a graduate of Ruckman's college) talked with us about this, and from what we heard him say in the pulpit when we visited his church about him believing salvation was by simply asking God to save you, was very confusing to us.  That's one of the reasons we decided not to join his church.  If salvation is by asking, then why did Jesus die? He could have stayed in heaven and said, "I'm making a new dispensation.  Anyone who simply ASKS me for salvation, I'll give it to them."  But he did not do this.  He came to earth and SHED HIS BLOOD on Calvary.  And now he asks Sinners to simply trust that blood atonement as sufficient to save them.  (How can someone trust that blood if they have never heard about it?  How can they trust that blood if they are asking apart from trusting in it?  Where is faith in asking?  We've personally heard the testimony of many people who say, "I asked God to save me.  But I don't know if I'm saved.  So I ASK him again every night just to be sure."  Notice how this false gospel leads to doubt rather than truly knowing you are born again).

The day we left our old home church, I distinctly remember hearing Peter Ruckman in the pulpit say at the close of his message, "If you want to get saved, you have to ASK, [a brief pause] ... er, TRUST the blood of Jesus Christ to save you."

Why did he stop in mid-sentence and change from saying one thing to saying the other?  Did he know he was about to say the wrong thing, so he changed to say the right thing?  Why two conflicting ideas?  The truth is they are very different.

I quote Peter S. Ruckman from years ago in one of his books from the 1980's:  "If you are saved, you know the only way to heaven is the substitutionary blood atonement of Jesus Christ.  If you don't know that, it's because you are lost."

Dr. Ruckman used to preach hard on the blood of Jesus and salvation by faith in it alone.  Does he now?  I don't know for sure, because I don't have contact with him.  But as I watch him on T.V. on Friday nights, he says appalling things like, "Just come to God the best way you know how!" And, "Ask him to save you!

This is not the Ruckman my father and I knew.  For that Ruckman used to be against "asking" for salvation, especially the anti-biblical gospel of "ask Jesus into your heart." 

Make sure to read the letter from Ruckman to my father where he states that he is against this. 


Yet, this "ask Jesus into your heart gospel is something that Chick tracts push a lot!  Especially in the end of their tracts.  Speaking of their tracts, I did indeed buy some Chick tracts for Manny.  I also remember distinctly telling him that I didn't like the last page in those tracts, but I do like the information given, as they are good seed-planters.  I also like the information they give about the errors of Catholicism. 

With this stated, I will now quote from Manny's own book, "God's Bible in Spanish."  On page 22, we read a quote from Mr. Gomez himself, in which he states that a Missionary correctly told him the following for salvation, "...if I would put my faith in the blood that Christ shed for me on the cross that, he would not only save me from an eternity in hell, but he would change my life."

Here we see the true Gospel, that of salvation by faith in the blood.  But then on the very next page, we find Manny quoting Mr. Gomez by saying that he did the following, "I ASKED Jesus to save me."

Again we see two conflicting statements.  Notice the difference.  One is the Blood-Stained Gospel and salvation by faith alone in it.  The other is a "Beggar's Gospel" in which a man "asks" Jesus for salvation.  Why do these men preach two different plans of salvation?

I am not questioning the salvation of Mr. Gomez.  But I do seek to ask "Why does he give two conflicting statements in his testimony?"  And, "Why does it seem so many others now do the same?"  We do not wish to go along with such people.  We stand on the BLOOD and salvation by faith in it alone, which is exactly what these people used to preach.  It appears they are now preaching something else.  If they desire to change, they are more than welcome to, but they should not expect us to go along with them.

Now, why do I bring this up?  Because this is the issue that started the whole thing, and the very reason we left our old home church. Because of this, after we left our old home church, I wrote to Peter Ruckman asking him to tell me what his problem was with me. (We never spoke to him at all during the time we left our church, and he was supposed to be our Pastor we only spoke with the assistant Pastor Brian Donova.)  In his return letters, Dr. Ruckman did not deal with the issue, rather, like Manny, he attacked me and wrote things which were untrue.  He never dealt with the heart of the matter.  Rather he labeled my wife a "retread" and said we were part of some church in Milton which tries to "talk people out of their salvation."  This also is untrue.  Although I now know of which church he speaks in Milton.  My father went to that Church off and on.    

Because of such attacks against us for no other reason than us simply pointing out the obvious and standing on the Blood, we now are very leery of the modern Fundamentalist movement, for the majority of them are now pushing the Bloodless Gospel instead of the blessed old Blood-stained GospelAsking is begging God for forgiveness of your sins apart from trusting his finished work to forgive you your sins.  Why then are so many actively hostile towards us for simply pointing this out?  Could there be a spiritual reason?

