Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Matt Souza

Peter Ruckman

Recommended Posts

I have NEVER spoke of Dr. Ruckman the way he speaks of others (and yes I've heard him preach once...)...he is rude, and crude, and mean. And I don't consider myself that...at least not most of the time. haha. Certainly my husband is NEVER EVER that way in the pulpit. Its not of God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that Ruckman is getting stranger and stranger with some things that he is "finding" in the Bible. I think maybe he did do some good things for fundamentalism in the beginning of his ministry, but what he has been preaching in the last few years or so is harming fundamentalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that Ruckman is getting stranger and stranger with some things that he is "finding" in the Bible. I think maybe he did do some good things for fundamentalism in the beginning of his ministry, but what he has been preaching in the last few years or so is harming fundamentalism.


Even from the limited amount I know of Ruckman I'd have to agree with this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even from the limited amount I know of Ruckman I'd have to agree with this!

Me, too, except I would go back further than a few years. I was in college in the early '80's when I first began experiencing some of his teachings...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's not, David Otis Fuller is.

My point is, the new Bible versions began to infiltrate IFB churches back in the mid 60s, and it was Dr. Ruckman that was leading the fight against it.

If you don't believe me, ask Gail Riplinger, author of New Age Bible Versions,or Dr. Bill Grady, author of Final Authority, or Dr. Sam Gipp, author of An Understandable History of the Bible.



i have read two of the three books you mentioned, and nowhere do they so much a mention PR as far as I can remember. Yes, he stood, but he didn't necessary "lead the way" for all KJB believers, Many colleges were teaching the truth all along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that Ruckman is getting stranger and stranger with some things that he is "finding" in the Bible. I think maybe he did do some good things for fundamentalism in the beginning of his ministry, but what he has been preaching in the last few years or so is harming fundamentalism.


I don't know what he's up to now. I would agree he has his fair share of weird teachings, and they get weirder the older he gets. I'm certainly not a "Ruckmanite," because there are plenty of things I don't like about him, enough to where I wouldn't be a member of his church. I try to take a balanced view of him.

It's really sad how he's shot himself in the foot so much throughout his life, with his talent and brains he could have done a lot more for God. His doctrine, by and large, is right on. He just spends so much time slamming people I can't ever recommend his stuff. Or course, there's no way I can recommend stuff by guys who are Bible correctors either. Ruckman's PrOBlem Texts book is excellent for dealing with supposed contradictions in the KJV. Other than that one, I can't recommend any of his other stuff that I can think of off the top of my head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes - Wikipedia, Hitler analogies, and everyone's got a story.

You know, I find myself defending people all the time. Take for instance, Tim LaHaye. He's popular, so a lot of IFBers think he must be a false prophet. Or he corrects the Bible once every 400 pages, so everything he does is trash.

Dr. Ruckman is weird, and he has a HUGE prOBlem with his tongue - that's where it ends. If you have a prOBlem with him being a pastor because of his marriages, then in all charity please shut your mouth and stay out of his church, and that goes for anyone who is a pastor anywhere. If you think he shouldn't be pastor, that's fine, Saul was disqualified from being king in Israel two years into his reign but God continued to keep in that position for another 40 years, and it would have been wrong for David to kill him when he could have.

As far as the fruit of his ministry, if you go to a King James Bible believing church you should thank God for Dr. Ruckman, because he was the lead dog in the fight defending the King James against Bible correcting scholarship. Without him and the battles he was involved in during the 60s and 70s, many more churches today would be washed up NIV churches. The polemic stand he took for the KJV sent Bible correctors reeling during that time and changed the IFB movement for the better. There are a lot of "big guns" that are King James today as a result of Dr. Ruckman, not the least of which would be Gail Riplinger, Jack Hyles (although he died), Bill Grady, and of course Sam Gipp.

There are a lot of really good men in the ministry as a result of Dr. Ruckman, including my pastor, who's been pastoring the same church for the last 25 years and been married to the same woman his entire life. Our church is a New Testament soul winning church that regularly gives over 500k a year to missions. We have several missionaries of our own on the field, and having grown up in this church I'm KJVO.

