Why don't you tell me what my mind on the matter is, can you find anywhere where I stated it? Can you find one negative thing I've said about Dr. Ruckman? Strange that you do the same to me that people like George attempt to accuse me of doing.

Who is trying to squash people's opinions here?

[QUOTE=Jeff;2838]I read his words and I do not get the same "thoughts" as you. I think you have put words in his mouth. Judge righteous judgment. Judge a man by his fruits. By their fruits you shall know them. So I wish everybody would just stop having as Dr Ruckman puts it; 'roast Ruckman'.

Geore may be "quick to jump on those who dare to even question Dr. Ruckman". But he would be quick to defend any brother who is in need of defending (when he knows him well). Brother Ruckman is known by me to be doing the ministery God has given him. He has reached people (in his crude way) that perhaps could not be reached by anyone else.

Paul was crude of speech.

My grandson is on the phone! I have lost my train of thought.

RUDE : 1. rough; uneven; rugged; unformed by art; as rude workmanship, that is, roughly finished; rude and unpolished stones.

2. Rough; of coarse manners; unpolished; uncivil; clownish; rustic; as a rude countryman; rude behavior; rude treatment; a rude attack.


CONTEMPTIBLE: 1. Worthy of contempt; that deserves scorn, or disdain; despicable; mean


Well I guess if you wouldn't have liked Paul if he was here either, because these two words define his manner of speech. But despite the protests, God is still blessing people through him.

For one thing, the slander I was referring to was not towards Dr. Ruckman's speech, but towards him being a heretic, hyperdispensationalist, weird, wacky doctrines and such, thats the slander

Let’s get the Chronology and the facts of this issue straight – and without pointing fingers and or making accusations (if possible).

When I came on the Forum (3/8/08), after browsing around for a while I noticed that a few folks on the Forum were being critical of brother Ruckman. On 3/08/08 I simply asked three questions of the members:

#1. Have you ever read any of the many books, commentaries, booklets, pamphlets, etc. that brother Ruckman has written? (And if so - how many? You don't have to list the names just the number -I'll trust you to be honest and truthful).

#2. Have you ever heard any of Peter Ruckman's numerous preaching and teaching tapes? (If so - how many? You don't have to list the names just the number -I'll trust you to be honest and truthful).

#3. Have you ever actually met brother Ruckman or been at any of his meetings where he has either preached or taught the word of God? (If so - where and when? I'll trust you to be honest and truthful).”

I never called anyone names or made any accusations. I just wanted to know if those people really knew much about brother Ruckman or were they going mostly on hear-say. [Proverbs 18:13] “He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.”

As I recall - only 2 people replied to those inquiries: Jerry said he had read 2 of Ruckman’s books and some articles on line and Tim had said that he had read an article on line and didn’t care for his crude language (or something along those lines). I never saw a reply from you. (So far so good.)

On 3/11/08 I gave my personal testimony about what I knew about brother Ruckman and basically made an appeal to all, that if they didn’t know brother Ruckman, maybe they shouldn’t be criticizing him. I don’t think that was unreasonable on my part. I never insisted that they not criticize him; I just tried to be reasonable and appealed to the members for “righteous judgment”.

Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

That was nearly a month ago – and all went well and peaceful until “the Geologist” came along and expressed his appreciation for brother Ruckman. And then all of a sudden the criticism started – again (from the same people)!

And so I came back on (not in defense of brother Ruckman), but wondering why anyone would be so quick to “Dump” on brother Ruckman, when hardly anything had been said about him (pro or con) for nearly a month. After the “negative comments by Jerry and Tim, I informed “Geologist” that they had been the same people who had been critical of brother Ruckman in the past. (Unjustifiable so in my judgment, since they knew very little about him personally and most of their criticism was based on hear-say.)

