[Brother Tim]

Steve, I really appreciate what you have said. I agree with much of it. My only problem is that it is hard to make any kind of criticism about Dr. Ruckman without being railed upon by some of his ardent followers. George has been reasonable in his responses, but others have bitten my head off for merely disagreeing with study Bibles in general in a thread introducing his new edition. I legitimately criticized his poor choice in humor and was soundly beaten about the head. Just how are we to discuss the pros and cons without actually mentioning the cons?

I was curious about his views on the UFO issue and asked his followers for some quotes. None have answered. I think the man has a lot to offer, but sadly many have put him on such a pedestal that it is difficult to have a discourse without tempers flaring.

[George]

Re: Steven Avery Post #100 - 04-23-2008, 11:43 PM

{Bible Studies - Dr. Peter S. Ruckman's Bible Believer's Bulletin free for download!}

Aloha brother Steven,

Welcome to the Forum brother. I want to congratulate you on a thoughtful, measured, and reasonable post, that seeks to fairly judge brother Ruckman by more than one or two of his booklets (where he is more apt to engage in "speculation" than the vast majority of his books) about controversial subjects i.e. UFO'S, aliens, etc.

Let me be clear from the outset: I am not a Ruckmanite. I am very grateful for the man and his ministry, although there are areas where I may disagree with him (more on "style" than on substance or doctrine).

I received the Lord Jesus Christ as my Saviour in October, 1958 and from 1968 until 1988 I read practically everything that brother Ruckman wrote (and many other authors at the same time). Since 1988 to approximately 2003 or 2004 (when a friend moved to Kauai from the mainland U.S.A.), I hardly read anything of his, and since then I have borrowed around 6 additional books (Ruckman's biographies, etc.) from my Christian friend's library. I don't believe that I have bought a book from him in over 20 years.

Those Christians who have come to the Issue of "Which Bible" (or "Final Authority") in 1980's or the 1990's or later, who "judge" this man and his ministry, without knowing the "pivotal" role that he played in changing the "paradigm" on this issue - from one of DEFENSE ONLY (starting with John Burgon up to Edward Hills) to OFFENSE - starting in the late 1950's through the 1960's and 1970's, I find are either ignorant (in which case they shouldn’t be “judging”); or obstinately prejudiced and biased against him because of his “language” (which, when it’s “excessive”, I don’t defend or emulate); his peculiar doctrines (which I either take or leave – depending on the Scriptures); his two (2) divorces (of which I have personal testimony from several people who knew about these matters first hand (not just brother Ruckman’s own testimony); or that brother Ruckman has criticized a Christian “leader” whom they have chosen to “follow”.

I have defended brother Ruckman on this Forum (and will continue to do so) because I personally know him; have met him; have eaten with him; played tennis with him; have sat in a church in Kaneohe, Oahu, Hawaii and heard him preach and teach; have read most of his books & booklets; have listened to hundreds of hours of his preaching and teaching tapes and get “peeved” every time a fellow believer takes “pot shots” at him and denigrates and maligns him unfairly.

I greatly value my Christian friends and love them with the same love that I have for my family. None of my family is “perfect” and neither are any of my friends. However, how can I stand by and not defend them when they are being maligned? In 47 years of marriage I have never once ever defended any of my children if they did wrong or sinned. Do I defend brother Ruckman when he is out of line; or doing wrong; or when he sins? Absolutely not! How can I defend wrongdoing and still “judge righteous judgment”?

On the other hand, it seems that every time Peter Ruckman’s name pops up on this Forum, brother Jerry goes into the “default” mode and bashes him (maybe he can’t help himself), which brings forth another warning; or admonishment; or a mild reproof from yours truly. I haven’t reached the rebuke stage – yet!

I find it hard to believe that for someone who knows so very little (first hand) about brother Ruckman, that he harbors so much rancor towards him. And I suspect that the major reason is that brother Jerry thinks very highly of brother David Cloud, (and often recommends him and his web page on this Forum) who has had a private “feud” going with brother Ruckman since 1985 and has printed a booklet (“What About Ruckman?”); and several highly critical articles (essays) about him. Brother Cloud has posted on his website (http://www.wayoflife.org/index.html) several articles - even a whole page on Ruckman devoted to basically bashing him and his ministry.

In the last 3 weeks I have read approximately 25-30 articles on various subjects (authored by brother Cloud) on David Cloud’s website and find that brother Jerry doesn’t only admire David Cloud, he often espouses David Cloud’s positions on doctrine also.

It really would be great if we could devote more time to some of the issues that are that are of great importance in this age of “Apostasy”, such as: the Emerging Church Movement (ECM); the “Seeker” church movement; the Humanistic tendencies of “Christian” schools, colleges, seminaries, etc; the pernicious influence of Psychiatry & Psychology in American Evangelical & Fundamentalist churches; the perverting of Christian children in the “government” (public?) schools; the continual “drift” away from the Holy word of God by Fundamentalist churches all over America; the “Imperial” Pastor movement (totalitarian dictators in the body of Christ) in many Baptist churches in America; etc.; etc.