Thank you Dr. Ruckman, for training my pastor.


I've gt a prOBlem with it, and I will express it, if you've got a prOBlem with it, perhaps this is not the place for you.

As a pastor called by God, not you, He called me to expose sin. And its quite clear, he does not meet the qualifications to be a pastor of a New Testament Church.

1Ti 3:1 ¶ This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sOBer, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
1Ti 3:3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
1Ti 3:4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
1Ti 3:5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
1Ti 3:6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
1Ti 3:7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
1Ti 3:8 ¶ Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
1Ti 3:9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.
1Ti 3:10 And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless.
1Ti 3:11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sOBer, faithful in all things.
1Ti 3:12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
1Ti 3:13 For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

Now if you disagree with that fine, but do not tell others what they can or cannot do on this board, you have not that authority.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now if you disagree with that fine, but do not tell others what they can or cannot do on this board, you have not that authority.



It was never my intention to tell others what they can or can not do on this board. I would not presume to do anything of the kind.

I making a point that I very much respect the office of a bishop, and if I don't agree with someone being a pastor I don't join his church. I don't, however, go out of my way to slam someone who is a pastor of another church, whether I think he is qualified or not. When Dr. Ruckman does it, I believe it is wrong. When people do it to Dr. Ruckman, I believe that is wrong as well.

As I said, I wouldn't be a member of Dr. Ruckman's church - put two and two together. I will not, however, go around slamming Dr. Ruckman, or any other KJVO pastor on the other side of the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bible tells us to name and reject Heretics, which Dr. Ruckman is. There are many examples in Scripture where Christ or one of the Apostles named names.

Peter Ruckman's position on the KJV is heretical. We cannot forget the numerous other Scriptural errors he spews out of his mouth, the fact that he is no longer qualified to be a pastor. King Saul is a poor example as he was a King, not a pastor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bible tells us to name and reject Heretics, which Dr. Ruckman is. There are many examples in Scripture where Christ or one of the Apostles named names.

Peter Ruckman's position on the KJV is heretical. We cannot forget the numerous other Scriptural errors he spews out of his mouth, the fact that he is no longer qualified to be a pastor. King Saul is a poor example as he was a King, not a pastor.



Looks like you're pretty quick on the "h" word.

What is so heritical about his stand on the KJB? That he teaches the KJB is the pure word of God for the English speaking people, preserved according to Ps. 12:6-7?

There are six marks of a heretic, he doesn't meet any of them:

1. Wrong on the final authority issue.
2. Wrong on escatology.
3. Wrong on signs and wonders.
4. Wrong on eternal security.
5. Wrong on baptism.
6. Wrong on the Godhead.

If you want to say he isn't qualified to be a pastor, fine, be my guest. But his doctrine is sound, though he may have a few odd ideas, it is sound.

Show me where it's not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like you're pretty quick on the "h" word.

What is so heritical about his stand on the KJB? That he teaches the KJB is the pure word of God for the English speaking people, preserved according to Ps. 12:6-7?

There are 5 marks of a heretic, he doesn't meet any of them:

1. Wrong on the final authority issue.
2. Wrong on escatology.
3. Wrong on signs and wonders.
4. Wrong on eternal security.
5. Wrong on baptism.

If you want to say he isn't qualified to be a pastor, fine, be my guest. But his doctrine is sound, though he may have a few odd ideas, it is sound.

Show me where it's not.


He's right on escatology and signs and wonders??? Really?

And PastorJ didn't say he was disqualified. God did. In the KJV 1611 as a matter of fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's right on escatology and signs and wonders??? Really?


He's premillennial and he teaches that the Apostolic signs and wonders are not for the church age saint.

Do you disagree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's premillennial and he teaches that the Apostolic signs and wonders are not for the church age saint.

Do you disagree?


Well of course I'm gonna believe some of the things he believes...that doesn't make him someone I should regularly listen to or follow.

