Testing the "Seven Times Purified Theory"

[John of Japan]

First, I have never read anything by Ruckman and so it is not his arguments that has brought me to my position. Second, I do not believe women theologians are approved of God and therefore I am not buying commentaries of the scriptures written by women. I will say that someone gave me a copy of a book once written by Gail Riplinger. I pitched it after a couple chapters as much for the tone as anything else.

Good. I'm glad to know this.

Still, wherever you got your views, Peter Ruckman started the whole nonsense about the KJV being a perfect translation, and "advanced revelation." No one in evangelicalism believed in a perfect translation until Ruckman started teaching it, though many Catholics believed the Latin Vulgate was perfect. There is no way to believe the KJV is perfect without believing there are errors in the original texts that God directly gave.

I have come to the KJV only position because of my personal study of the words of God and what I have learned about his ways over the years. Leaving the world dependent upon Hebrew and Greek scholars....

This is a copout. It's just an excuse by KJVO people who don't want to do the work needed to access the Greek and Hebrew. The Christian world is not "dependent on Hebrew and Greek scholars." There are 1000s of Baptist pastors who learned Greek and Hebrew in seminary, or just Greek in Bible college, and regularly use it in their ministry.

I teach Greek and my son teaches both Greek and Hebrew. (Now tell me I am bragging and not giving glory to God because I have told you what I do professionally. ) Languages are not that hard to learn, but do take a lot of memorization. In my many years of teaching in the US, I have only had two students fail my Greek 101 class, and none has ever failed Greek 102. Of the two who failed, one took it over and got straight A's. The other is about to take it over, and I believe he will do better. And both the men and women in our college are required to take Greek. The women typically do quite well, thank you.

and having an unending line of new and improved translations without the same words or even the same methods of translations like we have since about 2001 in America does not match any of our heavenly Father's ways that are revealed anywhere in his revelation of himself. Then, take into account that these are translations of the same manuscripts into the same language without any new source material. How can Spirit enlightened Christians fall for such tactics. Throw in the paraphrases and the dynamic equivalence editions and they are an insult to the church and to God, I believe.

I don't know why men like you are not more enraged at these practitioners of deceit than about men who believes the God who has sacrificed his Son to save us would not preserve his words in the language of the people who are willing to believe it and preach it to others all over the world.

I am not "enraged" at most modern Bible translators because they are not "practitioners of deceit." I know several modern translators. The OT editor of the NKJV and HCSB was my seminary Hebrew teacher, and he is a good man, and still a friend. It is slander to say that such men are "practitioners of deceit." That is a vicious thing to say. You can disagree with their Bible translation work, but don't insult them.

Where I do disagree with the modern versions is that there are still over 3,000 languages in the world with not a verse of the Bible translated. That is where our effort and funds should go, not in another modern translation. But that does not mean that such translators are "practitioners of deceit." Get a grip, man.

I have never liked Peter Ruckman nor his tactics but credit his school of getting thousands of missionaries all over the world. I know many of them personally.

It is simply not true that Ruckman's school has produced 1000s of missionaries. I doubt if it has even produced 100s of missionaries--dozens at the very most. I was a missionary to Japan for 33 years, but I only knew one Ruckman grad in Japan, and never met another Ruckman grad who was a missionary. (Now tell me I am not glorifying God because I said what I did for the Lord without explicitly mentioning Him. ) And in all of the dozens of missionary conferences in the US I've been in, and the hundreds of churches I have been to in five different countries, I have never one single time met a grad of his school, Pensacola Bible Institute, either pastor or missionary.

Ruckman's school was only a small one, even calling itself an "institute" rather than a college. So it wasn't even a Bible college. Check out the website for Ruckman's books: Bible Baptist Bookstore, a Ministry of Bible Baptist Church. There is not a single mention of Ruckman's school, nor of the church he pastored, for that matter.

You make statements without offering proof above. Besides that, God's favorite mathematical term is "divide." The way to God is narrow. Few find it we are told. There is a real and person Devil. He is the adversary. He has weakened the testimony of the church through the philosophy of the new bibles without end. That does not make the KJV true but there is less unity among Christians now than before our minds were enlightened with all these new bibles to choose from.

I'm glad you wrote this. It is the perfect example of misunderstanding the KJV because of a translation issue connected with the Christian culture of the translators.

When I talked about "divisions," I was writing about the Greek word hairetikos (αἱρετικός), which the KJV transliterates as "heretick" in Titus 3:10. Since the KJV translators were Church of England, they simply held to the Catholic meaning of heretic, which was basically, "Someone who doesn't agree with the Catholic Church." So to the KJV translators, it meant "Someone who doesn't agree with our church." However, what the Greek word actually means is "someone who causes divisions." God hates divisions in the local church, the body of Christ. So anyone who seeks to cause division in a local church is a heretic and should be disciplined out of the church. And those who believe in a perfect translation do cause such divisions.