Many Evangelical and Fundamentalist churches in America today are little more than a "Business" - not an "Organism". There’s a whole lot going on in the churches of our day that have little or nothing to do with New Testament church practice as recorded (for our benefit and example) in the Apostle Paul’s letters to the churches and the brethren. Instead of concentrating on these critical issues, we are spending our time chewing over (and over) whether brother Peter Ruckman is fit to preach; teach; pastor a church; or should be married!

It’s about time that we get on with the “weightier matters” and issues that are bedeviling Christians everywhere, and leave the judgment of brother Peter Ruckman up to God Almighty -
Romans 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

Again, welcome to the Forum, I believe that you are going to be both a positive and edifying addition to our little “family”.

George

[Brother Tim]

George, I agree with what you have said. Both David Cloud and Dr. Ruckman are at the forefront of the battle, and as such each exposes his smallest flaws for all behind them to see. I am going to endeavor to begin reading the bulletins that are available from Dr. Ruckman, so that I can learn more about his position. I currently receive David's articles that come out at least weekly. If you took your list of what things are important for us to concentrate our efforts on (emerging church, etc), you would find that these are the things that take up a majority of David's topics, especially in the last year.

Both of these men have much to give that we can learn. God has positioned them to be where they are. Neither deserves the place of high priest, and most do not place them there. We each must be careful not to accuse others of being mindless disciples of one of these men, when we ourselves do not want that label.

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

George, I agree with what you have said. Both David Cloud and Dr. Ruckman are at the forefront of the battle, and as such each exposes his smallest flaws for all behind them to see. I am going to endeavor to begin reading the bulletins that are available from Dr. Ruckman, so that I can learn more about his position. I currently receive David's articles that come out at least weekly. If you took your list of what things are important for us to concentrate our efforts on (emerging church, etc), you would find that these are the things that take up a majority of David's topics, especially in the last year.

Both of these men have much to give that we can learn. God has positioned them to be where they are. Neither deserves the place of high priest, and most do not place them there. We each must be careful not to accuse others of being mindless disciples of one of these men, when we ourselves do not want that label.

I didn't read the context of this thread first, but it is far safer and better to just pursue the Lord and be busy about trading than to sit under either of those guys. Ruckman's fruit is rather easy to see, but veiled to those whose hearts are not after the Lord.

Originally Posted by George

Re: Steven Avery Post #100 - 04-23-2008, 11:43 PM

{Bible Studies - Dr. Peter S. Ruckman's Bible Believer's Bulletin free for download!}

It really would be great if we could devote more time to some of the issues that are that are of great importance in this age of “Apostasy”, such as: the Emerging Church Movement (ECM); the “Seeker” church movement; the Humanistic tendencies of “Christian” schools, colleges, seminaries, etc; the pernicious influence of Psychiatry & Psychology in American Evangelical & Fundamentalist churches; the perverting of Christian children in the “government” (public?) schools; the continual “drift” away from the Holy word of God by Fundamentalist churches all over America; the “Imperial” Pastor movement (totalitarian dictators in the body of Christ) in many Baptist churches in America; etc.; etc.

None of these are more important than pursuing Christ.

Instead of concentrating on these critical issues, we are spending our time chewing over (and over) whether brother Peter Ruckman is fit to preach; teach; pastor a church; or should be married!

I agree, but the same goes for people on David Cloud's side. Whose side are you on? Before you answer, read Joshua 5:13-14.

It’s about time that we get on with the “weightier matters” and issues that are bedeviling Christians everywhere, and leave the judgment of brother Peter Ruckman up to God Almighty -

George

Agree. Let's close this thread.

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Thanks for the greetings and kind words, Tim and George. Now I'm going to give a round two on these issues.

There is no desire for me to take a pro-or-anti Peter Ruckman stance, and I do really generally appreciate David Cloud and some other folks who are adversarial to Ruckman. However I do agree that an anti-Ruckman tome is for a King James Bible defender a disservice to his own work. A person can express many disagreements with Peter Ruckman without trying to shout out day-after-day "I am not like Ruckman" in essence denying that Ruckman has really labored and helped in many realms of King James Bible understanding and defense. And obscuring the fact that Peter Ruckman more than any other person has made it acceptable to defend the King James Bible without apologies, without looking over your shoulder at other languages or scholars or theories. Today the ploughman, and even on rare occasion the seminarian, can fully defend the King James Bible. David Cloud and any other pure-KJB folks who make a big point of "I am not like Ruckman" would do well to consider rewriting any anti-Ruckman disassociation-and-attack pieces. Let differences in style and tone be apparent and noticed by others, and leave it at that. Simply announce your doctrinal differences and distance, write a couple of paragraphs, and move on. Personally, I really appreciated the tone of David Cloud and of Peter Ruckman both when I met them in person.

