Are Ruckman's claims concerning editions of the KJV in agreement with each other and factually correct?

[tmjbog]

Hm. Perhaps in your own mind. Like everything else.

All of the most respected pastors in the IFB or in KJV churches similar to the IFB either respect Ruckman (paid homage to him in their own writings), studied under him at one point, or ignore him completely.

Nobody except idiots, saboteur hirelings from other denoms, or the occasional fringe IFB outcast actually bothers to attack him, because they all know about his genius whether they agree with him or not, and they have this thing called a brain that's capable of grasping that 2 or 3 minor, or even non-doctrinally related, positions he held that might have been odd can't outweigh that: like trying to use a blueberry to tip the scale of a bowling ball on the other end.

Perhaps they never learned their times tables and dropped out of elementary school, so they aren't capable of weighing this obvious scale out for themselves.

"Not true". Uhuh. Think Sam Gipp, James Knox, etc. And btw the largest Baptist channels on YouTube are of pastors who graduated from PBI.
You do realize YouTube channels reach exponentially more followers than Joel Osteen's megachurch, right.

Yeah. As usual. The tree house kids club is blasting off again.

I think we've concluded there are more than 2 or 3 "minor" things that Ruckman was off base on and even a number of things where you could lay down his quotes side by side and have a Ruckman vs. Ruckman competition. Until the debate flared up a few weeks ago I knew almost nothing about him other than his extreme views on KJV. I know of most the significant IFB colleges but never heard of PBI until researching Ruckman. Likewise in IFB circles I've run, I've not come across anyone who ever mentioned him. Maybe in some portions of the IFB world he holds some significance but not as a whole.

 

[UGC]

I think we've concluded there are more than 2 or 3 "minor" things that Ruckman was off base on

Who's we? The Tree House 5? You guys starting an emo band?

I must need to post this again:


So what other blueberries have you added to massively tip the scale further in your direction? "Once Ruckman mentioned UFO's"?

This isn't the 90's. UFO's are not a "crazy" topic anymore. They are not an uncommon subject among both Christian and non-Christian communities: again, watch Phoenix Lights.

 

[logos1560]

Question: Do you really think a Fundamental Baptist forum is the place to try and champion rebellious, renegade causes like "anti-KJV" and "anti-Ruckman".

Your question is based on false assumptions or false allegations.

I am not anti-KJV. I have read the KJV over 50 years, and I accept the KJV as what it actually is.
I present verifiable facts concerning KJV editions. I am a fundamental, independent Baptist.

Disagreeing with factually incorrect claims concerning the KJV is not being anti-KJV.
Disagreeing with human, non-scriptural, erroneous KJV-only reasoning/teaching is not being anti-KJV.
I am in agreement with the actual view of Bible translations advocated in the preface of the 1611 KJV.

Ruckman's human KJV-only teaching did not come clearly and soundly from the KJV. He tried to read into verses things not stated in them. He failed to present any positive, clear, consistent, sound, just, true, scriptural case for his modern KJV-only theory.

 

[tmjbog]

Who's we? The Tree House 5? You guys starting an emo band?

I must need to post this again:
View attachment 954

So what other blueberries have you added to massively tip the scale further in your direction? "Once Ruckman mentioned UFO's"?

This isn't the 90's. UFO's are not a "crazy" topic anymore. They are not an uncommon subject among both Christian and non-Christian communities: again, watch Phoenix Lights.

Just to focus on the failed rapture guessing as a start. Lots of people have not guessed the rapture-especially those who believe the Bible. As for what Peter Ruckman thought about guessing the date I'll let him tell you his opinion:


Knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven.” The thing that is “unknown” (according to the statement) is the “day and hour” of the advent. This truth cannot be brought home with too much force to the Fundamentalist, as he has been taught from his youth that the Second Coming is “IMMINENT” (not found in the Scripture!) and that any attempts to set dates are Satanic and unscriptural. 1Thessalonians 5:1-6 contradicts this position, however, as does also the appearance of the Laodiciean church (Rev 3:22) immediately preceding the rapture – Revelation 4:1, 2. (Ruckman, Peter. The Book of Matthew. 1970, 1978, pp. 554-555)


And a few years later? He sets the year of the Rapture:


…for more than 35 years I have been preaching in public (and teaching in private) that the second advent date is Yom Kippur of the year 2000, if our calendar is right. By this figuring, I have told audiences all over America for 38 years that seven years must be deducted for the tribulation (giving us a figure of 1993), and then four years must be subtracted to make up for the differences in calendars. (Note: Christ is said to have been born in 4 B.C. by this adjustment of calendar systems.) This would give a maximum (I didn’t say, “exact”) date of 1989 for a rapture. (Ruckman, Peter. Bible Believers’ Bulletin. Feb. 1989, p. 1)

 

[tmjbog]

Who's we? The Tree House 5? You guys starting an emo band?

