Peter Ruckman

[Brother Rick]

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.

[JerryNumbers]

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.

[arroworchard]

Rightly said!! God's Word still is the authority

[Brother Rick]

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.

[Pastorj]

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.

[Brother Rick]

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. Edited June 2, 2010 by Rick Schworer

[Anon]

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.

[Brother Rick]

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?

[Anon]

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?

[JerryNumbers]

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.

[Brother Rick]

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.

[JerryNumbers]

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.

[Brother Rick]

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.

[JerryNumbers]

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.

[Brother Rick]

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. Edited June 14, 2010 by Rick Schworer