But in your answer, I certainly hope you did not mean that someone who causes divisions in the local church of Jesus Christ is an okay guy. You didn't say that in so many words, so I'll just hope you didn't mean that.

I have other points I would like to make about your comments but I am out of time now.

I'll be waiting.

 

[John of Japan]

Just in case anyone reading this wonders at my characterization of Peter Ruckman, see this link: The deterioration of Ruckman’s language demonstrated in his changing treatment of John R. Rice | Ruckmanism.org. This viciousness negates anything Ruckman taught about the Bible, IMO. He is not to be trusted in anything he wrote.

These are just some of the things Ruckman said about my Grandfather, John R. Rice, as documented on the website. (And I never knew a more godly, dedicated, soul-winning, Bible-loving preacher than John R. Rice, and I lived with him and worked for him.

"…Dr. Rice, and any other Bible-rejecting 'Fundamentalist.'" (Ruckman, Satan's Masterpiece! The New ASV, p. 69.)

…the deep, dark-stained, murderous, hatred that these Fundamentalists have for the Authority of the Authorized Text. From Origen to John R. Rice they have the same set of horns; (Ruckman, Peter. The Book of Acts. 1974, 1984 reprint, p. 84)

…leading fundamentalists in this century …John R. Rice… were used of Satan to help set up the One World “New Order.” (Ruckman, Peter. 22 Years of the Bible Believer’s Bulletin Vol. 1 “The AV Holy Bible” 1999, p. 454)

…the Lord showed Rice that he did not have the brains or the intellect to be a teacher… (Ruckman, Peter. History of the New Testament Church Vol. 2. 1984, p. 187)

…Bible blockheads like John R. Rice and Curtis Hutson to presume that OT salvation was the same as NT salvation. It is if you are deaf, dumb, and blind. (Ruckman, Peter. Ruckman’s Bible References: Personal Notes on Salient Verses in the Bible. 1997, p. 89)

…Abraham is a type of the Christian’s salvation by “faith” apart from “the works of the law.” This led naïve and shallow Bible students like John R. Rice and Curtis Hutson to assume that salvation under the law was identical to salvation under grace. Where this mad type of irresponsible nonsense came from no one knows… (Ruckman, Peter. The Book of Psalms Vol. 1. 1997 reprint, p. 247)

When poor, old, “godly,” kindly, stupid John R. Rice hit Revelation 22:14, he came apart at the seams just like Curtis Hutson, Westcott, and Hort. He couldn’t understand WORKS in connection with eternal life. (Ruckman, Peter. The Book of Psalms. Vol. 2. 2002 reprint, p. 1479)

…heretics like Curtis Hutson and John R. Rice… (Ruckman, Peter. Ruckman’s Bible References: Personal Notes on Salient Verses in the Bible. 1997, p. 28)

John Rice was stripping you of your spiritual billfold, your spiritual checkbook, your spiritual bank account, your spiritual savings and loan deposits, and your spiritual INTEGRITY. He was converting you into an unsaved German philosopher, and some of you bought the “gaffed act.” You were the “sucker.”…When Rice got to the WORDS (see the small “w” on “word”? By God, you had better see it!), he threw “THE BIBLE” (OUR PERFECT BIBLE) out the window because he was about to say “verbal inspiration” (p. 23). Did you catch the ole’ liar when he switched the TENSE on you? C’mon, did you? Why not? (Bible Believers' Bulletin. Dec. 2003, p. 11)

 

[robycop3]

Most of the modern Bibles are worst than the AV with it's known faults. LOL.

We must remember that all Bible translations are products of God's perfect word being handled by imperfect men. We point out the KJV's goofs to disprove the "KJV is perfect" claims by KJVOs. No other English BV claims to be perfect, but only that "We have given our best efforts to make the best translation we could", same as the AV makers did.

 

[robycop3]

Just in case anyone reading this wonders at my characterization of Peter Ruckman, see this link: The deterioration of Ruckman’s language demonstrated in his changing treatment of John R. Rice | Ruckmanism.org. This viciousness negates anything Ruckman taught about the Bible, IMO. He is not to be trusted in anything he wrote.

These are just some of the things Ruckman said about my Grandfather, John R. Rice, as documented on the website. (And I never knew a more godly, dedicated, soul-winning, Bible-loving preacher than John R. Rice, and I lived with him and worked for him.

"…Dr. Rice, and any other Bible-rejecting 'Fundamentalist.'" (Ruckman, Satan's Masterpiece! The New ASV, p. 69.)