I said:
“I don't know exactly why Brother Tim has a problem with brother Ruckman, but I do have a strong suspicion as to why brother Jerry has a "bone of contention" with him.
Brother Jerry is a big "fan" of Brother David Cloud (He has referred to brother Cloud on this Forum and has "linked" to brother Cloud's site on occasion). I have visited brother Jerry's web page several times and it is real clear that he has a real high regard for brother David Cloud.”

If you go through the 450+ posts of brother Jerry you can verify what I say. Now anyone can be a “fan” of anyone they choose – I am a big believer in “real” Christian Liberty. Associate with whomsoever you want. Push whichever Christian “Celebrity” and his (or her) books, etc. you want, you won’t hear a peep out of me.

However, if you are going to be critical of someone you should be more specific than throwing out general: “foul mouth - or foul typewriting fingers” or “wacky or heretical doctrine”, etc., etc.

Search through all 49 posts that I have made on this forum. Except for my personal testimony of my knowledge of him and criticizing those who have criticized him, you will not find one post where I recommend any of his books, articles, tapes, etc. You will not find me quoting him one time. You will not find me posting a “link” to any of his web pages. Do I like him – you bet I do! Do I always agree with him – you bet I don’t! Do I always approve of his rough and crude language – no I don’t! (But it’s not “foul” – like brother Jerry claims.)

And now we come to this latest “squabble”. I have no idea why I upset Jeff, but I must have because all of a sudden he jumped on me for no apparent reason (at least that I can see) and has made some unfounded claims about what I have said – so here goes – I am going to list the posts and then (calmly and slowly and deliberatively and carefully) I am going to examine what was said and comment:

From Jeff:
“George, what I get out of your words is that it's alright to criticize those who don't agree with you, such as Jerry and Brother Tim. However it is not alright to criticize those that you are a big fan of, such as Dr. Ruckman.
Is a man's character determined solely on what their views are and not how they conduct themselves?
Do you not see a double standard here?”


George’s reply to Jeff:
Did you read my words? "what I get out of your words". It's not "what you "get out of my words" - It's - what did I say? I never once said (or intimated) "that it's alright to criticize those who don't agree with you" No, not once! Please don't put words in my mouth.

I am saying let's stop criticizing brother Ruckman period! Have you seen me criticize brother Cloud or any other famous "Christian personality"? Why keep "beating up" on brother Ruckman if you have never met the man; or heard him preach or teach; or listened to his preaching & teaching tapes; or only read a couple of books by him? Hmmm?

There are other "fish to fry" out there. "Is a man's character determined solely on what their views are and not how they conduct themselves?" Good question! And I will answer it thusly: Is a man's character determined solely on what he says (or is reported to have said), or on his fruit? [Matthew 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.] We are not to judge by words, but by fruit - Is their anyone here that knows brother Ruckman well enough to be a "fruit inspector", if not then, let's drop the sniping of him - that's all.
Romans 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

Check my posts out - you haven't seen me laud brother Ruckman; or "recommend him or his books or his tapes to anyone. I haven't "linked" to his site in all of my posts. I don't recommend any "Commentators" or "Commentaries" when it comes to Bible study.

I would be holding a double standard if I justified any wrongdoing that brother Ruckman does or has done. I never have and I never will!

Why do people judge other people when they know little or nothing about them?

John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

Why judge at all, if you don't have to?


Originally Posted by Jeff (Another review - Underlines are mine – George)

"George, what I get out of your words is that it's alright to criticize those who don't agree with you, such as Jerry and Brother Tim. However it is not alright to criticize those that you are a big fan of, such as Dr. Ruckman."

I posted my answer to Jeff (see above) and now I am going to carefully examine what he said – again.

“George, what I get out of your words” (I cannot help what any person “gets” out of my words – I cannot control how someone “interprets” them I can only try to be very careful to convey my ideas, thoughts, and beliefs in as clear a manner as I can.)

