Can someone be saved by reading the NIV?

[John81]

There are at least a couple Bibles out there which are KJV but with some updated wording. They use the actual KJV text except they update some words; such as "ye" and "thee".

I believe one is called the "Comfortable KJV" and was put together by Ray Comfort.

I believe the other is called "Easy read KJV".

Some say these are easier for some people to understand.

I've read just a little of them and they seem okay. Even so, personally, I prefer the KJV with it's "archaic" language as it resonates with me and I find it much easier to memorize.

[Jerry]

Ray Comfort's Bible changes the meaning in various places. I am not familiar with the other one - but with a name like "Easy Read", it sounds like they are dumbing down the Bible, which I would have a problem with.

[John81]

I haven't read enough of either to know how true, or untrue, they are to the KJV text.

From what I have read, both are "supposed" to be the KJV with the ONLY changes being updates to the language.

If you, or anyone, knows of errors/changes in these I would be interested in knowing what they are for future reference.

The other Bible is called, "King James Version Easy Reading". Their website is http://www.swordbible.net

[BaptistBibleBeliever]

[quote="MC1171611"]
Anyhow, Doc (Ruckman) turns out dozens of pastors, teachers, and misionaries from PBI (Pensacola Bible Institute) every year
[/quote]

This is just TOO much to ignore!

I understand that the DOC has also [b]PUT OUT[/b] a few wives also?

Two, I believe? and he is now with his third wife?

Oh, he says that two of them abandoned him. It would appear that he has a problem marrying godly women - or he is openly defiant to the Bible's teaching on divorce and remarriage.

Wasn't one of them "mentally" ill? Is it true that she is in an institution?

[Bakershalfdozen]

[quote="MC1171611"]
[quote="Bakershalfdozen"]Ruckman believes that God "breathed again" in 1611.
[/quote]

Your problem with that is...

[quote="Bakershalfdozen"]
Ruckman believes that the KJV corrects the TR.
[/quote]

And so it must, if It is truly God's Word. Study it out a little, and you will find that the TR isn't very consistent in the manuscripts among the dozens of languages they were written in.

[quote="Bakershalfdozen"]
Ruckman believes that there was advanced revelation given to the KJV.
[/quote]

Again, your problem or refutation is...

[quote="Bakershalfdozen"]
Ruckmanites believe that everyone should learn English so they can read the only "true Word of God".
[/quote]

Oh, is that so? I am what some would call a "Ruckmanite," and I surely don't believe that! Furthermore, I personally know [i]three[/i] PBI graduates that are missionaries in Spanish-speaking countries, and THEY don't believe what you just attributed to all "Ruckmanites." MY SENIOR PASTOR graduated from PBI, he speaks fluent Vietnamese, and he would laugh in your face for that ridiculous statement, if he even was to waste his time.

Don't copy-and-paste from other people's sites without checking out the veracity of what you are quoting. And don't EVER, [b]EVER[/b] attribute something to "Ruckmanites" when you probably know very few, if any, and have no real idea what Doc (Ruckman) teaches!

[quote="Bakershalfdozen"]
Etc.

Etc.

Etc.
[/quote]

And just what is this supposed to mean? What are you implying from this? Please don't make such posts that have no real FACTS to back them up, and simply quote another man's OPINION. Thank you.[/quote]


That article I posted is just one of many resources that refutes the errors of Peter Ruckman. Some on here have studied about Ruckman and his teachings. He is a false and Biblically disqualified teacher.


1. God did not "breathe again" in 1611. Special revelation ceased with the completion of the N.T. (I Cor. 13:10).


2. The KJV does not [b]correct[/b] the TR; it agrees with it. The translation cannot correct the original. Please show us some of the alleged problems with the TR. Are you saying God couldn't get it right the first time and that He had to wait until 1611 to make a perfect Bible? If the TR has problems with it, did the Japanese, Chinese, Russian, German, Spanish translations get it right or only the English?


3. Just because you are a Ruckmanite, you know what all Ruckmanites believe? Does that make your opinion more valid than mine? I do in fact know some Ruckmanites and they do in fact believe that everyone should learn English in order to read the KJV. I didn't say every Ruckmanite believes this but many do.


4. Peter Ruckman has repeatedly ignored one or more of God's special commands specifically to pastors. He has been married multiple times. He is disqualified from being a pastor. He has ignored the very Word of God he claims to uphold. I am not interested in anything he has to say because I believe him to be untrustworthy. He is off on some of his teachings. He is also very foul-mouthed and foul-mannered to boot! Do we really have to post all the verses about the speech and mannerisms that should depict a servant of the Lord??

No thanks, I'll stick to preachers, pastors and teachers who do uphold the Bible and seek to live by it in every aspect of their life and don't promote some wacky 'doctrine'.

[Guest Guest]

So, our "updated" Bible would read: "People (gender inclusive, you know) won't survive by food only, but need every meaning that God...(?) says? writes? thinks? (at this point, the reader must decide what meaning best finishes the sentence)." Kinda' funny, no?

Doc's first wife left him before or shortly after he got saved, his second wife abandoned him because he would not place her over the Ministry, and his third wife is still faithful to God and him.

Besides, the majority of what you all are saying is that you accept the King James Bible because it is the [i]best available translation[/i] from the TR; were a better one available, from what you seem to be saying, you would abandon the KJB as inferior. Correct me if I am wrong, but this seems to be the gist of what you are saying.

