[CKG]

I don't know that I've ever met or read behind anyone that I agreed 100% with everything they say. I know folks get upset with Cloud over some of his remarks (i.e. Ruckman), but overall he has some very helpful material on his website particularly concerning the defense of the KJV and ecumenism.

Originally Posted by Luke

That's interesting, since Cloud's beef with Ruckman is Ruckman's "Bad Attitude" and "Temper"

Actually, brother, he lays on the divorce stuff pretty heavily, too. He takes the position that Ruckman is not qualified for the ministry, which, of course, is none of his business.

[George]

Originally Posted by Vendetta Ride

Actually, brother, he lays on the divorce stuff pretty heavily, too. He takes the position that Ruckman is not qualified for the ministry, which, of course, is none of his business.

Agreed brother,

Back in April and May (of this year) the subject about David Cloud's and Peter Ruckman's "feud" came up, and was dealt with on several Threads. I think that you have been very "fair & balanced" in your estimation of the man and his work.

I posted this statement from Cloud's site at that time and I believe it is appropriate to re-post it again.

The following quote is taken directly from David Cloud's Web Site and expresses exactly what David Cloud believes concerning the King James Bible [The underlines are mine - G.A.]:

DAVID CLOUD

"I believe the King James Bible is an accurate and lovely translation of the preserved Greek and Hebrew text of Scripture. I do not believe the King James Bible contains any errors. (That is not to say that it cannot be updated or that things could not be translated differently.) I believe that God had His hand upon the KJV in a special way because of the singular role it would play in the transmission of the Word of God during a long and crucial epoch of church history. (This is not to say that I believe it is some sort of “advanced revelation.”) In contrast with the modern English versions, I believe that the KJV is based upon a superior underlying text; it was produced by superior translators; it incorporates superior translation techniques; it demonstrates a superior theology; it embodies a superior English; it was created in a superior era; and it has a superior history."


According to brother Cloud’s Own Testimony: He believes that the King James Bible is an “accurate”, “lovely”, and “superior” translation of the preserved Greek and Hebrew text {WHICH TEXT?} of Scripture. “That is not to say that it cannot be updated {by whom?} or that things {words?} could not be translated differently.” {Like the NKJV?}

My question to brother Cloud is:

IS THE KING JAMES BIBLE = SCRIPTURE? = HOLY SCRIPTURE? = INSPIRED SCRIPTURE?

2 Timothy 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

There’s the rub! I have nothing against brother Cloud. I believe in real Christian liberty and I personally would not attack him for his beliefs or ridicule him for them. However the question remains: Does he believe that the King James Bible is God’s Holy Scriptures or just a “Superior” Translation?

I never got a satisfactory answer from his followers and supporters then and I don't expect to ever get one!

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by George

Agreed brother,

Back in April and May (of this year) the subject about David Cloud's and Peter Ruckman's "feud" came up, and was dealt with on several Threads. I think that you have been very "fair & balanced" in your estimation of the man and his work.

I posted this statement from Cloud's site at that time and I believe it is appropriate to re-post it again.

I never got a satisfactory answer from his followers and supporters then and I don't expect to ever get one!

Yeah, this is my issue with him as well. He thinks the Scriptures are preserved in the greek (even though he might not use those exact words) and he says that he isn't against updating and or translated differently. What on earth does that mean anyways? If there are no errors in the KJB why would it need to be updated? My goodness, this is just text book definition madness!

For Jesus' sake,
Stephen