“what I get out of your words is that it's alright to criticize those who don't agree with you", (Now for Jeff to “prove” what he has just said or “claims”- he is going to have to reproduce those very same words or something very close to them from what I have written (49 posts) on this Forum. If he is honest and has any integrity, he must produce the words – my words - not what he “thinks” I “meant”!)

I have never said or claimed what he is attributing to me. He is missing the point – which is: a few people on this Forum had been criticizing brother Ruckman on a “regular basis” and I thought that, if they don’t know him or haven’t read him that they shouldn’t be so critical of him. Does that make me unreasonable? Does that make me a hypocrite? I think not.

"George, what I get out of your words is that it's alright to criticize those who don't agree with you, such as Jerry and Brother Tim. However it is not alright to criticize those that you are a big fan of, such as Dr. Ruckman."

I just pointed out that Jerry and Brother Tim are at the forefront of those few brothers on this Forum that have been critical of brother Ruckman. If it’s not true – prove it. If it is true why get upset? I wasn’t being critical of their beliefs, their walk, or their words; I was just stating a provable fact. (Have we gotten so thin-skinned that we cannot point out the truth?) I have asked the brethren to refrain from continually snipping at brother Ruckman – is that an unreasonable request? Is it Christ-like to continually criticize a brother in Christ – who you don’t even know?

Brother Jeff, you have done me a disservice in attributing to me something that I have not said. I have read many of your posts and I have found that I have been in agreement with you most of the time, that’s why I can’t understand why you suddenly “jumped” me on this issue.

"However it is not alright to criticize those that you are a big fan of, such as Dr. Ruckman." Again – I never said that or intimated it, and you would be hard pressed to prove it from my own words. I never said that it is not alright to criticize those that I am a big fan of. (Why do you keep putting words in my mouth? Or why are you criticizing me for something that I never said – but you “think” I said? Or you “think” I “meant”? How can you hold me responsible for something that I haven’t said?

And by the way – other than my testimony about brother Ruckman and my attempts to get the brethren to stop dumping on him, you couldn’t find anything in any of my other posts where I talk about him; praise him; or recommend him. (If you don't believe me - Check it out)

"Is a man's character determined solely on what their views are and not how they conduct themselves?" (I believe I answered this question adequately): Good question! And I will answer it thusly: Is a man's character determined solely on what he says? (or is reported to have said?), or on his fruit? Matthew 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
We are not to judge by words, but by fruit - Is their anyone here that knows brother Ruckman well enough to be a "fruit inspector", if not then, let's drop the sniping of him - that's all. Romans 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

"Do you not see a double standard here?" (Again what double standard are you talking about? The one that you “think” I “meant”?) I am not guilty of a double standard, unless you can prove it from my words – not your “private” interpretation of them.

Please notice: I haven’t called you names and neither have I misrepresented you words. I will post my answer to your second post later.

Yours for the Lord Jesus Christ and for His Holy Word,
George

There is a world of difference between being "uncultured" or rough in speach, and being rude (ie. in the sense of slandering others and using unbiblical insults) or crude. One is just the person's personal style - which should never be the basis of our critiquing of his message - the other is sin. The Bible quite clearly teaches us to guard our tongues, not be crude in our speach (can't remember the exact terms used right now), and that we will give account of what we say to others.

The Bible also tells us to judge people by their fruits - doctrine and words are fruit. We are commanded to expose what is wrong - that would include exposing rotten fruit when it shows up.

Ephesians 5:3-4 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.

Ephesians 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.

Funny how some reprove those who are reproving sin!...

[QUOTE=Renee;2845]I don't know Dr. Ruckman, except by reputation. I do believe that only the Lord knows if he has reached more than he has turned away. I still remember how the pentecostals defended Jim and Tammy Faye with the same vehemence people defend Ruckman with. Paul used strong words when neccessary, I don't believe he was unneccessarilly rude among believers, or nonbelievers for that matter. Nor can I find where he defends rude, hurtful behaviour. I believe Paul simply told the truth, and that by "crude, contemptable" he saying that he didn't use a lot of flowery, powerful speech. I suspect Paul wouldn't be the type of pastor with the mesmerizing speaking skills people are seeking today.

