Featured Someone help me out here.....

And yet the Greek Orthodox Church considers the entire LXX including the apocrypha canonical - - how did that come about in the historical development of canonicity?

 

Can you give the details please?

 

1. Springer wrote in your link: "According to Dewey Beagle (sic), only in recent years (he was writing in 1960) have 'scholars' begun to value the Septuagint again." However, Beegle's actual statement was "many of the Old Testament scholars," not just "scholars" as in Springer's statement. New Testament scholars have always valued the LXX, something Springer apparently doesn't know. For example, my hard copy of the LXX (Brenton) was first published in 1851. Thayer's lexicon (1896) often refers to the LXX. Springer is careless with the facts.

2. In his article, "The Word of God for All Nations" (Article: The Word of God for All Nations by Phil Stringer - Textus Receptus), Springer says in the Japanese section (the facts for which he got from me), "Unfortunately, missionary Hime (spelling my name wrong) rejects the Verbal Plenary Translation method and speaks harshly of it." He pulled this out of thin air. What I actually did was write a negative review (with nothing about whether I agreed with VPT) of H. D. Williams' book, Word-for-Word Translating of the Received Texts (possibly the worst book ever written on Bible translation). In other words, I criticized Williams' book (with no personal attacks on Williams), and that was unforgivable to the Dean Burgon Society crowd. You can read my review here: Amazon.com: Customer reviews: Word-for-Word Translating of the Received Texts, Verbal Plenary Translating

 

In proof of Ziggy's assertion here, the oldest version of the "post NT LXX" postulate (not enough evidence to call it a theory) is that of Peter Ruckman in 1970 in The Christian's Book of Manuscript Evidence, in which he has a whole chapter on the subject, Ch. 4, "The Mythological Septuagint."

Not only does it have a "bunch of hooey" in it, in Ziggy's eloquent phrase , it viciously attacks many good men of God, such as my grandfather, about whom (catch that "whom," Ziggy) he wrote in various books, "Bible rejector," "used of Satan," "blockhead," "naive and shallow," "stupid," "liar," "blasphemous," and "hypocrite."

Anyone who follows Ruckman follows vicious ignorance.

 

I will have to look into these things. Thank you. Assuming your rendition of things is correct (I'm not saying it's not, just saying that I don't know yet), have you contacted him concerning these things?

 

George, you can trust John.

 

I appreciate the nod but it's meaningless to me. I trust you can understand that.

 

OK

 

'Anyone'?
Now, that sounds like a viciously ignorant statement. You see, we're all prone to over-reaching, just as Ruckman.

 

No I have not. He hangs out with H. D. Williams (for example, on the board of BPS Global), accepting what Williams said about me in his personal-attack-filled response to my review. I just figure they consider me to be their enemy. (The reverse is not true.)

 

All the more reason to reach out, no? But anyway, that's your business at the end of the day. I was just interested to see if there had been a exchange between you two on this particular matter.

 

Sorry, I've never met a Ruckmanite who know what he was talking about. That's ignorance. And as I pointed out, Ruckman was a vicious man. So my statement is accurate, not an overreach. Did you read what I listed that Ruckman said about my grandfather? Ruckman was a very vicious man. Further evidence: One Ruckmanite wrote a nasty pamphlet, DEAR Dr. JOHN: Where is my bible? That is exactly the title, with mixed caps and lower case, and lower case "b" for Bible.

Are you a follower of Ruckman?

 

Of course you must now double-down on your statement. Moving on.

Well it's kind of hard to follow a guy who's physically dead, but you would consider me that, yes.
Please note that I clearly implied that Ruckman did over-reach at times.
Who was your grandfather?

 

I see no need to respond to such personal attacks. These are unreasonable people

In your determination of whether or not what I say is accurate, if you want to examine Williams' personal attacks on me, go to the source: Word for Word Translating

 

The question would be based on his books and pamphlets, which live after him, unfortunately.

John R. Rice

 

Well then, I learned about your grandfather and learned to appreciate his work [aside from the KJB issue] because of Ruckman's writings on him and because of a Ruckmanite Bible Institute.

You seem to be ignorant [now there's some irony] of a number of positive things Ruckman wrote about your grandfather.

 

Actually i liked Ruckman, though i didn't/couldn't agree with him when it came to KJVO (although for many years I was KJVO.

He was a good expositor and actually referred to the Greek Text (TR) at times.
Once he was preaching (I was reading the sermon) in 2 Timothy and gave his own translation of a passage,
i thought it looked familiar - i checked it out and it was almost word for word the NIV rendering.

But his heresies of Double Inspiration and Advanced Revelation caused me to depart from the KJVO position.
His life was tragic and unhappy, i was sad when he left planet earth but i believe he is with His LORD Jesus.

 

I'm not sure you are understanding what I said. I did not say that any follower of Ruckman was ignorant and vicious. I said that following him meant following ignorance and viciousness. I challenge you to go through one of his books and note the personal attacks he makes against good men of God. That is not the approach of a Spirit-filled preacher.

 

Good to know.

Yes, I'm completely ignorant of anything positive Ruckman ever said about JRR. Do you have a quote for me?

 

I recall at least a couple of instances but I'll have to look.
Here's what I recall [and he wrote that way about all the guys he blasted on the KJB issue], something to the effect that in such-and-such area, John R Rice was good and I couldn't teach him anything.

If you want more concrete proof, a Ruckmanite Bible Institute (one at least) makes his book "The Home" mandatory reading.

Ruckman repeatedly insisted that just because a man was wrong/weak/apostate on one issue did not mean he was so on all and that God wasn't using him. He just never got the same kind of slack back from those guys because they were too offended.