We are Bible Believers.  Moreover, we are King James Bible Believers.  But more than that, we are believers in the "Blood Atonement" and believe in the forgiveness of sins (ALL SINS) through it alone, and we preach the pure Gospel of salvation by faith in the shed blood.  And, we now see that our stand on this has separated us from others.  In fact, it has gotten us much slack and ridicule from others.

But notice that those who are now against us, are those who are now going along with the crowd in preaching something else.  They are telling Sinners to simply "ask God to save them," rather than instructing them the biblical way of "trusting his blood sacrifice" to save him.  Why have they changed?

Why is this important.  Because we live in a day and age of apostasy.  And there are many "Fundamentalists" out there (many of which are Independent Baptists) who are preaching a gospel of 1, 2, 3, pray after me, a gospel which puts all the emphasis on the lips, but none on believing from the heart.  Jesus said of this type of people, "...This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me" (Mark 7:6).  But salvation is by faith from the heart (Acts 8:37) and not just something uttered from the lips.  These people who omit the blood and are quick to get someone to repeat a prayer with absolutely NO gospel message preached first are modern day Pharisees who love to talk about soul winning, but they aren't really winning anyone.  They are only getting people to repeat something, but they aren't getting them truly converted. 

Let me state dogmatically, not all modern Fundamentalists are this way.   Bbut many of them are, especially those who follow the Jack Hyles' method of "soul winning."  That method is very SHALLOW as it attempts to trick people into repeating a prayer.  But where is the faith in the blood?

I mention all this, as Manny brought up Carlos Donate, who is a graduate of Hyles college.  I remember distinctly preaching in Guatemala for Carlos Donate at his church on the subject of the Blood and the importance of preaching it alone for salvation and for one's faith to be in it alone to be saved.  I remember Donate getting up after I preached and apologizing for saying he didn't preach the blood.  He'd been using the modern method, rather than the Bible method.  He then said, "I'm going to make it a point to preach the Blood from now on!

It appears to me that many Fundamentalists today are not preaching the blood either.  Instead, they have "Beggar's Gospel" which instructs a Sinner to come to God through asking rather than through believing upon his finished blood atonement.

With this stated, just because someone says they are a "Soul-Winner" doesn't mean much.  We need to look at their method, for they just might be preaching something else, a BLOOD-LESS GOSPEL.  And if you look at modern Fundamentalism, and especially the modern Independent Baptist Movement, you will see much shallow evangelism.  No wonder Gomez has hooked up with Chick Publications, which in the end of their tracts instructs Sinners to "ask" God to save them.  No wonder Karl Baker has hooked up with them as well.

Why do I mention all of this?  Because the doctrine of salvation is the most important doctrine of the Christian faith.  And we should realize that if someone is preaching something other than the Biblical means of salvation through faith alone in Christ's shed blood, then they are headed the wrong direction.  My wife and I have made it a point to stand and not go along with these people in their folly.  For this, we are ridiculed and spoken against by them.  But we gladly accept it.  For we shall not change our position.  The entire Bible points to salvation only through blood atonement.  In the Old Testament, it was faith in the blood of a lamb.  In the New Testament, it's faith in the blood of THE LAMB, Jesus Christ.

This is the issue which started all this, which made us ridiculed by these people, and which caused us losing so much support we couldn't stay in Honduras.  My wife was saved, but others didn't want to believe that she was lost before the day of her salvation, for if it was true that she wasn't saved, then that means countless others who are members of Independent Baptist Churches could be lost as well.  They don't want to think this could be a possibility.  But this topic is very important, as there are hapless thousands of people out there who have been deceived into trusting in the prayer they pray, rather than in the Person and his finished work of whom they are supposedly praying to.  (My wife was one of them).  Yet these men will not deal with this issue.  And rather than discuss it, it's easier to just ridicule Robert Breaker and call him a "Calvinist" and a "crazy person."  (Both of which are completely untrue).   Instead of deal with the issue, they just attack the man.  This is exactly what the Pharisees did with Jesus.  They did not like him or what he preached so they attacked him personally.  We will continue to deal with the issue that these men so adamantly do not desire to face.

The truth is Jesus saves, and he only saves those who trust his blood atonement.  A man can ask all he wants, but until he trusts, he's not saved.  Even Ruckman, years ago, stated this in his letter to my father, speaking about those who "called" but weren't saved, but God later "cashed in" by bringing them the Gospel so they could hear it and then be saved by faith.