Overall, I have strong admiration for how Peter Ruckman historically helped change the attitude and tenor of the King James Bible debate. And I let most of the non-pure-Bible doctrinal and personal concerns about him to be only background.

Maybe on a forum like this such issues could be put on a separate threads .. "Peter Ruckman, non-Bible-version questions" and "Peter Ruckman, some brouhahas with other folks" . And those threads could even have their own spot.

My concern is that every thread gets embroiled in noise controversy so that the substance of what Peter Ruckman shares on the Bible version issues are basically ignored, drowned out by a dozen people attacking or defending. Not just here, but on any forum. So Ruckman's views on the English and Greek and textual lines and verses and the pure Bible and the alexandrian cult are nor discussed or examined. His studies of verses and textlines and church history and this or that are noised out.

Look at this thread, it is ostensibly about the Bible Believer's Bulletin, where there are tons of fascinating articles on the King James Bible and the alexandrian cult pretender versions, and virtually none of that gets discussed and then the thread is recommended to be closed.

(I can grant closing a thread that is long to start another on page 1 that is about the Bible version issues, but not just because of debate about the auxiliary issues that didn't really belong on this thread anyway.)

So please consider what I am requesting. Separate out Peter Ruckman discussions on this forum into two realms. One can be about brouhahas, qualifications for teaching, language and tone, marriages and divorces, disagreements and attacks, this at that.

The other, and I believe more important, threads will be only on his Bible version related articles and overall related issues.

Granted there will be some drift, since many questions span a couple of realms, like the realm of the papacy which is hisoorical and doctrinal and also Bible related, especially to those of us who see the W-H movement as the fabrication of the counter-reformation version. However Bible believers who attack Peter Ruckman don't generally attack him on such, or on his views on islam, or a number of other areas. Even his dispensational views can generally be seen as simply one of many doctrinal viewpoints, so they are generally not a point of great contention.

The main point is to keep the ad hominem arguments away from the pure-Bible discussions. (Incidentally, I am not using ad hominem here as a reference to a fallacy argument, simply a type of discussion that should be separated. It is a fallacy to think that all ad hominem points and references and arguments are fallacies.)

However, partly because I have always had a great respect for Brandon's website, the magic marker page being the best of the web (btw, sometime I think of possible enhancements or additions) maybe this forum could be the first forum where there is a section and threads that are Peter Ruckman related and Bible-version-issue pure. That is my suggestion, my request for consideration.

Oh, I thought of a possible objection. What if Peter Ruckman is quoted in the Bible version area where he is referencing D. A. Waite or David Cloud or this one or that unfavorably in terms of their views on Bible versions. Then let their views ** on the Bible versions ** be defended in the same realms. There really is a legitimate discussion about the differences in their views. And there is even a farily large difference between D. A. Waite and David Cloud. So where else to talk about such issues intelligently than here ?

Shalom,
Steven

[George]

None of these are more important than pursuing Christ.
Quote:
Instead of concentrating on these critical issues, we are spending our time chewing over (and over) whether brother Peter Ruckman is fit to preach; teach; pastor a church; or should be married!
I agree, but the same goes for people on David Cloud's side. Whose side are you on? Before you answer, read Joshua 5:13-14.
Quote:
It’s about time that we get on with the “weightier matters” and issues that are bedeviling Christians everywhere, and leave the judgment of brother Peter Ruckman up to God Almighty -

George
Agree. Let's close this thread.

I agree with most of what you have said, however there is always a balance in "pursuing Christ". And if we fail to heed that "balance" we would have failed to heed the "whole counsel of God".

Acts 20:26 Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men.
27 For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.
28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
31 Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.

Ephesians 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,
11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:

{MAN'IFOLD, a. many and fold. Of divers kinds; many in number; numerous; multiplied.}

The following describes the Scriptural duties of an elder/pastor/bishop:

SCRIPTURAL DUTIES & RESPONSIBILITIES OF: {an elder-pastor}

PERSONAL (Inward)

1. PRAYER [Addressed - to God]

2. STUDY [Scriptures – from God]

CONGREGATIONAL (Outward – “the ministry of the word of God”)

3. PREACHING [The Word of God] {PURPOSE: Feeding & Edification – Doctrine & Conduct}

4. TEACHING [Convincing, Exhorting - Sound Doctrine & the Whole Council of God] {PURPOSE: Feeding & Edification – Doctrine & Conduct}

5. WARNING [Against: Leaven (False Doctrine), Philosophy, Vain Deceit, the Traditions of Men, Science-Falsely-so-called, and the Rudiments of the World, etc.] {PURPOSE: Edification– Doctrine & Conduct}