It is strange how people will "read" words as suits them. Just as I'm accused of being "like-minded" with who-knows-who by Browilder. Perhaps you can tell me what was the point of George's post. What was with the conjecture about Jerry and Brother Tim? He really wasn't criticizing them? It is plain to me that George is not so concerned with defending Dr. Ruckman as he is with trying to silence those who would point out that his behaviour may not be Christlike and may be damaging the cause. Of course he does this by criticizing them, or maybe he just uses innuendo so that he can later say in effect, "I didn't say that, didn't you read what I said?"

How is what Jerry said
"dumping" on Dr. Ruckman. Is there any question that Dr. Ruckman has made uncalled for remarks? Is this any reason to come up with conjecture on Jerry's motives?

I don't know why I'm defending Jerry, or anyone else. But if Brother George has the right to defend Dr. Ruckman I believe I can defend the right of others on this forum to say what they believe.

From Jeff:
Jeff's reply:
Let’s “carefully examine" what you have said:

“Yes I read your words, and your words betray you.” (Could you please be more specific? It’s real easy to make accusations, but it’s much more difficult to spell them out and then back up what you say. HOW and in what way did my words "betray me”? Hmmm?)

"That was my point." ( Just exactly WHAT is your "point"? I have no idea what you are talking about - because {once again}, you are not being specific.)

"Much speaking doesn't change things." (How about making accusations doesn't make something true?) or "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" Galatians 4:16

"On your say so we're not supposed to give our views on Dr. Ruckman if they're not positive." (Once again - You are trying to put words in my mouth. Please quote what I said not, what you "think" I "mean". I have never said what what your are claiming I have said - you couldn't prove it if your life depended on it. Why are you and others so quick to condemn someone that you don't even know? Just exactly what is your problem? There are a lot more important subjects & issues on this Forum than "Barbecuing" Peter Ruckman!)

"Using your arguments I can't form a view on Jeremiah Wright, or say anything against him. So much for free and open discussions if you have your say." (Once more with feeling: WHAT arguments? Can't you ever be specific? Can't you see that you aren't thinking "critically" or logically? You can't just "throw out" words without having some context! What "arguments" have I ever made that would prevent you from forming judgments? You can think and believe whatever you want brother, but you keep missing my main point - and I'm beginning to feel like a broken record - Why are a few people on this Forum so adamant in their dislike of brother Ruckman that they never miss an opportunity to criticize him? Huh?)

2 Timothy 2:14 Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

I'm done - for now.

"Speaking in a crude manner is still sin,"

Chapter & Verse Please? :confused:

Aloha brother,

Just a quick response: If Christians (brothers & sisters in Christ) correct God's Holy words they are not exempt from criticism just because they are Christians!

I have probably read about 75% of brother Ruckman's books, etc. (between 1968-1985) and listened to hundreds of hours of his preaching and teaching (between 1968-1980).

I have hardly ever heard him use his "rough" & "crude" language on anybody except Bible "correctors" (lost or saved).

How many books, articles, tapes, etc. of his have you seen, read, or heard?

Doctrine and words are fruit? Chapter and verse.


Both Eph.5:3-4 & 11 do not apply here. You are referring to his marriages? Don't judge if you don't know the circumstanses. Let God be the judge of that. ( Contrary to what some people believe Dr Ruckman does not believe in divorce for any reason) God has blessed his work tremendously, it has not been unfruitful. Do not judge his style. The Lord has blessed him with a long and fruitful ministery. God has even blessed him with a Proverb 31 wife. I dare to say that is a gift and a blessing that only God can give to a man. It is one way of saying "well done thou good and faithful servant.

[QUOTE=Jeff;2838]Jerry hasn't been accused of "bringing the subject back up" - He and Brother Tim were the first ones to "criticize" brother Ruckman. Uncalled for - they could have just criticized Pbiwolski and left it at that.