I state all this, for many today try to discredit me in what I teach about salvation.  And that is why they say I should not be listened to when it comes to the topic of the Spanish Bible.  Yet they never stop to think that this is exactly what those Protestant Spaniards in the reformation had to face when they were working on getting out the Spanish Bible in their day.  They had their Spanish Inquisition, and it appears I have mine.  

With this stated, let's continue with what Manny says in his article, in light of the fact that the people he chooses to associate with won't deal with the issues, rather they have accustomed themselves like the Pharisees of old to ATTACK without discussing the possibility of what others have said against me are indeed lies.  Manny claims that I am, "...insane, desperate, jealous, and frustrated."  And he further states that my arguments are "far-fetched." 

He's entitled to his opinion.  But he doesn't know me very well.  I'm glad that Spanish-speaking people are turning from the 1960 to the Gomez.  At least they are going to something better.  But to say that the Gomez is the best, in my opinion, and I'm giving you my opinion based upon facts, is not correct.  I believe the facts clearly prove the Valera 1602 Purified is much better.  And, even though it's still being revised it is much better in the New Testament than the Gomez.  Just click on the following comparison chart below to see:


Scroll down on that comparison chart and look at the total number of differences from the KJV and the texts underlying it.  You'll see the Gomez is NOT what it claims to be.  It has not corrected the text completely.  It still deviates much from the TR and KJV.  It's, therefore, a lie to tell people what Mr. Gomez said.  For he said, and I quote, "...we have gone verse by verse making sure first of the purity of the text and then comparing the 1909 with the Authorized KJV.  EVERY SINGLE VERSE THAT DID NOT LINE UP WITH THE KJV WE HAVE IMMEDIATELY CORRECTED."

(I have capitalized the above for emphasis).  If this quote by Mr. Gomez is true, then all we must do is find ONE place that doesn't match the KJV, and find that Mr. Gomez has lied.  Or to be fair, let's just say he made a mistake in that one place.  But as we look through the whole Gomez Bible, and find many places where it doesn't line up with the KJV, how can we caulk that up to just a few mistakes?  Doesn't it prove that the Gomez Bible isn't what Mr. Gomez claims it to be?  And doesn't that prove that Gomez did not do what he claims to have done in revising his version?

Why then did Mr. Gomez make that dogmatic statement?   And then why does Manny call it a "straw dummy" when I point out that Mr. Gomez did no do what he claimed?  (Straw Dummy? Strange, that's what Donovan called the issue of Salvation through faith alone in the blood of Jesus).  It's not a "straw dummy".  Mr. Gomez should not have said such a dogmatic statement that isn't true.  And if you study the text verse by verse then you'll see that it does not IMMEDIATELY line up with the KJV.  This is a proven lie.  Why will Manny not accept it as such?  Is it because he does not want to admit the truth? 

If only Mr. Gomez had said it differently, there would be no problem.  Had he said, "I ATTEMPTED to immediately line up every verse with the KJV," then we would have no problem.  We would chalk up the differences to the fact that he attempted but failed.  But to dogmatically state that he did that, when the facts prove he did not, makes that statement a lie.  Attempt to deny it all you want, it won't change the fact.

Next, Manny did a great job of showing where in my list of what texts the 1602 Purified translators used, I included in one article the 1960.  I did.  I can't deny this.  I did include it.  But notice what I said.  I said it was "the 1960 Corrupt Spanish Modern Bible..."  Who in their right mind would think that they used the 1960 to make corrections, since I mentioned it was "corrupt?"  Further, the KJV translators had the corrupt Latin Vulgate (which Reina said was full of errors) on the table when they did the KJV.  Should we throw out our King James Bible because of this?  No.  They might have looked at it, but they didn't follow it completely.  They rejected it.  Same with the "corrupt" 1960 and the Valera 1602 translators.  They consistently rejected the 1960 because it was corrupt, and it wasn't true Castilian Spanish, rather modern Spanish.

I wrote that article a long time again.  In several other new articles, I took out the 1960 from the list.  Why?  Because although the 1602 Purified translators had the 1960 version on the table, yet THEY DID NOT FOLLOW VERSE BY VERSE the 1960, nor did they chose readings from it, as it appears the Gomez did in many places.  However, they did diligently compare verse by verse the 1543, 1556, 1814, 1865, 1909, KJV, McVey, and others.  But just because they compared them verse by verse doesn't mean that made them read with those.  Nor, did they ever state anywhere publicly that they "immediately" changed the verse to line up with the KJV.  They rather wanted a VALERA Bible which read close to the old Valera 1602, while it read completely with the pure texts underlying the King James Bible.  But they looked at those other older Protestant Reformation versions also.  They wanted the best CASTILIAN Spanish word, for Castilian Spanish is the right type of Spanish in which Spanish documents should be kept.  Read below on why Castilian Spanish should be what the Bible is written in.


