Dr. Peter S. Ruckman Clip, "Revelation 12: Future Fall of Angels"

[Castor Muscular]

Did you know that if you convert "KJV-only" to ASCII decimal numbers and add them up, they add up to 666?  It's true.

"KJV-only" into Hex:

0x4b0x4a0x560x2d0x6f0x6e0x6c0x79

Decimal, man, decimal.  It's not 0x666. 

But I added wrong.  Sorry.  Here you go...  KJB Only!

K = 75
J = 74
B = 66
O = 79
n = 110
l = 108
y = 121
! = 33

Total = 666

(No, I didn't add the space ... nobody adds spaces in numerology.)

 

[PappaBear]

Guilt by association.  Do you always argue from logical fallacy?

Guilt by association is not a logical fallacy WHEN the association is OBVIOUS and RELEVANT. Who is this thread about?! Ruckman... a twice divorced/thrice married proponent of aborting (genocide) of babies borne by Roman Catholics. To cry "guilt by association" on this thread is amazingly absurd when the person IS the topic.

You might want to review the topic title.  Ruckman is not THE topic, but Ruckman's clip on angels.  To paste all Bible believers with Ruckman's errors not related to angels is fallacy.  It would be similar to the fallacy of making all Calvinists to be Sodomites because of the "Fruits of Calvinism" gay group that identifies with that heretical theology.  There are plenty who stand for the King James whose families are not in shambles, just as there are plenty of apostate perverters of the truth who have also been through divorce more than once.  In other words, your smear does not stand true. 

How about this.  You boot everyone on this forum that ............. believes abortion is a sin

It would be empty...

Good one!  Is what I get for posting late at night when I'm weary.  I was attempting to quote your accusation and left out the word "not."  Still, I think you probably got the point since you were the original source.  And based on some of the comments on this board, even with my grammatical blunder, you would still be left with some.

Start with your own home. You effectively boot Ruckman, Ringler and all of their own ilk who defend them BEFORE you tell us to boot people off here.

I still enjoy Riplinger's New Age Bible Versions.  As for Ruckman, I effectively "booted" him from my position long ago.  I had my fill of his cussing, mean-spirited and dishonest tirades, ultra- or hyper-dispensationalism that changed salvation from one age to another, and pompous self-righteousness back in the 80's.  My "Bible Break" post (on both old FFF's) stated my division from Ruckman clearly.

[quote author=PappaBear, "Bible Break"]First has to be determined what specifically is being affirmed by KJV-onlyism. If you intend to paste me with Ruckmanist claims of double inspiration, then look elsewhere. On the other hand, I do believe the King James to be God's preserved word in the English language for English speaking people.  [/quote]

 

[Biblebeliever]

Biblebeliever... are you the same Biblebeliever that was on Cody's forum baptist1611.com?

Actually I was 177Jeremiah on Cody's Forum. I have been trying to log back on there. But have not been successful at least not yet. I seem to have forgotten my password.

 

[FSSL]

There are plenty who stand for the King James whose families are not in shambles, just as there are plenty of apostate perverters of the truth who have also been through divorce more than once.  In other words, your smear does not stand true.

Where did I make that hasty generalization? I named Ruckman and Riplinger, specifically and mentioned there are others on the FFF.com. 

But then again, that digresses from the point made above.

We are told that the modern versions are the reason for the spiritual decline of America. If that were the case, then the onus is on the KJVO to tell us how being KJVO prevents a spiritual decline, when some of the most well known KJVOs are in decline. The KJV only position is not working out well for them... or, is that what eventually happens when a person places an object in the place of worship instead of Christ?

Good one!  Is what I get for posting late at night when I'm weary.  I was attempting to quote your accusation and left out the word "not."

Yep. It was funny.

 

[FSSL]

Biblebeliever... are you the same Biblebeliever that was on Cody's forum baptist1611.com?

Actually I was 177Jeremiah on Cody's Forum. I have been trying to log back on there. But have not been successful at least not yet. I seem to have forgotten my password.

You are better off here... Cody and others will not defend the unborn. I got booted and all of my threads on the subject were deleted... in fact, the place goes through an annual scrubbing, it appears.

 

[PappaBear]

We are told that the modern versions are the reason for the spiritual decline of America. If that were the case, then the onus is on the KJVO to tell us how being KJVO prevents a spiritual decline, when some of the most well known KJVOs are in decline. The KJV only position is not working out well for them... or, is that what eventually happens when a person places an object in the place of worship instead of Christ?

Ask the Calvinists who replace Christ with the worship of Calvin & Augustine.  Point out Calvins murder of Servetus for being a Baptist and then ask if declining to murder is what happens when you accept the alleged "doctrines of grace" in place of the worship of Christ? 

Since not all -- not even the majority -- of KJVO's suffer from the errors you highlight, your fallacious smear does not stand up to scrutiny.

