What does Ruckmannite mean?

Doc.Cassidy,Dr. Ruckman is 81 years old. I did not know that you knew him personally. I assumed that by your first post on this thread. He really is a different person in person. I know that he has some far out stuff,and I don't agree with him on everything,but he has taught me a lot. I just hope when I am 81 years old I am still winning souls for Christ.
Don if you will email me the question that you want me to ask Doc. I will ask him when he comes.
Doc.Cassidy,have you talked to Ruckman lately? I talked to him in Feb. and he was still playing golie on a hockey team.
Kevin

 

One more thing,when Pastor Coley ask Dr.Ruckman to speak at our church he had 27 meetings before he could get to us. Not everybody feels toward him the way most people on bb feel.
Kevin

 

A Dr. Jekyl / Mr. Hyde complex, eh?

Ask him why he's a different person in person. If he's such a nice guy in person, ask him why he throws the fruit of the spirit out the window the moment he picks up a pen or sits down in front of a typewriter.

Ask him if he's got an apology ready for when he meets Westcott and Hort in a few years.

 

Why not come and ask him???? It is easy to blast him when he is not around to defend himself.

[ August 30, 2002, 04:14 PM: Message edited by: Japheth ]

 

Why? Do you think he might answer questions more directly than you do?

BTW, where are all of those doctrines missing from MV's?

You talked about it and were challenged. You listed a few verses and were challenged that these were textual differences not doctrinal differences... then strangely you went silent on the issue.

Of course, in person, Dr. Ruckman might shout down and verbally abuse his antagonists in a way that you can't do here... but still do you think he might give simple, truthful, factual, direct answers to simple direct questions?

 

Several reasons:
- I have a family, a job, and other committments that are just a *little* bit of a higher priority
- I live about 2400 miles away, in a different country
- I have *no* desire to ever meet that man in person
- I already have a pretty good idea what his answers would be
- Kevo wants me to meet the Junkyard Dog, but scripture tells me "Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision." (Philippians 3:2)

Kevo, take the $1000 it would take in airfare, room/board, etc, that it would take to get me down there and give it to missions. It will do ***much*** more good.

 

BrianT,I have to ask him a serious question. But being the gentelman that I am I will answer your question.NO!!!!!!!He will not. Brian, you scared me man,I thought you were going to accept my offer.1,000 is hard to come by for a paint contractor

 

Well SCOTTJ, first of all the MV's Do leave out or change Alot of verses, I have posted just a few of many of those changes/omisions. But why beat a dead dog to death? if you or anybody else out there want to use the MV's, then by all means DO SO. After all I know I will never convince some people of the obvious corruptions of the MV's. Personally I believe Psa 12:6-7 to the uttermost!!! I belive that the KJV is the Word of God;you know one of those "KJVO's." I also believe that the North African texts and the bibles that derive from them are corrupt. They may or may not omit any doctrines; but they do a fine job corrupting the ones that are there.

[ August 30, 2002, 06:40 PM: Message edited by: Japheth ]

 

How do you know that's what they've done? You have been challenged over this before as well. Unless you have the originals you either must honestly evaluate the evidence yourself or trust someone else's opinion or a combination. That's why when you make charges here, we ask you for proof then evaluate both what you give and where it came from.

You have posted where MV's differ from the KJV in places... not where MV's differ from the originals. God only inspired the originals therefore they are the standard. Absent the originals, we must trust what the manuscript evidence reveals to us

You can convince me! But you must come with solid proof and reasoning, not hype and bluster.

Actually you have been shown that what you believe about this verse is incorrect. To believe or claim that the Bible says or means something it doesn't dishonors God and His Word. You have been shown your error here. Your status as a child of God demands that you cease in it.

As do I. But not because it has divinely inspired words. I believe it is the Word of God since it accurately communicates God's message in the originals.

Proof? Where is it? We are right back where we started with you making charges that you cannot back up.

 

All you or anybody else has to do is compare the versions;it's right there in black and white right in front of ya. If you or anybody else can produce the originals to prove me wrong, then do so!! Other than that;what else is there to say??

 

"They may or may not omit any doctrines; but they do a fine job corrupting the ones that are there."

Okay, how have they been corrupted? If they teach a doctrine do they leave out some component of the doctrine? I have read the KJV completely through several times. I have read the NASB completely through several times. I have read the NIV completely through several times. I don't see where the NIV or the NASB leave out any doctrine or part of a doctrine that is not in the KJV.

 

I have. And this is exactly my point. You make accusations that you cannot prove because they are not true.

You got that backwards. I am not saying that any version or text is word for word identical to the originals. I am not saying that a particular translation is perfect to the exclusion of all other versions. I say that we have everything that God willed to commend to us in writing in several good versions and that the best of these are those that use the best methods of evaluating the manuscript evidence.

YOU are the one who says that the KJV is exclusively God's Word in English. Therefore it is you that must prove that by some miracle it is identical to the originals. Or if you will, that the TR is identical to the originals.

Well, we might say that the KJV is a very good translation of the Bible but not directly inspired nor exclusively the Word of God in English.

 

Of all the strings in Baptist Board that I have come across so far, this one has proved the most interesting. I hold to the KJV as the only reliable English translation today, and I am bitterly opposed to all modern versions. I am also, however, strongly anti-Ruckman. I do not believe that the KJV was begotten of inspiration, but rather of preservation. I believe the originals were inspired and perfect. Though we no longer have them with us, I believe that the originals were preserved through the Textus Receptus (Greek) and the Masoretic Texts (Hebrew). I believe that the TR and MT are as perfect as the AV. As concerning Dr. Ruckman, I believe that no one outside of Satan himself has done more damage to the KJV cause than he. His doctrines concerning the KJV are highly inaccurate (where was the Word of God during the Early Church?) and many of his other doctrines are completely strange and un-Biblical. Even if any possibility exists that he is in the right (which is impossible), his caustic, often profane manner of "persuasion." Because of Dr. Ruckman, I am often confused with the Ruckmanites, which makes it incredibly difficult for me to successfully defend the KJV. I pray that, one day, God will show Dr. Ruckman the light. Here is another thing that may prove a bone of contention: my pastor is a personal friend of Stewsie-Woosie. Translated from Ruckmanese, that is Dr. Stewart Custer of BJU.

 

So I know someone who is a personal friend of Dr.Ruckman,me. Speaking of Bob Jones Sr.,Dr.Ruckman speaks very highly of him.

 

Love him or hate him; I know very few that can defend the KJV like he can. Many MV-ers that were going to debate him publicly did not even show!! Why???

 

Because nobody knows more about the bible than Dr.Ruckman. He is by far the world champion

 

That was great, Kevo! I laughed so hard I spewed coffee. If I had my way, this forum would have more satire, but unfortunately there are too many people who would read something like that and take it seriously.

 

What is funny is as I previously asked, what happend to the people who were to debate him in the past?? Why did'nt they Show??

 

Who knows? Who cares? Maybe they were following the advice of Philippians 3:2.