I mean, just because Sarah Palin is anti abortion doesn't mean she's the kind of person I'd make my pastor...I mean...really, just because the Bible says women shouldn't be pastors, its okay because she's Sarah Palin and she says she's a Christian and she's anti abortion and she believes many things just like I believe...but even though she's not qualified to preach doesn't make her a bad person, right? And I can still sit under her godly teaching, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's premillennial and he teaches that the Apostolic signs and wonders are not for the church age saint.

Do you disagree?


He is disqualified from holding the position of pastor in a New Testament Church, he is not the husband of one wife, he has more than one wife, so he refuses to OBey God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well of course I'm gonna believe some of the things he believes...that doesn't make him someone I should regularly listen to or follow.



I'm not talking about whether or not he's qualified to be a pastor. That's another discussion, he's been labeled a heretic and you backed up the idea that he was a heretic.

You said he was wrong on escatology and signs and wonders, but turns out you agree with him. Chances are you agree with him on all six of those points. You prOBably have more in common with Dr. Ruckman than you know when it comes to doctrine.

My point is this and this only, he's not a heretic. If you knocked on his door and tried to win him to the Lord, and you didn't know who he is - you'd be pleasantly surprised and prOBably enjoy a good 15 minutes of fellowship with him before going to the next door.

I don't have the pleasure of living in the Bible belt anymore. I live in Mormon country, known as Idaho, and we're easily the only conservative King James church within a three hour drive. I know what a real heretic is. When people start using the label heretic on fellow KJVO fundamental Baptists, I begin wondering how much time they've actually spent dealing with real heretics and how much time they've spent in an ivory tower instead of swinging the sword.

Jack Hyles said, "Every man is my teacher." I'm willing to humbly listen to ANY man that believes those six points (and some who don't), and compare what he teaches to Scripture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why listen to a man who refuses to OBey a simple truth, and continues to pastor a New Testament Church even though he is completely disqualified according the Word of God. If he will not OBey that simple truth, will he OBey any truths?

He has been divorced two times and married three times and still in the pulpit.

WHAT ABOUT PETER RUCKMAN?


WHAT IS RUCKMANISM
?


Beware of Peter Ruckman


A person can find lots of information about this man on the net, along with many good reasons not to support nor listen to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is disqualified from holding the position of pastor in a New Testament Church, he is not the husband of one wife, he has more than one wife, so he refuses to OBey God.


Did you say "has"... because that's not the word Jesus used to describe past marriages.

John 4:18 "For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly."

It's not as cut and dry as you'd like to make it.

This whole thing could go on and on, I'm willing to drop it if you guys are. I'd rather talk about my kids, or the blessed hope, or actual Bible doctrines than argue about an old man in Florida.

I mean really, c'mon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean come on, get real, look in the Bible for the qualifications for a New Testament pastor.

1Ti 3:1 ¶ This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sOBer, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
1Ti 3:3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
1Ti 3:4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
1Ti 3:5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
1Ti 3:6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
1Ti 3:7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

Tit 1:6 ¶ If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.
Tit 1:7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;
Tit 1:8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sOBer, just, holy, temperate;
Tit 1:9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.

The verses you posted are great verse, yet they have nothing whatsoever to do with the qualification for pastor, yet the verses above has everything to do with them. You need to use verses in context, that is divide the truth properly.


2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Clearly, Peter Ruckman does not meet the qualifications given in the Bible for being a pastor of a New testament Church.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean come on, get real, look in the Bible for the qualifications for a New Testament pastor.


Your sarcasm in light of my attempt to peaceably end this is duly noted.

I never said he's qualified to be a pastor, in fact, I said I wouldn't be a member of his church.

I think there are a lot of pastors that aren't qualified to be pastors - APT TO TEACH, a lot of pastors couldn't teach thier way out of a paper bag. They spend every week lecturing on do’s and don't and never touch Bible doctrine.

Hospitality? There are a lot of pastors that are flat out rude to missionaries and evangelists.

If you want to say he's disqualified, be my guest, I tend to agree - but not because of the "one wife" idea that people get hung up on.


What I said was, he's not a heretic.