CORRECTION – SCRIPTURAL AUTHORITY & LIMITS OF: {an elder-pastor}

6. ADMONISHING [Advise, Caution, or Notify of a Fault] {PURPOSE - Correction}

7. REPROVING [To Refute, Disprove, or Convince of a Fault or to Make It Manifest] {PURPOSE - Correction}

8. REBUKING [To reprehend for faults; to chide, chasten, check, restrain or silence] {PURPOSE - Correction}

Headings 6 - 8 above describe the absolute LIMITS OF PASTORAL AUTHORITY (“Correction”). All matters of "Discipline" within a church are to be administered by the whole body (the congregation) – NOT an individual elder-pastor, or a board of deacons, or any other extra-scriptural council or committee. PLEASE NOTE: All matters of "Punishment" are to be administered by Almighty God!

In the early church there was no clergy–laity set up as in almost all modern day churches. There was no one individual “pastor” over the church, or in the larger churches – a “senior pastor”; “assistant pastors”; “youth pastor”; “Choir Director”; or so-called “Christian Counselors” - dispensing pagan philosophy within the church, or today’s’ modern equivalent - Humanism, Psychiatry, & Psychology.

The leaders in the early church were called elders and were always plural in number and they shared whatever power and authority they had – equally. No division existed between the congregation and elders-pastors. [They (elders-pastors and the congregation) all were brethren – with no distinctions!]

An elder’s (pastor’s) authority over the brethren was, and still is, very limited – spiritual only!

An elder (pastor) is not to exercise dominion over the brethren or over their faith!

As you can see: It's easy to say "None of these are more important than pursuing Christ". However, it's a bit more complicated than that - especially when another brother in Christ and his ministry is being maligned by someone who doesn't know that much about him.

I am on no man's side. I follow no man (pastor, teacher, scholar, etc.). My head is the Lord Jesus Christ, and no one else. I seek to be on God's side and the side of truth. I never introduced this thread on Peter Ruckman - but since I joined this Forum, I have tried to defend him against malicious attacks and petty criticism.

The day that the criticism and unprovoked attacks stop, is the day I will cease to defend him. Until then I will try my utmost not to mention him or his work again.

Yours for the Lord Jesus Christ and for His Holy Word,

George

I'd just like to put in my two cents worth for Steven Avery's proposal:

Maybe on a forum like this such issues could be put on a separate threads .. "Peter Ruckman, non-Bible-version questions" and "Peter Ruckman, some brouhahas with other folks"

I haven't been following all the discussion about Dr. Ruckman except enough to gather that he's a colorful personality and that it tends to detract from his good work on the KJB-only debate, as well as bog down discussion here so that the real issues get lost. I'm now interested in hearing some discussion of Dr. Ruckman's work on the Bible issues WITHOUT all the side issues about his personality. I did take a look at his website and have to say that while it appears I probably agree with him in general, his style is a problem for me, so if it's possible to separate the two here and bring out the Bible issues apart from his personality that would be great.

Could it be as simple as starting two separate threads with the two titles Steven Avery proposed?

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Steven

"Peter Ruckman, non-Bible-version questions" and "Peter Ruckman, some brouhahas with other folks"

Originally Posted by Connie

Could it be as simple as starting two separate threads with the two titles Steven Avery proposed?

Hi Connie,

Just to be clear, those would both be in the section some to which some of us will pay less notice. The ongoing discussions of the colorful personality aspects and the more edgy or off-the-edge doctrinal issues can all go on in that nice separated forum. Those threads can be as endless as the various sides want.

Under my proposal, or suggestion, what we will be discussing in the no-hassle threads will be topics like :

"English correcting the Greek - Peter Ruckman's examples"
"Alexandrian Cult - the modern version mentality"
"LXX - a myth - Ruckman and Gipp"
"Bible Believers Bulletin - 2008, a review"
"How do we view 'the Greek' "
"Ruth 3:15, both he and she are fine, per Peter Ruckman"

And many dozen more, potentially, things like that. With an attempt to really look at both the conceptual issues and the detail verse issues and the church history and overall textual issues.

Even if this bifurcation (.25c word there) of the Peter Ruckman discussion threads is done informally, it would still be a great help. What I don't like is the ongoing emphasis on the 'colorful' issues, which then becomes essentially the hijacking of any Peter Ruckman thread into a discussion of how good or bad he is.

And what I would like to see is more pure Bible discussion, respecting and discussing the ideas he has brought to the table about the position and majesty of the King James Bible, agree or disagree with various aspects.

Shalom,
Steven

And what I would like to see is more pure Bible discussion, respecting and discussing the ideas he has brought to the table about the position and majesty of the King James Bible, agree or disagree with various aspects.

You got me interested. Hope it can happen.