What do you think of Peter Ruckman?

This is ONE time that I do agree with you, I firmly believe that one day no one would use the KJV, no church ,or individual.
After what we call THE RAPTURE, no true Christians, no Holy Spirit, no KJV.
Terry maybe you will be here to see it!!!

[ January 29, 2003, 03:40 PM: Message edited by: swordsman ]

 

DO you really think you need to question someone's salvation? I don't. I think it is out of place and certainly out of your purview to do such.

 

What a great testimony Terry! A testimony of what happens to a country when they turn their back on God's word the King James Bible! Sure is a great place aint it? The new versions certainly are not out selling KING JAMES.Possibly in your circles but not anywhere else.

 

Amen Swordsman!!

 

Steve, do you live in a hole somewhere and never see the light of day? Now I now that you are living in a fantasy land! Of course, you will probably say every bookstore has lied about the numbers of different versions sold. You do know that the NIV outsells the KJV consistently, don't you?

Neal

[ January 30, 2003, 03:43 AM: Message edited by: neal4christ ]

 

Neal, if I may point out: I'd have to say that Hustler, Cosmopolitan, and The Enquirer consistently outsell Time and Newsweek.

My intention is not to compare the NIV with Hustler, but to show that simply because one item sells better than another doesn't mean that that makes it a superior item.

Christians are not supposed to be after popularity contests; in fact, we're promised that we won't be winning any.

So Terry, that sort of condescending behavior is part of what causes the devisiveness that God says He hates in Proverbs 6.

Swordsman, remember the fruits of the spirit in Galatians 5.

 

Don,

Why do you jump all over Neal? He's only repudiating false information provided by KJVAV1611.

I don't know if you're KJVO or not, so this may or may not apply to you. What really bugs me on this thread is the moderate KJVOs who refuse to rebuke the radical KJVOs when they proliferate falsehood, but jump all over the non-KJVOs when they see something they don't like.

It reminds me of those who claim to be moderate/non-violent Muslim clerics who refuse to speak out against Islamic fundamentalist terrorists.

 

Don said:

My intention is not to compare the NIV with Hustler

And yet you did anyway. Was it an accident?

 

Radical KJVOs are no more my responsibility than they are yours. On the other hand, if I can refute something a non-KJVO says, I will because I am KJVO.

Jason (one YOU would define a moderate KJVO)

 

For sake of discussion, why would you not express disagreement with a KJVO you disagree with to the same degree as a non-KJVO you disagree with? Because you have more in common with the KJVOs, or perhaps because you don't want to hurt your own cause?

I would think you would want to define clear differences to prevent guilt by association.

That is where I believe my comparison to "moderate Muslims" is valid. Moderate Muslims give assent to the radicals by their silence. I question whether "moderate KJVOs" are any different in their regard for truth.

 

I was refuting a blantant untruth.

Neal

 

I can't speak for all, but it is because I try to avoid dog fights. All too often, when one tries to break up a dog fight, both dogs end up on him, especially around here.

My purpose here is to learn. I will not get involved in personal attacks whether blatant or veiled (I think the MV crowd, for lack of better terminology, is much more skilled at the covert, controlled attack). If someone attacks someone else, this is not a part of the discussion I want to be involved in. If I say something that is factually untrue and am corrected, I will take that correction. I cannot speak for others regarding this.

 

By the way, I'll post what I think about Ruckman since that is what this thread is about.

Ruckman is a devisive and abrasive old man who has perfected the use of eisogesis to vent his feelings about anyone and anything, who us unqualified to pastor, who is disqualified from true apologetics, who uses the vile and filthy words in word and script that are the reason we no longer have a television.

I will not subject my children to such an unscriptural, profane, stubborn old man for fear they would be touched by his devisive, abrasive tactics and be rendered unfit to argue for the Christian faith with any authority.

Jason

 

Peter Ruckman has done more work for the Lord than any of you could ever possibly imagine yourselves doing. You just don't like him because he makes you feel bad. He hurts your little thin-skinned feelings because he preaches with a SWORD and most of you are used to hearing "loving and caring and sharing and coping" spewed forth from a garden tool and not a SWORD! If you Billy Graham-ites would pull your noses away from that TV for a little while and put it into a SWORD, you might learn to think for yourselves and stop being offended when someone tells you the truth! The world is going to Hell and all you people are doing is crying because Peter Ruckman makes you feel bad. Get over it and go tell someone how to escape the flames of Hell!

 

It's not that Ruckman makes me feel bad. To be honest, I don't think about him much. He may have redeeming qualities in person, I wouldn't know. What he does do is cuss in his books. The very language he uses is the reason we *don't* have a TV!

I think Billy Graham is a sell-out. He's a papal suck-up. He refers converts to Catholic churches. Ol' Billy's not the issue here.

I'm on the same side of the KJV issue as you are. I would not consider myself on Ruckmans side of anything, however, as he has done his best to alienate anyone who disagrees with him.

Jason

[ January 30, 2003, 02:10 PM: Message edited by: Refreshed ]

 

Some of us don't like him because he is doctrinally unsound and morally unfit. He is not hurting my feelings; he embarrasses me because he claims to be a Bible preacher while being an immoral, profane man.

 

The Harvest said:

you might learn to think for yourselves

Coming as it does in the middle of a huge pile of fundamentalist clichés, the above is really funny.

 

i'm assuming that you mean when he says ass. i personally would not call someone that, but i'm sure you are intelligent enough (i say that with no sarcasm) to know that when he is saying that he is saying that they are as dumb as a donkey.

i don't understand why that would cause you to not have a tv. please explain.