[QUOTE=Jeff;2838]Brother Jeff, (Re: Post #40)

"Jerry's response to this was justified, yet Jerry is the one accused of bringing this subject back up."

Jerry hasn't been accused (at least not by me) of "bringing the subject back up" - My point from the beginning of this "fracas" is that: He and Brother Tim were the first ones to "criticize" brother Ruckman again (after having been so critical in many of their past posts. When does it end? Or everytime brother Ruckman's name comes up is it open season - again and again?) Their criticism was was uncalled for - If they had a "problem" with Pbiwolski they could have just criticized Pbiwolski and left it at that.

George

Double Post - Please Ignore.

How is this criticizing Dr. Ruckman?

George, maybe all your words are just to much for me, or maybe my words aren't coming out right.

Can you answer me clearly:
-Did you or did you not criticize Jerry and Brother Time for criticizing Dr. Ruckman?
-If you did:
-Was it prompted by these last two quotes from them?
-Were they out of line for asking these questions?
-Were they even really an attacks on Dr. Ruckman?
-Do they have the right to give their views?
-If not, is that not a double standard to say they shouldn't give their views while those with opposing views go unchallenged?
-Is it not a double standard to suggest that they should not criticize Dr. Ruckman as you criticize them?

-Do you criticize Geologist or whoever else defends Dr. Ruckman?
-Do you feel that whoever defends him should be free from any criticism?

-Do you believe Jerry, Tim, or anyone else has the right to criticize Dr Ruckman?
-You have acknowledged that they have read some of his material, correct?
-If you don't believe they have the right to criticize him; why not?
-Have you never found anything Dr. Ruckman said or wrote not to be appropriate?

-Are you not saying Dr Ruckman should not be criticized by people who don't know him?
-Could we not say by the same argument that we should not criticize Jeremiah Wright?
-What's the difference?

-Are you not saying we should end any discussion of the character of Dr. Ruckman right now because you don't like it?
-If someone disagrees with you on this subject are they automatically wrong?

-Did you criticize Geologist for bringing this subject back up?
-Did you find the remark having to do with sticking your head in a bucket appropriate?
-If not, why only criticize Jerry and Tim?

I just got your last post before I finished:
-Then why did you bring this back up?
-If someone else brings it back up should they have no right to respond?
-When is someone giving their opinions (especially based on reason), views, or convictions "uncalled for"?

I replied to the whole post and somehow lost my reply right at the end.
I will reply tomorrow.

George

Aloha Brother Tim,

I have another apology to make to you for including you in my criticism of those who have been critisizing brother Ruckman - again.

In my haste to defend brother Ruckman I mis-read your post to Geologist and thought it was directed at brother Ruckman.

I have NO EXCUSE, and I ask your forgiveness. This is the second time I have apologized to you, but this time I committed a much more egregious error - no - sin!

I should have been more careful in my reading, and you may be sure that I will be far more careful in the future.

Again, I'm sorry for mis-casting you in the wrong light. I am going to make every effort to see that it won't happen again.

Your brother in Christ ,

George

Aloha brother,

I just wanted to let you know that I was mistaken about Brother Tim's Post. When I read it, I thought he was criticizing brother Ruckman when he was actually criticizing you (the "bucket remark").

Although he has been critical of brother Ruckman in the past, he was not criticizing him now, and I was terribly mistaken in including him in with brother Jerry as those who have been quick to criticize him again.

I have apologized to him - since I definitely was in error.

Your brother in Christ,

George

Jeff
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Tim View Post
"How is this criticizing Dr. Ruckman?"
(It wasn't. I hastily read Brother Tim's post and thought he was criticizing brother Ruckman. I have apologized to Brother Tim for casting him in a bad light. (See Post #57)

Since I lost all of my reply to your last post - I will answer it tomorrow.