…the deep, dark-stained, murderous, hatred that these Fundamentalists have for the Authority of the Authorized Text. From Origen to John R. Rice they have the same set of horns; (Ruckman, Peter. The Book of Acts. 1974, 1984 reprint, p. 84)

…leading fundamentalists in this century …John R. Rice… were used of Satan to help set up the One World “New Order.” (Ruckman, Peter. 22 Years of the Bible Believer’s Bulletin Vol. 1 “The AV Holy Bible” 1999, p. 454)

…the Lord showed Rice that he did not have the brains or the intellect to be a teacher… (Ruckman, Peter. History of the New Testament Church Vol. 2. 1984, p. 187)

…Bible blockheads like John R. Rice and Curtis Hutson to presume that OT salvation was the same as NT salvation. It is if you are deaf, dumb, and blind. (Ruckman, Peter. Ruckman’s Bible References: Personal Notes on Salient Verses in the Bible. 1997, p. 89)

…Abraham is a type of the Christian’s salvation by “faith” apart from “the works of the law.” This led naïve and shallow Bible students like John R. Rice and Curtis Hutson to assume that salvation under the law was identical to salvation under grace. Where this mad type of irresponsible nonsense came from no one knows… (Ruckman, Peter. The Book of Psalms Vol. 1. 1997 reprint, p. 247)

When poor, old, “godly,” kindly, stupid John R. Rice hit Revelation 22:14, he came apart at the seams just like Curtis Hutson, Westcott, and Hort. He couldn’t understand WORKS in connection with eternal life. (Ruckman, Peter. The Book of Psalms. Vol. 2. 2002 reprint, p. 1479)

…heretics like Curtis Hutson and John R. Rice… (Ruckman, Peter. Ruckman’s Bible References: Personal Notes on Salient Verses in the Bible. 1997, p. 28)

John Rice was stripping you of your spiritual billfold, your spiritual checkbook, your spiritual bank account, your spiritual savings and loan deposits, and your spiritual INTEGRITY. He was converting you into an unsaved German philosopher, and some of you bought the “gaffed act.” You were the “sucker.”…When Rice got to the WORDS (see the small “w” on “word”? By God, you had better see it!), he threw “THE BIBLE” (OUR PERFECT BIBLE) out the window because he was about to say “verbal inspiration” (p. 23). Did you catch the ole’ liar when he switched the TENSE on you? C’mon, did you? Why not? (Bible Believers' Bulletin. Dec. 2003, p. 11)

Just look on YuouTube for Ruckman & abortion". And in his book Mark Of The Beast, he claims the beast will be a 10-ft. tall alien with huge black lips who will impart the mark with a kiss. Does that even sound rational ?

 

[John of Japan]

Just look on YuouTube for Ruckman & abortion". And in his book Mark Of The Beast, he claims the beast will be a 10-ft. tall alien with huge black lips who will impart the mark with a kiss. Does that even sound rational ?

Well, we could go on and on, couldn't we?

 

[JD731]

Good. I'm glad to know this.

Still, wherever you got your views, Peter Ruckman started the whole nonsense about the KJV being a perfect translation, and "advanced revelation." No one in evangelicalism believed in a perfect translation until Ruckman started teaching it, though many Catholics believed the Latin Vulgate was perfect. There is no way to believe the KJV is perfect without believing there are errors in the original texts that God directly gave.


This is a copout. It's just an excuse by KJVO people who don't want to do the work needed to access the Greek and Hebrew. The Christian world is not "dependent on Hebrew and Greek scholars." There are 1000s of Baptist pastors who learned Greek and Hebrew in seminary, or just Greek in Bible college, and regularly use it in their ministry.

I teach Greek and my son teaches both Greek and Hebrew. (Now tell me I am bragging and not giving glory to God because I have told you what I do professionally. ) Languages are not that hard to learn, but do take a lot of memorization. In my many years of teaching in the US, I have only had two students fail my Greek 101 class, and none has ever failed Greek 102. Of the two who failed, one took it over and got straight A's. The other is about to take it over, and I believe he will do better. And both the men and women in our college are required to take Greek. The women typically do quite well, thank you.




I am not "enraged" at most modern Bible translators because they are not "practitioners of deceit." I know several modern translators. The OT editor of the NKJV and HCSB was my seminary Hebrew teacher, and he is a good man, and still a friend. It is slander to say that such men are "practitioners of deceit." That is a vicious thing to say. You can disagree with their Bible translation work, but don't insult them.