I must need to post this again:
View attachment 954

So what other blueberries have you added to massively tip the scale further in your direction? "Once Ruckman mentioned UFO's"?

This isn't the 90's. UFO's are not a "crazy" topic anymore. They are not an uncommon subject among both Christian and non-Christian communities: again, watch Phoenix Lights.

From ruckman's own mouth we find he was the only "pastor" smart enough to find Eve's adulterous relationship with the Devil in the Bible:

Verses 2–3 are an enigma on which no modern commentator would dare comment—that is, the “recognized” ones. It implies that Satan begat Cain when he seduced Eve. See 1 John 3:12, John 8:44, and Genesis 3:15.
Bible Believers' Bulletin. Nov. 2001, p. 6

 

[tmjbog]

Who's we? The Tree House 5? You guys starting an emo band?

I must need to post this again:
So what other blueberries have you added to massively tip the scale further in your direction? "Once Ruckman mentioned UFO's"?

This isn't the 90's. UFO's are not a "crazy" topic anymore. They are not an uncommon subject among both Christian and non-Christian communities: again, watch Phoenix Lights.

He more than believed in UFOs. He also somewhere in the Bible found that mankind was going to go populate other planets. Sounds like somebody was talking to the Mormons.

The gist of Revelation 22:2 is that on the new earth, in eternity, there are twelve nations divided off by twelve boundaries, and these nations are composed of nations who were saved during the Tribulation (Matt 25) and during the Millennium (Rev 19). These “saved nations” go into the city, partake of the “tree of life” to get their eternal life, and then they spend eternity reproducing and multiplying infinitely and going out into outer space, and populating first the twelve constellations that make up the zodiac, and then from there they move on out into outer space. (Ruckman, Peter. The Book of Revelation. 1970, 1982 printing, p. 592)

But the eternal life that these Gentiles get from the Tree of Life is different from that of the Christian. Christian’s don’t bear children in Eternity (Matt. 22:30); these Gentiles do (Isa. 9:7; Psa. 103:17). When these children reach a certain age (probably 33 ½ years old—see 1 John 3:2), they enter into the city on the month each of them was born (Isa. 66:22-23) through the gate assigned to the nation to which each of them belongs. They then eat from the Tree of Life the specific fruit that grows on it for their nation (Rev. 22:3). As these “nations” grow in number and become too many for the earth to sustain, God transports them to one of the twelve “houses” of the Zodiac to populate outer space (see note on Deut. 4:19). (Ruckman, Peter. Ruckman Reference Bible. First edition, p. 1669)

 

[UGC]

He also somewhere in the Bible found that mankind was going to go populate other planets.

Sounds like he actually had an imagination. Maybe you should play some Pokemon so you can get one, too.

"But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." 1 Cor 2:9
"For now we see through a glass, darkly..." 1 Cor 13:12
"If we suffer, we shall also reign with him..." 2 Tim 2:12

Idk what Ruckman said on this topic, but both myself and my friends have thought this too: after the millennial reign, will humanity be confined to just the new earth for all eternity, or will we explore the spiritual realm, whatever that entails? I know many people who think it's possible that we will "reign" over something like planets.

 

[tmjbog]

Sounds like he actually had an imagination. Maybe you should play some Pokemon so you can get one, too.

"But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." 1 Cor 2:9
"For now we see through a glass, darkly..." 1 Cor 13:12
"If we suffer, we shall also reign with him..." 2 Tim 2:12

Idk what Ruckman said on this topic, but both myself and my friends have thought this too: after the millennial reign, will humanity be confined to just the new earth for all eternity, or will we explore the spiritual realm, whatever that entails? I know many people who think it's possible that we will "reign" over something like planets.

I don't think getting "imaginative" with the Bible is a good idea. The Mormons all get to populate their own planet in Heaven, though. Maybe that would be a more satisfying religion for the Pokeman crowd.

 

[Twisted]

…for more than 35 years I have been preaching in public (and teaching in private) that the second advent date is Yom Kippur of the year 2000, if our calendar is right. By this figuring, I have told audiences all over America for 38 years that seven years must be deducted for the tribulation (giving us a figure of 1993), and then four years must be subtracted to make up for the differences in calendars. (Note: Christ is said to have been born in 4 B.C. by this adjustment of calendar systems.) This would give a maximum (I didn’t say, “exact”) date of 1989 for a rapture. (Ruckman, Peter. Bible Believers’ Bulletin. Feb. 1989, p. 1)

Odd I can't find this quote in the issue mentioned. Please post your copy that shows the quote on page 1. I've attached the entire issue.