What is the criticism you are referring to? Brother Tim and Jerry were simply making legitimate responses to other posts if it's what I'm thinking about.

If it is those two posts I believe you're talking about you must be awfully thinskinned yourself. One simply pointed out the rudeness in another's post and didn't attack Dr. Ruckman at all. The other asked a legitiamte question. I still believe that it is you dragging the matter on by making these charges.

I'm not to read anything into your words even though your intent seems clear, yet you can make conjecture about someone else's motives.

What you said is just so much different than the "words I put in your mouth" :confused:

I also apologize, I missed your post to Brother Tim before I posted.

I do have trouble following long threads at times.:(

Wow! One thing this sure shows is Dr. Ruckman doesn't leave people "in the middle of the road". I read his "Black is Beautiful" book (it seemed weird to me). I used his commentary on "Revelation" and found it quite helpful. Of course there are beliefs he has I don't agree with, but, I can't say anything about him except what he has said in his writings.

Proverbs 16:24 Pleasant words are as an honeycomb, sweet to the soul, and health to the bones.

Proverbs 17:22 A merry heart doeth good like a medicine: but a broken spirit drieth the bones.

I know none of you outside this forum. However, some of you seem WAY to serious. You should lighten up, you are going to strain something.

Amen, Brother!

My, my, my, it looks like I missed a heavy one last night! I did not think that my sarchastic comment would incite such a roar. Maybe I should've put a little smiley face :p after the quotation of Dr. Ruckman speaking "with charity."
At any rate, it's good to see most everyone has kissed, or at least hugged, and made up.

Oh yeah, all this talk has moved me greatly to temporarily change my avatar.

Ephesians 4:29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.

Ephesians 5:3-4 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.

Matthew 12:34-37 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

Colossians 3:8 But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.

James 3:2-8 For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body. Behold, we put bits in the horses' mouths, that they may obey us; and we turn about their whole body. Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth. Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth! And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell. For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind: But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.

Colossians 4:6 Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.

Because you keep defending him and making it seem like others have no right to criticize him and point out his sin or doctrinal errors. If you don't want others to critique his faults, stop defending him and bringing him up. Most of these comments are in response to posts like yours that keep knocking those who reprove and expose sin and error. :rolleyes:

Here is one about words being fruit:

Luke 6:43-45 For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes. A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.

Matthew 7:15-20 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

I can't find a specific verse that directly uses the word fruit in reference to false doctrine - however, there are various places where we are told to judge doctrine and critique it Biblically.

Both Eph.5:3-4 & 11 do not apply here. You are referring to his marriages?[/QUOTE]

No, I was referring to his words and doctrine.

Re: Brother Jeff's post #55
 

George's reply to brother Jeff's post (#55)

Jeffs Questions in Bold:

How is this criticizing Dr. Ruckman? (It wasn’t. Brother Jerry had 2 posts immediately before brother Tim’s post. In my haste to defend brother Ruckman I mistook Brother Tim’s post as being directed toward Ruckman. (I thought he was piling on) I was careless in my reading and I have apologized to Brother Tim.

George, maybe all your words are just to much for me, or maybe my words aren't coming out right.

Can you answer me clearly: (Now we’re getting somewhere)

-Did you or did you not criticize Jerry and Brother Time for criticizing Dr. Ruckman? (Yes, and I was wrong to lump Brother Tim in with brother Jerry)

-If you did:

-Was it prompted by these last two quotes from them? (I don’t know what 2 quotes you are referring but it was prompted by posts #21, #22 (by Jerry) and post #23 by Brother Tim (which I mistakenly thought was criticizing Ruckman)

-Were they out of line for asking these questions? (No questions were asked - brother Jerry was assigning sin to brother Ruckman (“Speaking in a crude manner is still sin” – Chapter & verse?) where there was no sin – unless he wants to include Paul & the Lord in on the accusation (since they both “unloaded” on “religious” people at times)

-Were they even really an attacks on Dr. Ruckman? (Brother Tim’s wasn’t (my error). Brother Jerry’s definitely was – it’s a sin to assign a sin to a brother, if he hasn’t sinned).