Where I do disagree with the modern versions is that there are still over 3,000 languages in the world with not a verse of the Bible translated. That is where our effort and funds should go, not in another modern translation. But that does not mean that such translators are "practitioners of deceit." Get a grip, man.
It is simply not true that Ruckman's school has produced 1000s of missionaries. I doubt if it has even produced 100s of missionaries--dozens at the very most. I was a missionary to Japan for 33 years, but I only knew one Ruckman grad in Japan, and never met another Ruckman grad who was a missionary. (Now tell me I am not glorifying God because I said what I did for the Lord without explicitly mentioning Him. ) And in all of the dozens of missionary conferences in the US I've been in, and the hundreds of churches I have been to in five different countries, I have never one single time met a grad of his school, Pensacola Bible Institute, either pastor or missionary.

Ruckman's school was only a small one, even calling itself an "institute" rather than a college. So it wasn't even a Bible college. Check out the website for Ruckman's books: Bible Baptist Bookstore, a Ministry of Bible Baptist Church. There is not a single mention of Ruckman's school, nor of the church he pastored, for that matter.


I'm glad you wrote this. It is the perfect example of misunderstanding the KJV because of a translation issue connected with the Christian culture of the translators.

When I talked about "divisions," I was writing about the Greek word hairetikos (αἱρετικός), which the KJV transliterates as "heretick" in Titus 3:10. Since the KJV translators were Church of England, they simply held to the Catholic meaning of heretic, which was basically, "Someone who doesn't agree with the Catholic Church." So to the KJV translators, it meant "Someone who doesn't agree with our church." However, what the Greek word actually means is "someone who causes divisions." God hates divisions in the local church, the body of Christ. So anyone who seeks to cause division in a local church is a heretic and should be disciplined out of the church. And those who believe in a perfect translation do cause such divisions.

But in your answer, I certainly hope you did not mean that someone who causes divisions in the local church of Jesus Christ is an okay guy. You didn't say that in so many words, so I'll just hope you didn't mean that.

I'll be waiting.

I teach Greek and my son teaches both Greek and Hebrew. (Now tell me I am bragging and not giving glory to God because I have told you what I do professionally. )
(Now tell me I am not glorifying God because I said what I did for the Lord without explicitly mentioning Him. )

It is difficult to put up with whining. I wish you would quit it.

How long will it be until you address the subject of your own op? This thread has degenerated into an argument about the KJV and Peter Ruckman with Christians having to put up with insults and charges of church splits and divisions caused by people who believe the scriptures are true and faithful. And, that you have offered no proof for it. Thinking on the subject now, it seems to me your whole purpose of the op might have been to stir the pot.

Speaking on the subject of Psalms 12:6 & 7, the scriptures are spiritual and whether a man learns the Hebrew and the Greek and studies the oldest manuscripts, it is still true that he will not understand the deep things of God unless he has the Spirit of God indwelling him and who alone can teach him the mind of God. So, if you don't mind my saying, it seems to me it is a waste of time to learn these languages if you have a faithful translation in your own language. The exception of course is if God has given you a particular call to translate the scriptures into another language that is not your own.

Now, I am not going to get into an argument about personalities on this thread, such as Peter Ruckman and Gail Riplinger. I have no interest in that. And I want you to know that I am not incensed at all if you disagree with my position on the KJV bible. I can't remember ever bringing up the subject of bible translations while witnessing to unsaved men. I sure have not ever instigated a church split because of it.

I was a missionary to Japan for 33 years, but I only knew one Ruckman grad in Japan, and never met another Ruckman grad who was a missionary.

I would like to briefly address this comment. Our church currently supports 85 missionary families on a monthly basis. Most of them are foreign missionaries who are serving all over the world. All are KJV only. We do faith promise missions to help provide for them. Most of them probably likes Peter Ruckman, but I do not know that for sure. I never ask them. I know they love our Lord Jesus Christ and they sacrifice much in their work in Africa, and Asia, and South America, and the islands and obviously they love those people. We have had missionaries in Japan but I was just looking over our roster and at the present time we have no supported missionaries to Japan.

None of them go to preach the KJV. They go to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and they work hard to learn the languages of the people to whom they are sent. One particular family is in a communist country (i will not say which one) but he is fluent in the language after a few years and has translated the scriptures into that language, an arduous task for sure. And no, he did not use the KJV as his source material. This is a remarkable family and they are doing a great work. We have others who are involved in translation. We receive correspondence from them on a monthly basis in areas where they are able to send their letters and prayer requests. It is wonderful to be a part of this. I spent 2 weeks with our missionary to Vietnam back in 2013 and it was a real blessing I will never forget.

But back to our subject of this thread. Do you have any lingering comments on the seven-fold purification of Psalm 12 before we are out of space? How did you come to your understanding of the statement and what does it mean to you?