Oh, if you'll read the article on page 6, it goes into a lot of detail. It's a pity you've never sat under any pastor who teaches the Bible.

 

[Twisted]

I don't think getting "imaginative" with the Bible is a good idea. The Mormons all get to populate their own planet in Heaven, though.

Even cults get some things right. Where do you think all the people will live after the heavens and earth are remade by fire? LOL! What am I saying? You can't even comprehend such a thing.

 

[UGC]

I don't think getting "imaginative" with the Bible is a good idea. The Mormons all get to populate their own planet in Heaven, though.

I think if you don't get imaginative with the Bible you're a stick in the mud. It doesn't mean you have to teach it as if it's doctrine, but using your brain to think about what the spiritual realm is like is not anti-Christian.

Mormons do not have a copyright on that idea, neither does someone who contemplates it without the shame of being thought-policed have to accept other things about Mormonism along with it...

 

[UGC]

Btw, I guess the whole "UFO" stigma is now cleared up for good:

 

[Twisted]

Btw, I guess the whole "UFO" stigma is now cleared up for good:

Always bothers me when a church has zero information about itself (like a location? website?) on its YouTube page.

Rockharbor Church - Bakersfield

At Rock Harbor Church Bakersfield (RHC), we teach the Bible from Genesis to Revelation and seek to apply its truth to our daily lives.

rockharborchurch.net

This guy probably stumbled on Ruckman's UFO info from the 70's. I mean, no Liberty grad is going to come up with this stuff on his own. The scorners here on the FFF say you can't.

 

[UGC]

Always bothers me when a church has zero information about itself (like a location? website?) on its YouTube page.

Yeah that would help. I started listening to him because a channel that uploads IFB sermons sometimes shares his stuff.

I mean, no Liberty grad is going to come up with this stuff on his own. The scorners here on the FFF say you can't.

Oh I guarantee more have studied Ruckman than care to admit. I grew up in big nondenom churches friendly with the New Calvinist Movement out in Cali, yet I learned boatloads from Ruckman that NONE of those guys knew about.

 

[logos1560]

IF they were able to deal with 'actual facts', they wouldn't be KJV-only.

That is true.

Many KJV-only advocates will not face or deal with any facts that expose the serious problems with their inconsistent, non-scriptural, human KJV-only reasoning/teaching. Those that do typically become former KJV-only advocates as they depart from or forsake their former erroneous KJV-only claims.

 

[logos1560]

Anti-KJV people don't even know what a fact is.

Your posts demonstrate that you do not know what a fact is.

I accept the KJV as what it actually is instead of trying to claim that it is something that it is not as KJV-only advocates claim.

I believe and accept all that the Scriptures actually state and teach concerning themselves. I have read the KJV over 50 years, and I am not "anti-KJV" as you incorrectly allege. You fail to prove your allegation to be true.

It is a fact that disagreeing with human, non-scriptural KJV-only reasoning/teaching is not being anti-KJV.

My scripturally-based position concerning Bible translations including the KJV is the same as that of the KJV translators.

Would you accuse the KJV translators of being anti-KJV?

I present actual verifiable facts concerning editions of the KJV that some try to ignore and avoid.

 

[Twisted]

I accept the KJV as what it actually is instead of trying to claim that it is something that it is not as KJV-only advocates claim.

Do you accept the KJV as the Holy Scriptures, given by inspiration of God? (II Tim. 3:16) It's a YES or NO question.

I present actual verifiable facts concerning editions of the KJV that some try to ignore and avoid.

And YOU ignore the FACT that Ruckman himself deals with those editions. I've quoted the sources.

The problem with YOU, is you have NEVER understood Ruckman's position, but rather have created a strawman position to use to build a following for yourself.

Well, here's news for you, bud. We've got plenty of Bible-rejectors around.

Every one of your posts, EVERY ONE, does NOTHING to build up anyone's faith in the word of God. Your "ministry" is to DESTROY faith.

 

[voicecrying]

Do you accept the KJV as the Holy Scriptures, given by inspiration of God? (II Tim. 3:16) It's a YES or NO question.

Have you stopped beating your wife? It's a YES or NO question.

 

[Twisted]

Have you stopped beating your wife? It's a YES or NO question.

Don't have one.

 

[tmjbog]

Odd I can't find this quote in the issue mentioned. Please post your copy that shows the quote on page 1. I've attached the entire issue.

Oh, if you'll read the article on page 6, it goes into a lot of detail. It's a pity you've never sat under any pastor who teaches the Bible.

I've sat under several who have taught the Bible. Just not under a guy like Ruckman with extra Biblical teachings. Typically that comes more from the Mormons or JWs.