Pastor, sir, you prOBably agree with him on a lot more than you disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many people try and justify more than one marriage and say it's okay to pastor if one has been married and divorced...because, after all, he's only married to one woman presently. They say that the verse saying "husband of one wife" is referring to polygamy. But that actually wasn't a prOBlem in the day it was written, so that's truly a non-argument.

And, to boot, it appears that even the secular world understands what marriage-divorce-remarriage is. They call it serial polygamy. More than one wife, just not all at the same time.

As to KJVO and heresy...if someone who claims to be a Christian, regardless of what version they use, is consistently ignoring the principles and commands in God's Word, they should be marked for warning. I know a KJVO pastor (he's passed away now) who tried to kill someone. He said he was doing the work of God: trying to strangle a young man who simply told him God was moving that young man. We would all say, "Horrors! That man is disqualified!" But to point out that PR's serial polygamy is grounds for disqualification is wrong. Hmmmm. (BTW - lest you doubt the story of the strangling, I was there. It took 4 people to pull him off the young man.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dr. Ruckman is also a brawler and has ruined his testimony with his nasty attitude towards other people. Jesus was never rude and sarcastic in His teachings. This attitude shows a lack of Christian love, which God says should be in every Christian.

I am not familiar with every single doctrine Ruckman preaches...I am familiar with his divorces, and his snide attitude that is also proud, and his strange alien and prophetical teachings. I also do not agree that it is wrong to study the Greek texts.

Like I said earlier, I agree with Sarah Palin on alot of things too...but it doesn't mean I make her a spiritual hero or even someone I would ever want to take advice from.

The cultlike way Ruckman has gained followers in the past is also suspect, as it is with any MAN who gains such a following.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dr. Ruckman is also a brawler and has ruined his testimony with his nasty attitude towards other people.


Correct.

Jesus was never rude and sarcastic in His teachings.


Wrong.

This attitude shows a lack of Christian love, which God says should be in every Christian.


I agree, absolutly.

I am not familiar with every single doctrine Ruckman preaches...


If you were willing to hear him out, you'd prOBably agree with about 75% of what he teaches, and you'd prOBably find his teaching to be very clear, plain, and easy to undestand.

I am familiar with his divorces, and his snide attitude that is also proud,


You know all about his personal life, but little to nothing of what he actually teaches? And for his personal life, which you gather from what sources.... you are willing to completly dismiss everything he's ever done in his life? I'm glad God has a lot more grace than you do.

and his strange alien and prophetical teachings. I also do not agree that it is wrong to study the Greek texts.


His kooky ideas about aliens are never presented as anything more than theories, possibilities, and ideas. What's wrong with that?

He doesn't have strange prophetical teachings. He may differ from you on some particulars concenering the Millennium or the Everlasting Kingdom, but that by no means makes him a heretic.

He's never taught that it's wrong to study the Greek texts. He teaches, and I whole heartedly support him on this, that to hold the Greek in authority over the KJB is wrong. When you consider how many Greek texts there are, and that they do not agree with each other, and there is no one Greek text that lines up with the KJB entirely - you must choose from the Greek or the KJB. If you choose the Greek, you're in big trouble because now it comes down to which Greek.

Like I said earlier, I agree with Sarah Palin on alot of things too...but it doesn't mean I make her a spiritual hero or even someone I would ever want to take advice from.

The cultlike way Ruckman has gained followers in the past is also suspect, as it is with any MAN who gains such a following.


A lot of Bible "gurus" have their rabid followers, and there's no doubt that Ruckman has his fair share of them. He by no means encourages them to be this way. In fact, there are churches in this country with the name of "Hyles" in the actual name of the church, and then there's the infamous 100% Hyles buttons that people used to wear. Dr. Ruckman would never tolerate such a thing. At the same time, there are those that have taken Dr. Ruckman's sarcastic nature and tenacity towards Bible correctors much farther than he ever did, damaging the cause of Christ. I don't defend Dr. Ruckman's attitude, it's a big flaw that has hurt a lot of people. But at the same time I don't discredit everything he ever did because I don't like that.