Our King James Bible is in Elizabethan English, some say it's Old English, and they further state it's archaic.  I do not believe that to be the case.  It's from the time of the reformation, and for this reason, it's blessed by God.  The Valera 1602 Purified translators wanted the old CASTILIAN Spanish words from that same time period.  It's NOT archaic, as Castilian Spanish is still used today.  However, when you read the Gomez, you read a version that is in modern, updated Spanish, and not the beautiful old Castilian Spanish language (that by the way is still EASILY UNDERSTOOD today by Spanish-speakers).  How interesting then, to claim to love the KJV because it's OLD ENGLISH, but then to not want the same in Spanish (i.e. THE OLDER SPANISH reformation words), choosing rather the modern words used in the corrupt, ecumenical 1960 Spanish Bible.  This is what the Gomez did time and again.

Further, when it comes to the word "Verbo," Manny wants you to believe that it's the best Spanish wordHe erroneously believes that Verbum is the oldest Latin word (going back around 400 years after Christ or even a little earlier).  But Gail Riplinger in her article does a good job of showing this is not the case.  But for those who do not want to hear from a woman, and who don't want to look at the facts from her, click on the following below which proves VERBUM is NOT the oldest extant reading in Latin, for around 100 years after Jesus, we find rather the word Sermo used by the early church in Latin.  Also, it proves that Verbum is the CATHOLIC reading, and not the old Protestant reading in Spanish. 



Mr. Stephen Hite recently put out a work called the Octapla, in which he has eight different N.T. versions of the Spanish Bible given verse by verse next to each other.  In his work, it's crystal clear that Verbo is the Catholic word inserted into the 1793 Roman Catholic Spanish text of Scio, which he translated directly from the corrupt Latin Vulgate.  If Manny (and Carlos Donate) desire to defend a Catholic word from a Catholic text, then so be it.  But the facts prove that early Christians used Sermo in Latin and it was the Catholic Church which changed it to Verbum.  In Spanish, the early Protestant Christians used Palabra and it was the Catholic Church that changed it to Verbo.  If Manny desires to allow the Catholic Church to dictate to him which words he should choose in the Spanish language, then more power to him.  But I, as a Bible Believer, will not.  I can not. 

Manny further invents a teaching that Palabra is grammatical in error in Spanish, and that Verbo is correct because it's a masculine word.  He then says that because ella is used in reference to Jesus that this makes Christ a she.  If he chooses to believe this ridiculous argument, then so be it.  But true Spanish-speakers have no problem with it.  It's a feminine word, it's not speaking of Jesus as feminine or effeminate!  All the old Spanish Protestants used Palabra.  Are we seriously supposed to believe that they were all ignorant of Spanish grammar? 

Manny then endeavors to explain why we are no longer friends.  He then says piously that he's "withdrawn fellowship" from me.  If this is what happened, then so be it.  But I did not withdraw friendship from him.  I've prayed for him often and still do.  I wish him well in his ministry.  But I do stand by my comment that he has "turned on me."  For there is nothing else you can call it.  He's called me every name under the sun but white.  No, wait, he's called me that too!  He said I was a: "Caucasian American with a limited knowledge of Spanish."  (I was preaching in Spanish before Manny even learned it!  I know I'm not perfect.  I never claimed to be.  But I can speak it enough to start several churches, and teach and preach in Spanish, and start a Bible Institute, and converse day after day with people from all over the world who call me and ask me about the Valera 1602 Purified.  I also know it well enough to go verse by verse with all the Spanish Bibles and the KJV, and find the Gomez doesn't read with the King James like those who defend it claim it does).

He further called me: "a fool, a skunk, a liar, insane, an irrelevant critic, a chronic pathological liar, a loser, a deluded maniac," and much more.  To my knowledge, I haven't called him any names.  If I have, I publicly apologize, for that is not only un-Christian, but downright childish. That is so second grade.

Mr. Manny accuses me of not being able to deal with the issue, and being a liar who makes stuff up.  Why would I do this?  There are plenty of facts to deal with, and the facts which I dealt with above, as well as in my article in which I give what I perceived to be lies from people about the Gomez Bible, are clearly presented.  These should be dealt with.  For if lies are what made the Gomez movement into what it is today, we most certainly should not follow it! 

I view Manny's way of writing as very arrogant and uncaring, and someone who has no "brotherly love" towards others.  I would encourage Manny to read the Pauline epistles over again to see what Paul says about how we should treat other brothers in Christ, whether we agree with them or not.  I also hope Manny as the Pastor of a congregation does not deal with his "flock" in such a manner.  For this will only push them away.  Paul said, "Let all your things be done with charity!" (1 Cor. 16:14).  He also gives many more verses about charity, which Manny should do well to heed. 