[pneu-engine]

[quote]
Besides, the majority of what you all are saying is that you accept the King James Bible because it is the best available translation from the TR; were a better one available, from what you seem to be saying, you would abandon the KJB as inferior. Correct me if I am wrong, but this seems to be the gist of what you are saying.
[/quote]

MC:

You are absolutely soaking wet. We hold to the KJV because it is THE translation for all English speaking peoples. It's a moot point to say that if there was a better one, we'd pick it, b/c there isn't and cannot be.

You said to correct you if you were wrong.

YOWZA ALREADY!!!!!!!!

Ok then, just as you've requested::::::

[color=darkred][size=18][i][b] You are completely wrong!!!!!!!!![/b][/i][/size][/color]

[BaptistBibleBeliever]

It bugs me that a Ruckmanite would come in here and look for a problem where none exists and then use it to be divisive. The King James Bible IS the Bible for the english speaking people and is a settled issue by faith for me. I have absolutely no desire to pick up or read (or for that matter, examine) any new versions - I don't care how close they claim they are to the TR).

I will stick with my KJB - which is free to use because there exists no copyright restraints. Nor do I wish to make any publishers wealthy.

Does that about cover it?

[Kubel]

[quote="MC1171611"]
Besides, the majority of what you all are saying is that you accept the King James Bible because it is the [i]best available translation[/i] from the TR; were a better one available, from what you seem to be saying, you would abandon the KJB as inferior. Correct me if I am wrong, but this seems to be the gist of what you are saying.
[/quote]

There are different levels of KJV-Onlyism. It is a doctrine based entirely on faith, with no scriptural backing. Because of this, there are many different degrees of KJVOism.

On the lightest end, you have people like John R. Rice that believed that only the original Hebrew and Greek were inspired. He believed any translation, when done faithfully, are useful as scripture- but he preferred the KJV, believing it was the best translation available for the English speaking people.

On the opposite, most extreme end, you have people like Peter Ruckman, who believes the KJV is a new revelation and is even superior to the TR from which it was translated. All new translations must be translated from the KJV. When asked which KJV he believes is inerrant, his response was "all of them, stupid".

Most people here fall in between these two KJVO extremes. These forums take a position right in the center of the KJVO scale, and generally do not welcome those who are at either end. I'm at the light end of KJVOism, but they still for some reason put up with me :D.

[pneu-engine]

[quote]
It bugs me that a Ruckmanite would come in here and look for a problem where none exists and then use it to be divisive. The King James Bible IS the Bible for the english speaking people and is a settled issue by faith for me. I have absolutely no desire to pick up or read (or for that matter, examine) any new versions - I don't care how close they claim they are to the TR).

I will stick with my KJB - which is free to use because there exists no copyright restraints. Nor do I wish to make any publishers wealthy.
[/quote]

A hearty and fervent AMEN, BBB. :D :D :D :D

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Kubel,

I'm praying that you will come to see and be comletely convinced that the KJV is God's perfectly preserved Word, and unlike John R. Rice, cannot hold second place, or even an equal place, with any other translation for all English speaking peoples.

[dwayner79]

[quote]
his second wife abandoned him because he would not place her over the Ministry
[/quote]

I bring this up because it sounds like you are commending him for this. This is sin. Our first responsibility is to God (our personal lives), then to our Spouse, then to our family, then to work/ministry, etc.

If this is true, then he was living in sin and should have been confronted about it. IMHO, she has no biblical right to leave, but he is certainly at fault with his failed marriage.

[lettheredeemedsayso]

[quote]
The only things that you will hear about Doc are the bad things, just like the News. When Dr. Ruckman is quoted, normally it is in response to a Bible perverter, or some religious hypocrite, just like Christ did to the Pharisees. However, when preaching or dealing with sinners, he is one of the most compassionate people you would ever hear or see.
[/quote]

Amen! And we all know how the Lord dealt with these types

[Pastor Matt]

[quote="dwayner79"]
[quote]his second wife abandoned him because he would not place her over the Ministry
[/quote]

Our first responsibility is to God (our personal lives), then to our Spouse, then to our family, then to work/ministry, etc. [/quote]

:shock:

I agree!!!!

:D

[Bakershalfdozen]

[quote]
Doc's first wife left him before or shortly after he got saved, his second wife abandoned him because he would not place her over the Ministry, and his third wife is still faithful to God and him.
[/quote]


1. There are 2 sides to every story. Make that 3 if you want to include God's point of view. So I'll take whatever Ruckman says about his first and second wives with a grain of salt - make that 2 or 3 grains.


2. He is [b]disqualified[/b]! Go read I Timothy 3 for yourself and stop listening to Ruckman's explanation of it.


[color=blue]1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;[/color]


It says "[b]one wife[/b]", not "[b]one wife at a time[/b]".



[quote]
Besides, the majority of what you all are saying is that you accept the King James Bible because it is the [i]best available translation[/i] from the TR; were a better one available, from what you seem to be saying, you would abandon the KJB as inferior. Correct me if I am wrong, but this seems to be the gist of what you are saying.
[/quote]

The majority did not say that so you are wrong.

[Guest Guest]

I was saved by reading the Good News Bible. Go figure. I actually thought the drawings were kind of neat and helpful in it. Mind you I started listening to a lot of Christian radio programs back then also so that may have helped too. I have read almost every MV out there but after having gained further knowledge I now pretty much only read the KJV, sort of as the authoritative benchmark.