Sword of the Lord Review of Ruckman's Teaching

illinoisguy

Well-known member
Elect
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
989
Reaction score
472
Points
63
Since we have been told that we must "submit" to the teaching of Peter Ruckman, we need to know what he taught. So here goes - excerpts from the article "Ruckman's Various Plans of Salvation and Other Rabid Ravings," by Curtis Hutson, published in the Sword of the Lord on February 3, 1989.

"In his article Dr. Ruckman said, 'Noah got saved by building a boat, and Abraham got saved by believing he would have as many children as the stars.' He also said, 'In the Old Testament it was the blood plus works.'. . . He would be hard pressed to find any Bible-believing fundamentalist who goes along with his various plans of salvation. I personally do not know one preacher in the world who believes such foolishness. . . . On page 449 of his book on Revelation, he claims that baptism cleanses a man from 'the filthiness of the flesh.' Here he says, 'Naaman, who is baptized in the Jordan to be cured of leprosy. He is baptized 7 times, or one time for each year of the Tribulation, which indicates that water baptism in the Tribulation can cleanse a man from the filthiness of the flesh.' This is pure speculation with no scriptural basis and is total nonsense. . . . Are people during the millennium saved by works without faith, as this self-professed scholar claims? Absolutely not! . . .
"On pages 542 and 543 in his commentary on Revelation, Peter Ruckman says, 'there has been no advanced revelation from the Holy Spirit from 1909 until the present time. The last thing the Holy Spirit ever revealed, along Biblical lines, was revealed to Bullinger, J.C. O'Hair,, Arthur W. Pink, Clarence Larkin, and C.I.Scofield - more than 50 years ago!' . . . The Bible is God's revelation to man. It is all of God's revelation to man, and it is God's only revelation to man. Bullinger, J.C. O'Hair, Arthur W. Pink, Clarence Larkin and C.I. Scofield did not receive one iota of revelation from God. . . . How in the name of common sense can someone who claims to be a deep Bible teacher and scholar . . . claim that revelation continued up until 1909! . . .
"We have read some of Peter Ruckman's writings, and I have never seen where he used any verses from the original 1611 version of the King James Bible. The verses he used were always from the same Bible we use and most every other preacher we know, uses - that is, the 1769 5th revision of the original 1611 KJV. . . .
"When the King James translators came to the Greek word baptizo, they did not translate the word. Rather, they transliterated the word. If they had translated the word, they would have had to translate it to 'dip' or to 'immerse.' However, the Church of England at that time taught sprinkling for baptism. And if the translators had translated the word to 'immerse,' they would have been in trouble with the Church of England. So in order to avoid the trouble and to hide the true meaning of baptizo from the people, they transliterated the word. To claim that God inspired the translators in that deception borders on blasphemy. If someone wishes to accuse God of that kind of deception, that is his business. But that is not a position that we at the Sword of the Lord wish to take."
 
Last edited:
Top