 

[John of Japan]

It is difficult to put up with whining. I wish you would quit it.

Nope. I plan to keep whining! Come on, do your job. Criticize my profession: Missionarying, Bible translating, teaching Bible college and seminary....

How long will it be until you address the subject of your own op? This thread has degenerated into an argument about the KJV and Peter Ruckman with Christians having to put up with insults and charges of church splits and divisions caused by people who believe the scriptures are true and faithful. And, that you have offered no proof for it. Thinking on the subject now, it seems to me your whole purpose of the op might have been to stir the pot.

I have dealt thoroughly with my own OP, and we are now on the last page of the thread. I wish you would quit criticizing. Or at least, quit answering my posts which you consider to be off topic. Don't you get it yet? The thread was tongue in cheek.

Speaking on the subject of Psalms 12:6 & 7, the scriptures are spiritual and whether a man learns the Hebrew and the Greek and studies the oldest manuscripts, it is still true that he will not understand the deep things of God unless he has the Spirit of God indwelling him and who alone can teach him the mind of God. So, if you don't mind my saying, it seems to me it is a waste of time to learn these languages if you have a faithful translation in your own language. The exception of course is if God has given you a particular call to translate the scriptures into another language that is not your own.

This is off topic, since the thread is about the "Seven Times Purified Theory."

Now, I am not going to get into an argument about personalities on this thread, such as Peter Ruckman and Gail Riplinger. I have no interest in that. And I want you to know that I am not incensed at all if you disagree with my position on the KJV bible. I can't remember ever bringing up the subject of bible translations while witnessing to unsaved men. I sure have not ever instigated a church split because of it.

Good.

I would like to briefly address this comment. Our church currently supports 85 missionary families on a monthly basis. Most of them are foreign missionaries who are serving all over the world. All are KJV only. We do faith promise missions to help provide for them. Most of them probably likes Peter Ruckman, but I do not know that for sure. I never ask them. I know they love our Lord Jesus Christ and they sacrifice much in their work in Africa, and Asia, and South America, and the islands and obviously they love those people. We have had missionaries in Japan but I was just looking over our roster and at the present time we have no supported missionaries to Japan.

Again off topic.

None of them go to preach the KJV. They go to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and they work hard to learn the languages of the people to whom they are sent. One particular family is in a communist country (i will not say which one) but he is fluent in the language after a few years and has translated the scriptures into that language, an arduous task for sure. And no, he did not use the KJV as his source material. This is a remarkable family and they are doing a great work. We have others who are involved in translation. We receive correspondence from them on a monthly basis in areas where they are able to send their letters and prayer requests. It is wonderful to be a part of this. I spent 2 weeks with our missionary to Vietnam back in 2013 and it was a real blessing I will never forget.

Very glad to know this. I have friends who are KJVO Bible translators, and I honor them.

But back to our subject of this thread. Do you have any lingering comments on the seven-fold purification of Psalm 12 before we are out of space? How did you come to your understanding of the statement and what does it mean to you?

You're not paying attention. My topic was a tongue in cheek examination of the theory that the KJV is "purified" and therefore perfect. I used the history of the Japanese to show that the theory is unbiblical. If the theory were correct, then I could use Ps. 12:6 to prove that the Japanese Bible is pure rather than the KJV.

 

[JD731]

Nope. I plan to keep whining! Come on, do your job. Criticize my profession: Missionarying, Bible translating, teaching Bible college and seminary....


I have dealt thoroughly with my own OP, and we are now on the last page of the thread. I wish you would quit criticizing. Or at least, quit answering my posts which you consider to be off topic. Don't you get it yet? The thread was tongue in cheek.


This is off topic, since the thread is about the "Seven Times Purified Theory."


Good.


Again off topic.


Very glad to know this. I have friends who are KJVO Bible translators, and I honor them.


You're not paying attention. My topic was a tongue in cheek examination of the theory that the KJV is "purified" and therefore perfect. I used the history of the Japanese to show that the theory is unbiblical. If the theory were correct, then I could use Ps. 12:6 to prove that the Japanese Bible is pure rather than the KJV.

For what it is worth, I cannot blame you for reacting as you have when someone says bad things about your grandfather. I knew John R Rice back in the day. He seemed to me to be a good fellow. I even bought a couple or three of his commentaries from the Sword. We still have his most excellent booklet, "What Must I Do To Be Saved" in our track rack and my friend Tom, who witnesses and gives tracks to nearly everyone he meets, carries it as his favorite track to give to those who show more interest in the gospel.

But, as you say, that is off topic too and you will probably come back with something snarky so I will just go to a holding mode.