Since many who are in such "spiritual decline" are decidedly non-KJVO and anti-KJB, your fallacious smear does not endure consideration.

When the Jim & Tammy Faye Bakker scandal broke, Jack Hyles and others claimed that Fundamentalists did not suffer from such issues.  Amazing the turn about as such scandal reached not just to his colleagues in ministry such as Bill Pennell, but reached deep into his own family and church.  But, contrary to some opinions, both within and without the HAC galaxy, Jack Hyles did not represent all of fundamentalism.  His errors, and the sins of his son, are not the fault of fundamentalism, but of pride, arrogance, and unwillingness to repent.  The same is true of Ruckman, I might add.

People fail because of sin.  KJVO's as well as the next guy.  However, the point made, and which you acknowledge, is that America today is in spiritual decline.  Our society has morals that are run amok, and church attendance is being abandoned wholesale.  These were not such problems prior to the multiplicity of Bible versions, when God's word was referred to as authoritative instead of questioned and the commandments became either grievous or only suggestions to be ignored.  Even the canon or apostleship of some authors is routinely questioned without the slightest twitch or rebuke from your kind.

But hey, Hananiah, break all the yokes of wood with your false words that you want.  You only turn around to construct yokes of iron for the necks of those who follow you.

 

[Castor Muscular]

Ask the Calvinists who replace Christ with the worship of Calvin & Augustine.  Point out Calvins murder of Servetus for being a Baptist and then ask if declining to murder is what happens when you accept the alleged "doctrines of grace" in place of the worship of Christ? 

 

[FSSL]

People fail because of sin.  KJVO's as well as the next guy.  However, the point made, and which you acknowledge, is that America today is in spiritual decline.  Our society has morals that are run amok, and church attendance is being abandoned wholesale.  These were not such problems prior to the multiplicity of Bible versions, when God's word was referred to as authoritative instead of questioned and the commandments became either grievous or only suggestions to be ignored.  Even the canon or apostleship of some authors is routinely questioned without the slightest twitch or rebuke from your kind.

Well then... what modern version started the problems and when?

Or... could it be the multiplicity of KJV editions? Why not?

As long as the OBJECT remains the focal point of worship, Christ is not even in the equation... Where is it above?

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=PappaBear]Point out Calvins murder of Servetus for being a Baptist and then ask if declining to murder is what happens when you accept the alleged "doctrines of grace" in place of the worship of Christ? [/quote]

Most Baptists I know have an fairly orthodox view of the Trinity. Servetus, not so much. Granted, neither do the majority of KJVO I know so....

[quote author=PappaBear]However, the point made, and which you acknowledge, is that America today is in spiritual decline.  Our society has morals that are run amok, and church attendance is being abandoned wholesale.  These were not such problems prior to the multiplicity of Bible versions, when God's word was referred to as authoritative instead of questioned and the commandments became either grievous or only suggestions to be ignored.[/quote]

I'm curious. Do you know when church attendance peaked in America? Do you know how widespread church attendance was say...oh...at the beginning of the nineteenth century?

 

[Ransom]

Most Baptists I know have an fairly orthodox view of the Trinity. Servetus, not so much. Granted, neither do the majority of KJVO I know so....

Pappa probably thinks Servetus would have been an orthodox Trinitarian Baptist if only he had a Blessed King James Super-Duper Holy Bible (peace be upon it) understood the Comma Johanneum properly. LOL!

 

[PappaBear]

People fail because of sin.  KJVO's as well as the next guy.  However, the point made, and which you acknowledge, is that America today is in spiritual decline.  Our society has morals that are run amok, and church attendance is being abandoned wholesale.  These were not such problems prior to the multiplicity of Bible versions, when God's word was referred to as authoritative instead of questioned and the commandments became either grievous or only suggestions to be ignored.  Even the canon or apostleship of some authors is routinely questioned without the slightest twitch or rebuke from your kind.

Well then... what modern version started the problems and when?

Or... could it be the multiplicity of KJV editions? Why not?

As long as the OBJECT remains the focal point of worship, Christ is not even in the equation... Where is it above?

I posted an article for comment in the Bible versions forum.  Care to read it?  It is by a non-KJVO, but it answers your question pretty well.

The problem with modern versions is not the old language as much as it is the new critical texts underlying the translations.  Most MV's come from the W-H, which is why criticism of one pretty much holds for the other daughter translations.  And they came like a tidal wave.  And, as if a single one were not good enough, they keep coming.  Tell me, do you favor the Ebonics Version?

 

[FSSL]

I posted an article for comment in the Bible versions forum.  Care to read it?  It is by a non-KJVO, but it answers your question pretty well.

The problem with modern versions is not the old language as much as it is the new critical texts underlying the translations.  Most MV's come from the W-H, which is why criticism of one pretty much holds for the other daughter translations.  And they came like a tidal wave.  And, as if a single one were not good enough, they keep coming.  Tell me, do you favor the Ebonics Version?