-Do they have the right to give their views? (Certainly! But in brother Jerry’s case it’s not a matter if he has the "right" - but is it "right"?)

-If not, is that not a double standard to say they shouldn't give their views while those with opposing views go unchallenged? (If I were to insist on them not giving their views I would be a hypocrite – guilty of a double standard. However, I don’t believe that I am insisting that they not give their views – I’m saying that constant criticism of a brother in Christ is wrong, so why continue?)

-Is it not a double standard to suggest that they should not criticize Dr. Ruckman as you criticize them? (I don’t believe so. To suggest to brethren that they should cease criticizing another brother in Christ (when they obviously know so very little about the man or his ministry – except for hear-say) is the Scriptural thing to do. To sit idly by or to encourage them would be wrong – why must God’s people constantly “bite and devour” each other? What happened to Christian charity?)

-Do you criticize Geologist or whoever else defends Dr. Ruckman? (If they do something wrong, I would. (Telling a joke may not be “convenient” – but why should anyone get offended if it wasn’t directed at anyone in particular, and it was a JOKE after all, the brother wasn’t serious. Have we lost our sense of humor or are we so thin-skinned that we are offended when someone tells a harmless joke? By the way: All of our children are married - there have been several occasions during the course of their marriages where I have sided with my daughters-in-law when it was obvious that my sons were doing wrong. I try real hard not to practice “respect of persons”.)

-Do you feel that whoever defends him should be free from any criticism? (Of course not (but it's not a matter of "feelings"). None of us should be free of criticism (if we can take it – that’s one way that we can learn & grow). However, I believe that the brethren should be circumspect in their criticism (which I failed to do in Brother Tim’s case) and not anxious to “pile on” to another brother – especially if they have very little personal knowledge of the brother or his ministry.)


-Do you believe Jerry, Tim, or anyone else has the right to criticize Dr Ruckman? (Absolutely! But again, it’s not a matter of “rights”, it’s a matter of - is it the RIGHT thing to do? Do we, as brother Jerry often does, make wild accusations against a brother when most of those accusations are coming from another source (probably David Cloud) and could not be proven in a court of law?)

-You have acknowledged that they have read some of his material, correct? (Brother Tim is out of the equation, so as far as brother Jerry is concerned – he has admitted to reading 2 books and a few articles by brother Ruckman. Peter Ruckman has written approximately 100 books; probably as many pamphlets or booklets; and hundreds of articles over almost 60 years of his ministry. On top of that, he has hundreds (if not thousands) of hours of audio and video tapes also. How can Jerry or anyone else judge this man if they haven’t even seen, read, or heard even 1% of his material? That’s been my point all along! However, David Cloud has a page on his web site that has 11 anti-Ruckman articles (most of which I read). I suspect that brother Jerry has gotten most of his information from Cloud’s site, since by his own admission he hasn’t actually read that much of Ruckman’s material – which would mean that he is judging by hearsay, not first hand knowledge. You know the verses dealing with that kind of judgment.)

-If you don't believe they have the right to criticize him; why not? (Doesn’t apply, since I believe they have the “right” – although again the question comes up: is he “right” in doing so?

-Have you never found anything Dr. Ruckman said or wrote not to be appropriate? (Brother Ruckman is not perfect, nor does he have all of the answers. There are areas where I disagree with him; areas where I question his judgment; and areas I can’t follow his reasoning. Having said that let me say that I have yet to meet anyone (Christian or not) who has read the Bible through 175 times – that puts me to shame by comparison. Ruckman has a nearly photographic memory (I have seen him preach 5 nights in a row (while doing an 8’ x 8’ chalk board drawing) where at each service he quoted from 50 to 100 hundred verses without looking up a single verse in his Bible! I have seen him 5 mornings in a row draw the entire history of the church and the transmission of the Biblical text on a 4’ x 16’ board without once referring to any notes! I have seen him answer any question (Scripturally) that anyone had from the audience about anything – in 10 seconds or less. To dismiss this man and make accusations about him that may not be true is not wise.)