 

[JD731]

We must remember that all Bible translations are products of God's perfect word being handled by imperfect men. We point out the KJV's goofs to disprove the "KJV is perfect" claims by KJVOs. No other English BV claims to be perfect, but only that "We have given our best efforts to make the best translation we could", same as the AV makers did.

Is there now a consensus among scholars and translators concerning God's perfect word? I thought I read somewhere that there were disagreements over manuscripts.

 

[John of Japan]

For what it is worth, I cannot blame you for reacting as you have when someone says bad things about your grandfather. I knew John R Rice back in the day. He seemed to me to be a good fellow. I even bought a couple or three of his commentaries from the Sword. We still have his most excellent booklet, "What Must I Do To Be Saved" in our track rack and my friend Tom, who witnesses and gives tracks to nearly everyone he meets, carries it as his favorite track to give to those who show more interest in the gospel.

But, as you say, that is off topic too and you will probably come back with something snarky so I will just go to a holding mode.

I appreciate your good words about my grandfather. But Ruckman said such things about many good men of God. The website I linked to (run by a KJVO missionary) only used Rice as an example.

 

[JD731]

I appreciate your good words about my grandfather. But Ruckman said such things about many good men of God. The website I linked to (run by a KJVO missionary) only used Rice as an example.

I know, and there are a few men who try to mimic his style. I met a man like that once and he said some things about some of the Sword men that offended me greatly because they had been a blessing to me in my life. I have attended many Sword of the Lord conferences, the last in N C when Bro Bobby was still living. It was my first time eating a tomato sandwich.

Fortunately, there are some wonderful KJV brothers and I am associated with many of them, my pastor being one of them.

 

[Michael Hollner]

Good. I'm glad to know this.

Still, wherever you got your views, Peter Ruckman started the whole nonsense about the KJV being a perfect translation, and "advanced revelation." No one in evangelicalism believed in a perfect translation until Ruckman started teaching it, though many Catholics believed the Latin Vulgate was perfect. There is no way to believe the KJV is perfect without believing there are errors in the original texts that God directly gave.


This is a copout. It's just an excuse by KJVO people who don't want to do the work needed to access the Greek and Hebrew. The Christian world is not "dependent on Hebrew and Greek scholars." There are 1000s of Baptist pastors who learned Greek and Hebrew in seminary, or just Greek in Bible college, and regularly use it in their ministry.

I teach Greek and my son teaches both Greek and Hebrew. (Now tell me I am bragging and not giving glory to God because I have told you what I do professionally. ) Languages are not that hard to learn, but do take a lot of memorization. In my many years of teaching in the US, I have only had two students fail my Greek 101 class, and none has ever failed Greek 102. Of the two who failed, one took it over and got straight A's. The other is about to take it over, and I believe he will do better. And both the men and women in our college are required to take Greek. The women typically do quite well, thank you.




I am not "enraged" at most modern Bible translators because they are not "practitioners of deceit." I know several modern translators. The OT editor of the NKJV and HCSB was my seminary Hebrew teacher, and he is a good man, and still a friend. It is slander to say that such men are "practitioners of deceit." That is a vicious thing to say. You can disagree with their Bible translation work, but don't insult them.

Where I do disagree with the modern versions is that there are still over 3,000 languages in the world with not a verse of the Bible translated. That is where our effort and funds should go, not in another modern translation. But that does not mean that such translators are "practitioners of deceit." Get a grip, man.
It is simply not true that Ruckman's school has produced 1000s of missionaries. I doubt if it has even produced 100s of missionaries--dozens at the very most. I was a missionary to Japan for 33 years, but I only knew one Ruckman grad in Japan, and never met another Ruckman grad who was a missionary. (Now tell me I am not glorifying God because I said what I did for the Lord without explicitly mentioning Him. ) And in all of the dozens of missionary conferences in the US I've been in, and the hundreds of churches I have been to in five different countries, I have never one single time met a grad of his school, Pensacola Bible Institute, either pastor or missionary.

Ruckman's school was only a small one, even calling itself an "institute" rather than a college. So it wasn't even a Bible college. Check out the website for Ruckman's books: Bible Baptist Bookstore, a Ministry of Bible Baptist Church. There is not a single mention of Ruckman's school, nor of the church he pastored, for that matter.


I'm glad you wrote this. It is the perfect example of misunderstanding the KJV because of a translation issue connected with the Christian culture of the translators.

When I talked about "divisions," I was writing about the Greek word hairetikos (αἱρετικός), which the KJV transliterates as "heretick" in Titus 3:10. Since the KJV translators were Church of England, they simply held to the Catholic meaning of heretic, which was basically, "Someone who doesn't agree with the Catholic Church." So to the KJV translators, it meant "Someone who doesn't agree with our church." However, what the Greek word actually means is "someone who causes divisions." God hates divisions in the local church, the body of Christ. So anyone who seeks to cause division in a local church is a heretic and should be disciplined out of the church. And those who believe in a perfect translation do cause such divisions.