... and what passages in these modern versions have contributed to the spiritual decline in America?

 

[PappaBear]

I posted an article for comment in the Bible versions forum.  Care to read it?  It is by a non-KJVO, but it answers your question pretty well.

The problem with modern versions is not the old language as much as it is the new critical texts underlying the translations.  Most MV's come from the W-H, which is why criticism of one pretty much holds for the other daughter translations.  And they came like a tidal wave.  And, as if a single one were not good enough, they keep coming.  Tell me, do you favor the Ebonics Version?

... and what passages in these modern versions have contributed to the spiritual decline in America?

  More like that passages that are NOT in these modern versions.  ;D

It is not the specious argument, but the matter of faith and the Spirit.  Your side looks for what it can absolutely prove or disprove by fleshly wisdom (2Cor 1:12) or to the fleshly mind (Col 2:18).  My side is more concerned with "what manner of spirit ye are of" (Luke 9:55). 

What there is about this issue which has contributed most to the spiritual decline in America is the whole battle over the Bible to begin with.  The Bible says that faith comes by hearing, and that hearing comes by the word of God.  Society no longer listens to Christians because your crowd has been so successful at overthrowing the faith once delivered, at challenging the scriptures and its authority to speak objectively and absolutely about spiritual matters and eternity. 

Like Jack Moorman said concerning doctrinal differences about the 1 hour mark in response during his debate with James White, "Yes, in the modern versions ... you will have the deity of Christ, yes you can be saved, yes you have the trinity, but it is not as frequent.  An airplane can fly, it has 3 engines, it can fly on just one of them.  But wouldn't we really feel happier going across the Atlantic on all three?  So, it is not a question of not having the deity of Christ in the modern versions, they have been diminished."  White's response was concerned with making the King James "the standard."  There was no problem with it being the standard for most of its 400 year history and seeing the Great Awakenings in result.

In the article I referred you to, Rick Wade made an excellent point. 

[quote author=Rick Wade]As I noted above, those who argue for the Byzantine or Received Text say that it is improper to subject the Bible to the scrutiny of textual criticism. The Bible, being the inspired Word of God, is unique. One begins with it as inspired and then accepts what it says.[/quote]

This touches on the foundation of the Word of God for the hearing of faith.  What you guys are drawing people towards is putting confidence in men and princes instead of faith in Christ as LORD enough to preserve and use His own words.  As a result, there has been a diminishing of the Bible as authority and a loss of faith in modern society.

 

[Biblebeliever]

You are better off here... Cody and others will not defend the unborn. I got booted and all of my threads on the subject were deleted... in fact, the place goes through an annual scrubbing, it appears.

Really? Wow, I had no idea that was being done. Did Cody ever share his views regarding abortion?

How long ago were you a member of his forum?

 

[Vandal]

Dr. Peter S. Ruckman Clip, "Revelation 12: Future Fall of Angels"




Dr. Peter S. Ruckman Clip, "Revelation 12: Future Fall of Angels"​

I found this clip to be very interesting.

 

[FSSL]

You are better off here... Cody and others will not defend the unborn. I got booted and all of my threads on the subject were deleted... in fact, the place goes through an annual scrubbing, it appears.

Really? Wow, I had no idea that was being done. Did Cody ever share his views regarding abortion?

How long ago were you a member of his forum?

Yes. He is in complete agreement with Ruckman. He banned me because it created quite a stir. Chette was disturbed by Cody.

 

[FSSL]

... and what passages in these modern versions have contributed to the spiritual decline in America?

  More like that passages that are NOT in these modern versions.  ;D

Then, what passages are MISSING that has contributed to this spiritual decline? OR are you just slinging mud at the modern versions and coming up with unsupportable arguments to justify demeaning God's Word?

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=PappaBear]Society no longer listens to Christians because your crowd has been so successful at overthrowing the faith once delivered, at challenging the scriptures and its authority to speak objectively and absolutely about spiritual matters and eternity. [/quote]

There are a lot of reasons that society no longer listens to Christians, but I'll guess that there are many reasons that rank infinitely higher than the one you just mentioned. Reasons like:

- the arrogant, hateful, proud, judgmental attitude they see from "Christians" (notably Fred Phelps, Terry Jones, Ruckman)
- the prevailing thought in the Church that would say one's spiritual condition can be tested simply by looking at their political views (and all the associated garbage that follows from that type of thinking)
- the hypocrisy and double standards they hear from the Church at large (e.g. "Allowing those gays to marry destroy the sanctity of my third marriage!")
- the anti-intellectualism coming from many of the loudest members of the Church (For example, see: KJVo movement)
- the fact that even the best of the Church is often indistinguishable from the world in the ways that actually matter
- and, especially, because the Jesus in the Bible looks nothing like the Jesus preached from many, many pulpits every Sunday...in those pulpits where He is even preached at all.

