1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Alexandrian Creed

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Comrade, Aug 25, 2004.

Top Posters
  1. Comrade

    Comrade New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2004
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    0
    by Peter Ruckman


    1. There is NO FINAL AUTHORITY but God.

    2. Since God is a SPIRIT, there is NO FINAL AUTHORITY that can be seen, heard, read, felt or handled.

    3. Since all books are MATERIAL, there is NO BOOK ON THIS EARTH THAT IS THE FINAL AND ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY on what is right and what is wrong; what constitutes TRUTH and what constitutes ERROR.

    4. There WAS a series of writings one time which, IF they had all been put into a BOOK as soon as they were written the first time, WOULD HAVE constituted an infallible and final authority by which to judge truth and error.

    5. However, this series of writings was LOST, and the God Who inspired them was UNABLE TO PRESERVE THEIR CONTENT through Bible-believing Christians at Antioch (Syria), where the first Bible teachers were (Acts 13:1), and where the first missionary trip originated (Acts 13:1-6), and where the word "CHRISTIAN" originated (Acts 11:26).

    6. So, God chose to ALMOST preserve them through Gnostics and philosophers from Alexandria, Egypt, even though God called HIS SON OUT of Egypt (Mat. 2), JACOB OUT of Egypt (Gen. 49), ISRAEL OUT of Egypt (Exod. 15), and JOSEPH'S BONES OUT of Egypt (Exod. 13).

    7. So, there are two streams of Bibles: the most accurate - though, of course, there is NO FINAL, ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY FOR DETERMINING TRUTH AND ERROR: it is a matter of "preference" - are the Egyptian translations from Alexandria, Egypt, which are "almost the originals," although NOT QUITE.

    8. The most INACCURATE TRANSLATIONS were those that brought about the GERMAN REFORMATION (Luther, Zwingli, Boehler, Zinzendorf, Spener, etc.) and the worldwide MISSIONARY MOVEMENT of the English speaking people: the Bible that Sunday, Torrey, Moody, Finney, Spurgeon, Whitfield, Wesley, and Chapman used.

    9. But we can "tolerate" these if those who believe in them will tolerate US. After all, since THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE AND FINAL AUTHORITY THAT ANYONE CAN READ, TEACH, PREACH, OR HANDLE, the whole thing is a matter of "PREFERENCE." You may prefer what you prefer, and we will prefer what WE prefer: let us live in peace, and if we cannot agree on anything or everything, let us all agree on one thing: THERE IS NO FINAL, ABSOLUTE, WRITTEN AUTHORITY OF GOD ANYWHERE ON THIS EARTH.
     
    #1 Comrade, Aug 25, 2004
  2. Bro Tony

    Bro Tony New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,398
    Likes Received:
    0
    That you resort to use someone like Ruckman who has been shown over and over again to spew warped information against Bible believing Christians grieves my heart. [​IMG]

    Bro Tony
     
    #2 Bro Tony, Aug 25, 2004
  3. Comrade

    Comrade New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2004
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is honestly the only thing I have used but look at it this way every arguement i have heard in a version debate usually goes back to this I am personally not truly happy with everything I'd rather be winning souls. I give up on debating verions I believe what I believe and everyone else is the same way. I am against other versions because alot of them remove verses and large portions of chapters. Revelation says that we should not add on or take away from the scriptures.
     
    #3 Comrade, Aug 25, 2004
  4. Bro Tony

    Bro Tony New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,398
    Likes Received:
    0
    That you have a version that you have chosen to use, even exclusively, is alright with me. That you believe it to be the most accurate and don't desire to use any other I have no problem with. What I have a problem with is the statements that what are clearly the Word of God are "corrupt" "blaspemous" "dung" "false" etc.
    God has given us His inspired, infallible Word through His prophets and Apostles and He has preserved it in many valid and reliable versions.

    Bro Tony
     
    #4 Bro Tony, Aug 25, 2004
  5. Comrade

    Comrade New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2004
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not going to try and change you into KJVO but I have read through other versions before and to me they are very hard to understand and are very choppy.

    I would like you to explain more the statment "What I have a problem with is the statements that what are clearly the Word of God are "corrupt" "blaspemous" "dung" "false" etc."
    I urge you to find historical information on the manuscripts it is very enlightening.
     
    #5 Comrade, Aug 25, 2004
  6. KJVBibleThumper

    KJVBibleThumper New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    They are neither valid or reliable im afraid.
     