But in your answer, I certainly hope you did not mean that someone who causes divisions in the local church of Jesus Christ is an okay guy. You didn't say that in so many words, so I'll just hope you didn't mean that.

I'll be waiting.

'Peter Ruckman started the whole nonsense about the KJV being a perfect translation, and "advanced revelation." No one in evangelicalism believed in a perfect translation until Ruckman started teaching it'

It did not just start with Ruckman, for many before him held to the KJVO position such as Edward F. Hills (1912-1981) a prominent scholar of whose credentials far outweigh most scholars today. He claimed perfection for both the Textus Receptus and the King James Version and all faithful translations of the T.R. (Hills, Bible Believing Study, p. 87). In speaking on the original inspired texts, he says, “For if God has not preserved these Scriptures down through the ages by His special providence, why would He have infallibly inspired them in the first place?”

 

[Logos1560]

Edward F. Hills (1912-1981) a prominent scholar of whose credentials far outweigh most scholars today. He claimed perfection for both the Textus Receptus and the King James Version and all faithful translations of the T.R. (Hills, Bible Believing Study, p. 87).

While Edward F. Hills may be one of the first to use some KJV-only arguments, he did not actually claim perfection for the Textus Receptus. He admitted a few errors in the TR such as at Rev. 16:5 and Rev. 17:8.

One reading followed in the KJV at Revelation 17:8 (and yet is, instead of, and shall come) is said by Edward F. Hills to be an “uncorrected printer’s error in Erasmus” (p. 83). Edward F. Hills wrote: “Here the reading kaiper estin (and yet is) seems to be a misprint for kai paresti (and is at hand), which is the reading of Code 1r, the manuscript Erasmus used in Revelation” (KJV Defended, p. 202).

In the first edition of his book in 1956, Edward F. Hills asserted: “The purpose of the providential preservation of the New Testament is to preserve the infallibility of the inspired original text” (KJV Defended, p. 30). Under the heading “providential preservation concentrated itself on the Greek New Testament text” in this same 1956 edition, Edward F. Hills observed: “A distinction must be made between the providence of God in the preservation of the Greek New Testament text and the operation of God’s providence in the translation of that text into other languages” (p. 31).

 

[Logos1560]

'. He claimed perfection for both the Textus Receptus and the King James Version and all faithful translations of the T.R. (Hills, Bible Believing Study, p. 87).

Concerning the KJV, Edward F. Hills wrote: "Admittedly this venerable version is not absolutely perfect, but it is trustworthy" (KJV Defended, p. 230).

 

[Michael Hollner]

Concerning the KJV, Edward F. Hills wrote: "Admittedly this venerable version is not absolutely perfect, but it is trustworthy" (KJV Defended, p. 230).

Seems to contradict his other statement in Bible Believing Study. Do you know the dates and years each quote was written by him?

 

[John of Japan]

'Peter Ruckman started the whole nonsense about the KJV being a perfect translation, and "advanced revelation." No one in evangelicalism believed in a perfect translation until Ruckman started teaching it'

It did not just start with Ruckman, for many before him held to the KJVO position such as Edward F. Hills (1912-1981) a prominent scholar of whose credentials far outweigh most scholars today. He claimed perfection for both the Textus Receptus and the King James Version and all faithful translations of the T.R. (Hills, Bible Believing Study, p. 87). In speaking on the original inspired texts, he says, “For if God has not preserved these Scriptures down through the ages by His special providence, why would He have infallibly inspired them in the first place?”

I'm afraid you are misunderstanding Hills. I have that book, and on that page he says, "For all these modern versions are founded on a naturalistic New Testament textual criticism which ignores or denies the special, providential preservation of the holy Scriptures" (Hills, p. 87). So in the context of the statement you quoted, he was talking about textual criticism, and thus about the preservation of the Hebrew OT (Masoretic) and Greek NT (TR), not the perfect translation theory.

Now you say, "many before him [Ruckman] held to the KJVO position." I would like you to give me quotes on that. I have read extensively on bibliology ("No brag, just fact"), and have never run across a "perfect KJV" theory before Ruckman.