Manny also mentions in his article that he has too much to do to respond to me, as he's so busy.  Yet his article is 21 pages long.  His article to Gail Ripliger is a lengthy 49 pages long.  How is it he attacks me for writing things on the internet, but he's "above reproach" himself for writing so much? 

He also talks about how great it is to have written a book, so he can point people to it when they ask him questions.  I wonder why Manny doesn't mention that I've written four books alone about the Spanish Bible Issue? (Not to mention over 10 others on other subjects).  I wonder why he also doesn't mention that he had several of my books about the Spanish Bible and appears to have referenced them time and again?  I wonder why it's okay for him to do so, but it's wrong in his eyes for me to write and try to inform people and point them to facts.  For I make some very good points about the problems in the Gomez in them.  Points, which he never deals with.  I also give very important historical information about the Spanish Bible and those men behind it. Information that is very needed in the Spanish-speaking world.  Why then does he seek to make me irrelevant?  Does he view me as a threat to him?  I'm not. I'm don't desire fame, money, recognition, etc.  I just desire facts to be presented about the Gomez text without them being covered up.

Manny continues by saying I belittled the "scholarship" behind the RVG.  I guess I do.  Why?  Because I've read it, and I've gone verse by verse with the KJV and I don't see them matching.  I also have talked with Gail Riplinger, who is a very scholarly woman, and she agrees with me that the Gomez has problems.  But who are we?  We are nothing but Sinners.  And who are those in which Manny praises?  Are they not Sinners as well?  So let's set aside the men (or women) and let's just look at the text, shall we?  This is what I did.  And, I find the Gomez falls very short on scholarship, while the Valera 1602 Purified does not. 

This is why I don't accept the "endorsements" of men who try to persuade us to use a version of the Bible because "they" say so.  I believe we should study it out for ourselves.  And then we can choose to accept or reject it.  But you can not tell me for one minute that all of those men on that "endorsement" list have indeed gone VERSE by VERSE through the entire Gomez Spanish Bible (from Gen. to Rev.) and found that it is 100% exactly in agreement with the KJV.  They have not.  They are endorsing it based upon an endorsement by someone else.  For the facts prove the Gomez is not entirely like the KJV.  Yet, Mr. Gomez insisted it is.  That's all I'm pointing out.  I'm not endorsing or rejecting the Gomez.  I have charity and believe that anyone who wants to use it can.  They don't need my permission.  And since I, "don't have an audience," according to Manny, then what does it matter what I say?  In fact, why does Manny want so badly to write against me?   Is it because I bring out some good points, and these must be covered up, as that's S.O.P. (Standard Operating Procedure) in a cult environment and in the modern IFB movement to attack the MAN rather than the issue itself?  Is that why Manny thinks he must shut my mouth through his much words and much speaking and intimidate me into submission like so many other "big wigs" in the IFB movement try to do?

I believe that has to be it.  I'm only pointing out the obvious, and it's obvious that people like Manny who defend the Gomez like to viciously ATTACK people personally even lying about them without ever dealing with the facts themselves.  The facts are in the text.  Does the Gomez read with the KJV as Mr. Gomez claims?  That's the issue, because that's what Gomez made the issue when he made that statement.  Did he lie?  You have to decide that for yourself.  For me he most certainly did.  And his finished Bible proves it.  It's not perfect, and it doesn't read like a version in which the Revisor "IMMEDIATELY" corrected every verse to line up with the King James.

Well, I grow weary with this.  Manny's Spirit is one of haughtiness, and for this reason I warn Manny that "pride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall" (Prov. 16:18).  I pray that won't happen. I hope Jesus comes back first.  But with his attitude of setting himself up as some authority while lying about me and slandering my name one must wonder what God will say to him at the Judgment.  My only desire is to preach the truth, no matter the cost.  And so far, the cost has been great.  But I have nothing to lose, I'm not trying to make a name for myself, trying to get meetings, trying to get $, trying to get a following, trying to look like an authority in the eyes of others, which is all too often what many IFB (Indepedent Fundamentalist Baptist) missionaries and Pastors try to do.  In my ministry, I've consistently chosen to go against the majority when the majority is wrong, and I've suffered for it.  But I choose to stand on what I believe to be right and stand against something that I see is not what it claims to be.  I'm not trying to make a name for myself.  Manny is doing a great job of that himself in writing about me and against me.  That only puts my name out there even more.  Personally, I'm tired and don't want to be involved, especially when people only care to name call rather than deal with the facts.  But I believe God wants me to point people to the best Spanish Bible and that's what I'm trying to be faithful in doing.  Is it the 1602 Purified?  So far it is, but it's also not finished. (It's in its 3rd edition now, but we are waiting for it to be printed again in its latest revised edition).  I pray it will be done soon.  For when it is, anyone who wants the truth can get a copy and compare it with the Gomez.  And you'll be surprised how different the Gomez is from the King James, and even the old Reina-Valera on which it claims to be based.  They also will see how great the Valera 1602 Purified is, as it's a true reformation text.