Yes, every Bible "guru" gets his strange following and rabid fans, but there plenty more people like myself who have been able to glean and learn from Dr. Ruckman and other men and use the knowledge for the furtherance of the Gospel and understanding of Scripture.

Luke 6:43, "For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit."

If Dr. Ruckman is such a heretic, and there's nothing good about him or his ministry, then all the fruit coming out of his ministry is rotten apples.

Is Sam Gipp a rotten apple? The man's ministry is being a friend to churches.

Is my pastor, Rick DeMichele, a rotten apple? He's been married to the same woman his whole life, pastors a church of over 1,000 (Which was 200 when he took over 25 years ago), sticks to his guns on the CCM issue, and we regurally give over 500k a year to missions.

My dad graduated from Rick DeMichele school, a by-product of Ruckman's. My dad was married to the same woman his whole life, taught in the Word for the World Baptist Bible institute for 3 years, was an assistant pastor for 1 year, and a missionary for 2 years. We came back from the mission field, and then my father went north to help another man start a church. Then he came down with cancer, brough mom back down to DeMichele's church, joined DeMichele's church on Sunday and died on Wednesday. Was he a rotten apple, becuase he was a by-product of Ruckman?

I listened a lot to Dr. Ruckman as a youn man on tapes while I was in Papua New Guinea. It changed my life and instilled in me a love for the word of God. Having that love instilled in me, I learned how to preach, teach, and write for the Lord. I preached in three different high schools in PNG on a regular basis, preached on the street to crouds of over 100 people, and translated the KJV Daniel from English to Pigin. When I got back to the states, I graduated from the same Bible school my father did. I work two jOBs to provide for my family in this recession, am raising an above average Christian family for the Lord. I can trace a lot of that back to a young 18 year old boy who developed a love for the word of God listening to Ruckman tapes. Am I a rotten apple? A corrupt tree can not bring forth good fruit, after all.

My longwinded point is this, I don't believe anyone should be a follower or a disciple of any one man. There are a lot of pastors out there who do NOT meet the qualification to be a pastor. There are a lot of them, and the married qualification is only ONE of them. Unhospitable, brawlers, inability to teach doctrine, not having family under control... there's a long list. But as David did not see it as his responsibility to go out and touch God's annointed, I too do not see it my responsibility to go out of my way to slam other pastors that I don't think are qualified. The gifts and callings of God are without repentence, and while I don't believe that necessarily means a pastor can stay a pastor his whole life, I for one am not going to be the one to go after him.

A bad tree can't produce good fruit, and yet Dr. Ruckman's ministry has produced a lot of good fruit, and yes, some rotten fruit too. Why is so hard to take a balanced view of things like this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, but Bro. Rick, when you say bad tree and liken PR's ministry to that, insinuating that everything is okay...there is no credence given to God! One time in Bible college, some students (myself included) were discussing several things with one of our professors (easily the godliest of all of them, imo then and still today). He made a comment that aptly fits PR's ministry (and others who are disqualified - he is by no means the only one): "God doesn't always bless because of; many times he blesses in spite of."

I am familiar with much of PR's teachings. I attended college near PBI, and knew some students from the college. Now, I know that every college has wacko students, so at the time, that's what I put it down to. But fast forward a few years, to a different state and I meet a pastor who believed the SAME things...also learned from PR! My husband was affected by those teachings as well.

I would not say that I agree with PR on any of his teachings. What I would say is that, where he is Biblical, I can agree with him because it's Bible. I can agree with anyone who is right on the Bible! And I understand your reluctance to "stab" at preachers. I don't think that's what this thread does, though. Paul said to mark those who cause divisions...and PR does. NOT because he is so scriptural, but because he is a brawler (and because of some of his teachings).

I personally am glad that your pastor has allowed God to lead him - and that your dad did, too. That is testimony to God's grace. :clapping: Just as it is in any of our lives.

(BTW - Saul was a king, anointed by God to be king. Pastors are not kings...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now I know a family who has been all but torn apart because of the beliefs and practices they had from Dr. Ruckman in the past. One is now agnostic and another is close to it....great people...but so jaded now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 41 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...