Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Sheep, Shepherd, Or Wolf?


heartstrings

Recommended Posts

  • Members

According to Ruckman's teaching on abortion, It's not a person "until it breathes" and abortion is justifiable after rape....

**WARNING** Graphic images in this video...I would recommend audio only, and I am not posting this as an endorsement of Kent Hovind

 

Married 3 times and still "preaching", teaches that one can be saved by works after the rapture, and foul language seems to be OK. It doesn't matter how many "PHD's" a man has; if he teaches heresy, he's a wolf....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Oh yes, I forgot to mention; Many wolves use a King James Bible exclusively too. This gives them no merit. Actually it's more deceptive for us and dangerous for them because they are adding to and taking away from God's Word, False witnesses against God is what they are. God hates it and sheep flee from it. Bennie Hinn also uses a King James too as do many of the Pentecostals, in my community, who teach a works salvation out of it. One can "defend" the King James all they want to while not even knowing the God of the King James. His name is Jesus Christ and He is the only Way, the Truth and the Life,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have read many Ruckman articles, but it has been prOBably 20 years ago or longer, and I found his 'lifestyle' to be questionable, even back then.

His language, combined with his attitude, have put a 'divot' on the head of KJVers, that has ruined a wide variety of 'defenses' for the accuracy of God's word.

The videos he put out, I think, tried to 'smooth-over' his roughness.

Though I am not a KJB only, I have found that the times I used his information for defense of the bible, his name almost always comes up, and to the detriment

of the truth.

I hold no ill will toward Ruckman, every man should live his own convictions, but we are known by our fruit, and that is not just the fruit of our lips, but also the fruit of our 'path' that we tread.

If we are not careful, we can ruin, not only the testimony of ourselves, but also the veracity of the scriptures because of the testimony of ourselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

isn't there a difference between using and believing the KJV Bible?

 

Yes, but some IFB seem to think the KJB is a 'magic wand' and it alone saves people, and without it nOBody gets saved. These above situations declare the 'common sense' of that.

I don't think the scriptures support the so-called fact that reading the Bible alone saves anyone, as per the 'Ethiopian eunuch' situation.

Forget the fact that there has to be the 'foolishness of preaching' included.

So yes there is a difference. A BIG difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I AM LAUGHING OUT LOUD over these biased, agenda-ed videos. I had a minute to watch them and and surprisingly disappointed in the wisdom I take for granted by some.

 

I could care less about Ruckman but can say that I have see him preach and enjoyed it every time. The same and more so about Hutson. However I have never read any of either of their writings and I have never heard of Hovind.

 

BUT, these videos are exactly the kind of examples I mean when I say you cannot trust the writings and now lets include the videos of men.

 

How blatantly twisted are the facts in "roast or slander" videos of other people. Come on, I expect women to take this kind of play on emotions as fact, but men?

 

Whether you love or hate these muttenheads is irrelevant. What is relevant is that who cares what any of them say or their critics and why does it affect you so??? They are just dudes.

 

Allot of people on here throw the words heresy and heretic around like candy. I wonder if any have the first clue what the words really mean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Members

In that respect, they're basically Arminian in doctrine.          Basically, the only difference in that and the Pentecostals is "speaking in tongues".  Just one of the many sad, dead religions.                         

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

In that respect, they're basically Arminian in doctrine.          Basically, the only difference in that and the Pentecostals is "speaking in tongues".  Just one of the many sad, dead religions.                         

What branch of Pentecostals believes one can lose their salvation? I've never personally met a Pentecostal who had that view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

What branch of Pentecostals believes one can lose their salvation? I've never personally met a Pentecostal who had that view.

Glen Lowery, Pastor, Pace Assembly of God, Pace, Fl --  "I could be a Baptist if it wasn't for that damnable Baptist doctrine of eternal security."

 

"Bro. Dave", Pastor, Huntsville Community Holiness, Huntsville, Al -- "If a woman pierces her ears she damns her soul to Hell."

 

Those are two that I've heard personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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



×
×
  • Create New...