I heard from a man the other day who wrote to Manny several times and talked to him on the phone.  He said that Manny said something to him to the affect of: "I've walked over bigger guys than you to get to a fight!"   This perfectly portrays the attitude of Manny and people like him.  They want to FIGHT!  They love contention.   And they love making themselves look like the Victor so that they can exalt themselves in the eyes of their peers.  It's so they can feel good about themselves and pat themselves on the back.  (Isn't this what the Pharisees wanted as well?)  So Manny, it's all yours.  You used the more angry and mean words, so you must have won the debate!  You won the fight!  Hooray for you!  All praise King Manny!   All hail Emmanuel!

But what about the facts?  Why won't you admit that there has been much lying by the Gomez crowd?  And why won't you admit you have lied about me?  Why didn't you deal with Mr. Fellure lying about the Valera 1602 Purified?  How many people were turned away from it because of that lie?   And why won't you ever deal with the text itself?

Is your thinking that since a man said something about me, then it must automatically be true?  Is that it?  Is your attitude, "He's one of us, and if he said it, that makes it true!"  If that's the case, then truly that's a cultic attitude.  And you should realize that men can and do lie.  Even you "humble" Gomez is capable of lying.  The question is, "Did he?"  You've got to decide. 

If I myself have lied in anything, I'm truly sorry. God did not call me to lie but to preach the truth.  Manny, I read through your article three times, and my conscience bears witness that there were no WILLFUL LIES presented by me on my part.  Yet, you call me a "pathological liar."  But you are the one who's trying to slander my good name and make me look like some kind of evil doer who does nothing and is just a great big nobody with no audience.  Why do you seek to destroy me and my ministry?  Do you truly think that's the Christian thing to do?

I don't think ill of you.  I don't live only to put you down and spit upon you as you do me.  In fact, I desire to follow the Bible and "esteem you higher than myself."  Is it too much to ask for you to follow the Bible and do the same?  I mean, I am an elder.  I am older than you and I've been in the ministry longer.  Does that not count for anything?

You close your article with, "Nevertheless, may this article go forth as another rebuke to Robert Ray Breaker for his multitudes of lies against other Christians (1 Tim. 5:20).  What a horrible testimony on his behalf!  Now excuse me as I take a shower to clean this skunk smell off me."

Yep, my testimony is horrible.  But it's not my fault.  It's because of guys like you who are lying about me.  Is me telling what I perceive to be the truth a "lie" just because you say so?  So I'm not allowed to tell my side of the story?  Sounds like the Pharisees who tried to shut up the disciples of Jesus.   

If you feel dirty, how is that my fault?  Isn't it because you should feel dirty for slandering my name and lying about me?  You're the one calling the dirty names!  Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.  Dirty mouth, dirty heart.

I'll gladly admit it if you can prove to me that I lied.  But that will be hard to do, for it appears you see things differently in your own way, and each so-called lie you gave you twisted or else misrepresented.  And rather than simply TALK with me, you would rather ATTACK and spread FALSE information about me and why I left my old home church.

Further, you want to make others think I'm out of God's will.  How do you know what is God's will for me? 

Have you ever stopped to think maybe you're the one out of God's will?  For you are hooking up with a crowd that's headed the wrong way!  And your name calling and attacking me personally is only proving that you are one of those type of people who have no brotherly love and who defend each other at all costs rather than the truth?  Where's the Spirit of Christ in all that?

This is why I'm writing to warn you Manny about those people who put out the Gomez.  They have lied.  This can't be denied.  You should greatly ponder the people of whom you hang around with and question if what they are saying is indeed the truth.  Are they lying now?  I hope not.  Are they serving the Lord and doing a great and mighty work?  I hope so.  But I personally can't go along with them because they aren't preaching what they used do, and because their text is not what it claims to be. That's my personal choice.  I don't need them.  One man and God is a majority!  Amen?  If you want to go along with them, help yourself!  Enjoy it!  Just don't make the issue, "If he's not with me, he's against me!"  