 

[subllibrm]

[quote author=PappaBear]Society no longer listens to Christians because your crowd has been so successful at overthrowing the faith once delivered, at challenging the scriptures and its authority to speak objectively and absolutely about spiritual matters and eternity.

There are a lot of reasons that society no longer listens to Christians, but I'll guess that there are many reasons that rank infinitely higher than the one you just mentioned. Reasons like:

- the arrogant, hateful, proud, judgmental attitude they see from "Christians" (notably Fred Phelps, Terry Jones, Ruckman)
- the prevailing thought in the Church that would say one's spiritual condition can be tested simply by looking at their political views (and all the associated garbage that follows from that type of thinking)
- the hypocrisy and double standards they hear from the Church at large (e.g. "Allowing those gays to marry destroy the sanctity of my third marriage!")
- the anti-intellectualism coming from many of the loudest members of the Church (For example, see: KJVo movement)
- the fact that even the best of the Church is often indistinguishable from the world in the ways that actually matter
- and, especially, because the Jesus in the Bible looks nothing like the Jesus preached from many, many pulpits every Sunday...in those pulpits where He is even preached at all.
[/quote]

No, no, no it is the undermining of the KJV that did it.  ;D

 

[Biblebeliever]

"Is too!"

Why should I believe you?

Have you looked into the King James Code and Bible Numerics?

"Is too!"

Age proves nothing. Show me otherwise, if you can.

Well then why do most of the modern Vatican versions go out of print within the first 10 to 15 years of their publication? These modern bibles can't even make it to 75 years. Or 55 years.

Not one modern version can stand up to the God Honoured Authorized King James Bible.

Of the same mind . . . not of the same English Bible translation. There you go, making major category errors again.

Scott, in order to be of the same mind and same judgment, we Christians need to submit to the Authority of One Bible.

There are a lot of changes in the modern versions. Therefore, the main cause for a lot of the confusion in Christianity today is the modern bible versions.

I attend a church that is not KJV-only whee people bring their own translations. There is not utter confusion. Stop telling tall tales you can't support.

Well first off, you need to bring the Bible Version Issue to your pastor's attention and then if he does not change, then leave his church. Any church that does not preach from the Authorized King James Bible, that very same church has gone into apostasy.

And no Ransom, they aren't tales. It is the truth. The use of multiple, contradictory, modern bible versions does create confusion. That is one of the reasons why a lot of Christians can't even agree on the Biblical Doctrine of Eternal Security.

And there are thousands of men who have gone to sound, Bible-believing seminaries that didn't happen to worship the KJV, and have every confidence in the word of God. Why should these men's story trump theirs?

Name some Sound, Bible-believing Seminaries. Go ahead Scott. Name them. If they teach modern textual criticism. Then no, they are NOT sound, Bible believing seminaries.

And do these men really have confidence in the word of God? What Bible do they believe to be the perfect, pure and inerrant word of God?

Wow, it's a totally anonymous testimony, so it must be true!

In this video below, you can listen to the accounts of two men who both had their faith destroyed in the Bible by modern textual criticism. It is all in this Video series:

Blaspheming God's word! Part 1

Why.Should.I.Believe.It.Is.The.KJV.And.Not.Something.Else.

Because of the external and internal evidence testifying that it is the King James Bible. For the internal witnesses. Look into the King James Code. Study the fascinating Bible numerical codes and patterns that are in the text of the Authorized Version.

So say the KJV-onlyists, without evidence either from Scripture or plain reason. They are foolish; regard them not.

Seriously Scott. If my Bible which I have is not perfect, well then can you hand me a copy of God's perfect, pure and inspired word?

Yes, I did say the NASB, didn't I? So you already knew the answer to my question, and you are dishonestly pretending you didn't. Quit lying.

I asked you if you believe that the NASB is the perfect, pure, and infallible words of God. It is how you answered the question Scott. Do you believe that the New American Standard Bible is the perfect and inerrant and inspired word of God?

Answer my entire question this time. And please do not cut off part of my question to you.

You are the one claiming that the KJV is special. Therefore it is up to you to show me that the KJV is special. The burden of proof has always rested on the KJV-onlyists for introducing a new belief that is not part of the faith delivered to the saints. Don't be lazy and try and pawn your work off on the rest of us. KJV-onlyism is not the default position here.

The Final Authority is where you have to start from. The King James Bible is the preserved, pure word of God.

Now if you don't believe so, then simply offer me a perfect replacement.

I knew you couldn't answer my question. Round and round you go on the KJV hamster wheel. Squeak squeak squeak!

Okay, I am going to answer your question with a question Scott. Does the word "Bible" appear anywhere in the Bible?