    #6 KJVBibleThumper, Aug 25, 2004
  7. Orvie

    Orvie New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    0
    They are neither valid or reliable im afraid. </font>[/QUOTE]Don't be afraid. The MV Boogieman is not out to steal God's Word from you.
    Many (not all) of the MV's are demonstratably valid and very reliable for the modern reader, unlike the 1611/1769 which today's reader may find stale instead of fresh, rusty instead of sharp (Heb 4:12). :D
     
    #7 Orvie, Aug 25, 2004
  8. Bro Tony

    Bro Tony New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,398
    Likes Received:
    0
    These are terms that have been used by members of the KJVO camp in reference to the MV's. They have not been able to say they just prefer their chosen version but have used these ungodly adjectives on the Word of God.

    Bro Tony
     
    #8 Bro Tony, Aug 25, 2004
  9. David J

    David J New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    Those words used by KJVOist are an attack on translations other than the 1769KJV.

    I have yet to see a MV user stoop to such a level in order to defend using a MV.
     
    #9 David J, Aug 25, 2004
  10. Bro Tony

    Bro Tony New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,398
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your statement and your fear lack any basis in fact.

    Bro Tony
     
    #10 Bro Tony, Aug 25, 2004
  11. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    1
    The excerpt from Peter Ruckman is completely self-refuting. He is putting himself out as an authority by stating that we have no authority.

    He makes an authoritative statement that there is no final authority. So we are supposed to take his words as authority!

    No thanks, Mr. Ruckman, your words are not my authority.
     
    #11 Marcia, Aug 25, 2004
  12. natters

    natters New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen, Marcia.

    By what authority should we believe in KJV-onlyism? Scripture doesn't teach it. So where's the authority for this doctrine?
     
    #12 natters, Aug 25, 2004
  13. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Pathetic. But expected nothing more from Ruckman. He needs our prayers and those duped into following him need it worse. [​IMG]
     
    #13 Dr. Bob, Aug 25, 2004
  14. Ransom

    Ransom Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    1
    The Creed of the Alexandrian Cult = the ultimate non-thinking bot post.
     
    #14 Ransom, Aug 25, 2004
  15. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    There is one sublime statement that he makes that I can agree with...

    OK, we agree, so would you please stop sending your clones to the BB.

    HankD
     
    #15 HankD, Aug 25, 2004
  16. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    What? To the "only" it is NOT a preference but a revelation from God that is the ONLY translation.

    To say "let us live in peace with our preferences" is 100% untrue. Sadly untrue.
     
    #16 Dr. Bob, Aug 26, 2004
  17. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ruckman is an idiot and everyone knows it even the KJVO he's a smooth talking hypocrite that don't know what he's talking about. Jude had Ruckman in mind when he wrote this verse.

    "For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God and Lord Jesus Christ." Jude verse 4. NKJV

    1cross+3nails=4given
     
    #17 DeclareHim, Aug 26, 2004
  18. AVL1984

    AVL1984 <img src=../ubb/avl1984.jpg>

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    7,506
    Likes Received:
    62
    Faith:
    Baptist
     
    #18 AVL1984, Aug 26, 2004
  19. AVL1984

    AVL1984 <img src=../ubb/avl1984.jpg>

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    7,506
    Likes Received:
    62
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Very true, Dr. Bob. I have dealt with many Ruckmanites, and they are so warped in their thinking I believe they are cultic. :( We need a cult-busting squad. [​IMG]

    AVL1984 [​IMG]
     
    #19 AVL1984, Aug 26, 2004
  20. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Comrade:This is honestly the only thing I have used but look at it this way every arguement i have heard in a version debate usually goes back to this I am personally not truly happy with everything I'd rather be winning souls.

    God gives different jobs to different people. He gives the pleasure of winning souls to every believer, as well as other basic rules, but He has each one SPECIALIZE in something, and in varying degrees. He has me working against cults, especially those such as Jehovah Witness, which hides behind Jesus' robe without knowing the WEARER of that robe. We must not forget that each of us is working for JESUS, and not ourselves. We do NOT hafta answer to anyone but HIM, far as our worship goes.


    I give up on debating verions I believe what I believe and everyone else is the same way.

    I've seen more than one KJVO come out of it. YOU could, also, if you actually examine the FACTS and the FICTION about it.


    I am against other versions because alot of them remove verses and large portions of chapters.

    So says Ruckman and a few other Ministers of Misinformation. Neither he nor anyone else can prove anything was omitted in a later version, because the case is more likely that the KJV's sources have material ADDED. the translators added a few words here & there not required for clarity.


    Revelation says that we should not add on or take away from the scriptures.

    The AV translators were fearful of OMITTING while later translators were fearful of ADDING.
     
    #20 robycop3, Aug 26, 2004
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...