That's why I am warning you Manny about your anti-Christian attitude.  I pray you will serve Christ rather than man. I pray you will wake up and see that the text is the issue, and that text is not what they say it is.  It's a lie to say it's been immediately corrected in every verse with the KJV when it's blatantly obvious that it hasn't.

You can give all the rebuttals to this you want. Help yourself.  It's open season on Robert Breaker.  Call me every dirty name in the dictionary, then take as many showers as you please.  But, I'm not important.  I'm just a nobody, trying to tell everybody about somebody who'll save anybody.  I'm just the voice of one crying in the wilderness.  You said it yourself, I'm not worth dealing with.  I'm nothing.  What is important are Spanish-speakers and them having the pure words of God in their own language.  Wouldn't you agree?  That's all I want.  I want them to get the pure gospel, God's pure words, and I want them to live a pure, Spirit-filled life, serving God with a pure heart.  (If they do that, they won't have to take a bunch of showers all the time.)

I'm tired of the vicious and childish attacks and lies that are so prevalent in the modern IFB movement.  Aren't you?  That's very childish to name-call.  It shows a man who can't articulate himself and can't deal with the issue at hand, so he must turn to the flesh and mock the person with whom he doesn't agree with.  Why not deal with the issue and the facts alone.  Why attack the person? 

I'm not interested in jumping on the bandwagon and going the way that the crowd's going.  Remember the old question, "If everybody else jumps off a cliff, would you jump off also?"  Not me.  I've found that the majority isn't always right.  In fact, they usually aren't right.  And moreover, in our day and age of apostasy, they almost always are wrong!  That's why I chose to practice discernment, and refrain from embracing them and their teachings.  I chose to take a few years to step back and study it all out and look at it.  And you're vindictive spirit of bitterness proves to me that you are not demonstrating the Spirit of Christ, rather the wrath of man.  Be careful you don't get a root of bitterness.

Manny, do be careful.  You are appearing to become the very thing we both used to be against, a PHARISEE who thinks he's right and everyone else is wrong.  It appears to me that you further are putting your faith in MAN rather than God, and I hate to warn you, but man will let you down every time.  You and I both used to talk about the ministry and those many men that we viewed as guys who were just in it for the fame, the money, etc.  They were apostates.  They were men-pleasers and glory hounds.  Why are they suddenly okay now?  For it seems you are hanging around with that very crowd.  It appears you are becoming just like them.

I'm glad you have a Bible you think you can believe in.  I'm sorry you're deceived into thinking it's the best Spanish Bible when the facts prove otherwise.  I love you in the Lord and pray for you often.  My Daddy was right when he said, "There is simply no substitute for CLEAR and EFFECTIVE communication."  Sadly, your calling me names isn't clear nor effective.  And many have told me that all it does is turn them off completely to the whole issue. 

You're choosing to believe a letter written against me in which lies are presented and trying to make people think I'm the bad guy isn't an effective way for truth to be pointed out.  The truth is we did nothing wrong!  God knows and I know it.  Now, you should know it.  For I've declared unto you the truth. Everything in that letter written about us WAS AN OUTRIGHT LIE!   I wish it wasn't so. But it is. I've read that letter through time and again, and I can't believe he wrote it.  I've showed it to friend after friend, Pastor after Pastor, Christian after Christian, and they all say, "That's crazy.  I know you Robert, and I know what you've done in Honduras and what you are doing now!  Those are outright LIES about you!"   

The only question I have is why lie?  Ruckman has lied about me.  (I personally believe someone else lied to him, so in my eyes he's not to blame).  Someone at his church has lied about me and said I called him a "heretic."  I never did.  Then you come along and LIE about me as well.  Why?  Gomez has told some lies too, and those that follow him have done the same.  This cannot be denied.  All I want to know is WHY?  Why make me out to be the liar?  Why not deal with those who lied first? 

Some wise person once told me that when someone lies about and attacks you, it's because of one of several things:

1.  They are scared.

2.  They hate you and are jealous of you.

3.  They are guilty of something, but they want you to take the blame.

So which is it Manny?

I would never have posted that article about the lies in the Gomez.  I was not going to say a thing.  I've kept this all to myself for years.  But once you dragged me into it and SLANDERED my name in your article against Gail Riplinger, (an article in which YOU ARE WRONG ABOUT VERBUM, by the way, for the facts prove Sermo is an older reading), I figured it was time to speak up and tell my side of the story and show people what is really behind the Gomez movement and present it for what it really is.  If I said anything wrong, I'll gladly give account to God for it someday.  But don't people deserve the facts?  All of them?  Or are certain people "censured" or "prohibited" from speaking?  Careful!  It was the Spanish Inquisition that did the same thing.  They prohibited people's speech.  The Pharisees also tried to keep the disciples from speaking about Jesus.