David Otis Fuller did not hold to that (Which Bible? in 1970), John R. Rice did not hold to that though he believed in preservation (Our God-Breathed Book, the Bible, 1969), even J. J. Ray did not hold to a perfect translation position (God Wrote Only One Bible, 1955, 1970). Francis Turretin (Reformation scholar) spoke against the Catholic doctrine that the Vulgate was inspired and inerrant (The Doctrine of Scripture, 1688). Fundamentalist scholars such as Warfield did not believe in a perfect translation. French evangelical theologian Louis Gaussen (Divine Inspiration of the Bible, 1841) and Swiss theologian Rene Pache (The Inspiration and Authority of Scripture, 1969) did not hold to any perfect translation theory. Even "Dean" John Burgon didn't believe in a perfect KJV.

I could go on and on. (I guess I already have. ) So please give me quotes from anyone, even just one evangelical before Ruckman who believed the KJV was a perfect translation.

 

[John of Japan]

I know, and there are a few men who try to mimic his style. I met a man like that once and he said some things about some of the Sword men that offended me greatly because they had been a blessing to me in my life. I have attended many Sword of the Lord conferences, the last in N C when Bro Bobby was still living. It was my first time eating a tomato sandwich.

Fortunately, there are some wonderful KJV brothers and I am associated with many of them, my pastor being one of them.

I preached in TX a couple of weeks ago for a beloved KJVO pastor. Had an awesome time. He took Patty and me to the Institute of Creation Research museum and bought me a hat! Made some great visits, including to an aged opera singer, who sang a hymn for us and gave us 5 of her CD's.

The Ruckman school grad I knew in Japan (the only one out of 100 or so IFB missionaries) was a gentle, quiet type, and didn't imitate Ruckman on that--thank the Lord. He did call me one time to talk about our translation effort. I think he was trying to figure out how close it would be to the KJV.

 

[robycop3]

Is there now a consensus among scholars and translators concerning God's perfect word? I thought I read somewhere that there were disagreements over manuscripts.

There have been disagreements about mss. since long before our time, But we must remember, none of us were present when they were written, & we don't know who wrote most of them, & when. Therefore we have no grounds upon which to accept or decline.

 

[Michael Hollner]

I'm afraid you are misunderstanding Hills. I have that book, and on that page he says, "For all these modern versions are founded on a naturalistic New Testament textual criticism which ignores or denies the special, providential preservation of the holy Scriptures" (Hills, p. 87). So in the context of the statement you quoted, he was talking about textual criticism, and thus about the preservation of the Hebrew OT (Masoretic) and Greek NT (TR), not the perfect translation theory.

Now you say, "many before him [Ruckman] held to the KJVO position." I would like you to give me quotes on that. I have read extensively on bibliology ("No brag, just fact"), and have never run across a "perfect KJV" theory before Ruckman.

David Otis Fuller did not hold to that (Which Bible? in 1970), John R. Rice did not hold to that though he believed in preservation (Our God-Breathed Book, the Bible, 1969), even J. J. Ray did not hold to a perfect translation position (God Wrote Only One Bible, 1955, 1970). Francis Turretin (Reformation scholar) spoke against the Catholic doctrine that the Vulgate was inspired and inerrant (The Doctrine of Scripture, 1688). Fundamentalist scholars such as Warfield did not believe in a perfect translation. French evangelical theologian Louis Gaussen (Divine Inspiration of the Bible, 1841) and Swiss theologian Rene Pache (The Inspiration and Authority of Scripture, 1969) did not hold to any perfect translation theory. Even "Dean" John Burgon didn't believe in a perfect KJV.

I could go on and on. (I guess I already have. ) So please give me quotes from anyone, even just one evangelical before Ruckman who believed the KJV was a perfect translation.

'So please give me quotes from anyone, even just one evangelical before Ruckman who believed the KJV was a perfect translation.'

“As for me, I will take the King James translation as the very Word of God for the English people. I believe it is without error. It is 100 percent correct. People who do not know a word of Greek can become real Bible scholars. Many times their understanding is far greater than the Greek scholars.” (B.F. Dearmore (1897-1968), The Message, "Greek Versus English," May 28, 1959).

 

[John of Japan]

'So please give me quotes from anyone, even just one evangelical before Ruckman who believed the KJV was a perfect translation.'

“As for me, I will take the King James translation as the very Word of God for the English people. I believe it is without error. It is 100 percent correct. People who do not know a word of Greek can become real Bible scholars. Many times their understanding is far greater than the Greek scholars.” (B.F. Dearmore (1897-1968), The Message, "Greek Versus English," May 28, 1959).

Very good. That's one. But I asked for "quotes" plural. If you got this from David Cloud (Old Time Fundamentalists Who Defended the King James Bible), the others on the page did not teach a perfect KJV doctrine.

At any rate, Ruckman is the one who started the modern KJVO movement in 1970 with his book The Christian's Handbook of Manuscript Evidence. There was no movement per se before Ruckman. I do note that Which Bible? ed. by David Otis Fuller also came out in 1970, so it contributed.