But what is your motive for all this?  Why are you ridiculing and name-calling me?  What is your purpose for doing so?  My reason is just to present what I've seen and heard.  And then let people decide for themselves.  I don't wish to hide certain things.  I wish to present them.  That's what I've done.

From my perspective, I see it clearly.  I'm without the camp looking in.  And I see a bunch of men who think they are doing something for God, but they forget they are in the last days in a time which the Bible calls apostasy, and they forget men are Sinners.  And it appears they are trusting in their numbers and in the arm of flesh rather than walking in the Spirit.  They further forget that the Spanish-speaking people were lied to once about which Bible is the right one.  What if they are being lied to again?  What if the Gomez isn't the right Bible?  How do we know?  Well, we don't know because brother so and so said so.  We can only know when we have read so!  I've read it.  The Gomez is more like the 1960 than the true Protestant Reformation text.  It's not Castilian Spanish, but updated modern Spanish.  And time and again it has a deviate reading from the old Reina-Valera and other reformation texts and Spanish words.  The Valera 1602 Purified, however, reads so closely with the beautiful old Spanish of the true Reina-Valera text.  It's closer to the KJV in many places because of this, and it's old Castilian Spanish.  Which do you think Spanish-speakers will truly want?  Even the laws of Spain and Central and South America say that CASTILIAN SPANISH should be the standard.  Why then do you reject that?

In the Gomez movement, I see nothing but man-worship, and the praise of "men" with all those "endorsers" of the Gomez.  That's what I personally see as I look at it objectively.  When I look at their words and their claims objectively, I further see outrageous claims that don't match up with the text itself says.  Can you fault me for simply practicing discernment? Or should I rather become blind to the facts like the Pharisees were.  Can a Pharisee see?

What I see coming from them and you is appalling.  Where is the brotherly love?  Where is the charity?  Where is the godly exhortation.  Instead it's all attack, ridicule, lie and slander

I believe others see this as well, and your carnality shows.  I wish YOU, Manny, could see it also.  But alas, you are too busy in your own little world running with your pack and enjoying the benefits of the membership in your own little elitist society to see the big picture.  Someday you'll see it.  And when you do, you'll find that I've been right here praying for you like I always do.  No hard feelings on my part.  Call me what you will.  I still love you and pray for you. 

But be advised, however, I'm not going to write you back in the manner you write me. I'm not interested in name-calling and attacking.  I'm tired of it.  It's obvious you don't want any clear and effective communication.  And, Manny if you want to devote your time to picking through my articles and trying to "catch me in my words" (just like the Pharisees spent their time trying to do with Jesus), then help yourself.  I have better things to do!  I'm actually reading the text itself, rather than spending my time defending the man who wrote it.

Allow me to close this with another letter I received from Peter S. Ruckman, in which he seems to have the same exact spirit that you do.   I wrote to him after he wrongfully attacked me and lied to me in the letter you quoted in your two articles with a direct quote that I found from George MΓΌeller.  And in my letter, all I did was quote his words in saying, "I am content to wait until the judgment seat of Christ for God to clear my character."

Mr. Ruckman responded a lot like you Manny, by returning my letter with the haughty words, "No man can condemn your character you Fool!  You mean your reputation.  You can't get anything straight, can you?

So there it is.  He called me a fool and so do you. 

But I'd rather be a "fool" in the eyes of the brethren than be "fooled" by the brethren into believing a lie.

After reading Mr. Ruckman's response, I then went and looked up the difference between the words "character" and "reputation" in the 1828 Dictionary.  What did I find?  They mean the same thing.  Why then would he attack in this manner?  It's obvious, like you, he's only in the flesh.  And, he always wants to have the last word.  He can have it.  That's not my thing.  I'm only interested in the true word.

So help yourself Manny. Knock yourself out.  You can have the last word.  It's all yours.  Call me any name you want and do exactly what others did which is not deal with the issue and only ridicule, slander, and throw dirt in my face, if that's what you believe is the "CHRISTIAN" thing to do.  I personally don't think it is. 

As for me, I'm done.  I don't have anything more to say to you.  Say all you want about me.  Slander me more if you want.

As for me, I'll continue pointing out the truth to anyone who will listen.  And I'm sure I'll continue to be ridiculed for it.  But what does it matter?  I don't have an "audience" anyway, or at least that's what you keep saying.

Sincerely in Christ Jesus our Lord, your friend, even though you don't think so,

Robert Breaker

1 Sam. 12:24!