-Are you not saying Dr Ruckman should not be criticized by people who don't know him? (No. I am saying that the criticism should pointed, specific (not generalized) and verifiable. If not, we Christians shouldn’t be judging – but if some choose to ignore the Biblical command and wrongly slander brother Ruckman I for one am not going to sit idly by and let the accusations fly without challenging the accuser.)

-Could we not say by the same argument that we should not criticize Jeremiah Wright? NO WE CAN’T! Up to now I believe that your questions have been fair, REASONABLE, and well thought out – but this kind of reasoning is beyond me. Comparing Wright to brother Ruckman is like comparing Cain to Able; the pagan kings to Abraham; Esau to Jacob; Pharaoh to Moses; King Saul to David; Ahab to Elijah; Hymenaeus or Alexander to Paul; or Judas to Peter! There is no comparison! Jeremiah Wright is a reprobate “preacher” of lies, hate, and coveteousness. Brother Ruckman is a child of God (warts and all). You couldn’t use the same argument in dealing with these 2 men than you could between Satan and God Almighty!

-What's the difference? (See above. I hope that you can see the difference.)

-Are you not saying we should end any discussion of the character of Dr. Ruckman right now because you don't like it? (Hardly! I keep going back to my main point: There is a difference between what we can do (because of "rights") and what we should do (because we Christians are supposed to be charitable, especially to those of the "household of God").

-If someone disagrees with you on this subject are they automatically wrong? (It all depends on where they are coming from. There’s a difference between being mistaken and having a personal vendetta against a fellow brother in Christ.)

-Did you criticize Geologist for bringing this subject back up? (No, because he was just expressing his appreciation for brother Ruckman – brother Jerry could have let it lie, but he chose not to, and therein lies the “problem”. Every time someone comes into the Forum and expresses appreciation for brother Ruckman – Is he going to “set them straight” with his unwarranted attacks on him? If he does he can rest assured that he will be opening up another “can of worms” like this present “donnybrook”. The question is: Why can’t brother Jerry let sleeping dogs lie?”)

-Did you find the remark having to do with sticking your head in a bucket appropriate? (I never gave it that much thought, since it was not addressed or directed at anyone in particular and it was a JOKE, after all – I have read or brother Ruckman use that line at least a dozen times or more and have never been offended by it – because it doesn’t apply to me!)

-If not, why only criticize Jerry and Tim? (Discernment – that’s what this whole exercise has been about. A harmless joke directed at no one in particular is quite different than unfounded personal attacks upon a specific brother in Christ. I hope that you can see and understand the difference.)




I just got your last post before I finished:

-Then why did you bring this back up? (I didn’t accuse Jerry of bringing the subject back up, I accused him of his renewed attacks on brother Ruckman – that’s a big difference. Any one could say something about Ruckman, but why does Jerry take it upon himself when Ruckman’s name comes up to criticize and demean the brother?)

-If someone else brings it back up should they have no right to respond? (Why respond? There are a whole lot of threads on this Forum (some frivolous, silly and outright ridiculous; and others of a very serious spiritual and Scriptural nature) I do not respond to any of the former, and I try to carefully choose the ones that I do get involved in (but I sure blew it with Brother Tim – for which I am genuinely sorry). Why respond at all? Is Jerry obligated to tear down brother Ruckman every time someone says something positive about him? I don’t understand that kind of a “Christian” attitude. In addition: you'll notice that although I may have some differences brother David Cloud I have been real careful not to criticize him - I don't know him that well and what business is it of mine anyway?)

-When is someone giving their opinions (especially based on reason), views, or convictions "uncalled for"? (If it’s their “opinion”, “views”, or “convictions” that’s one thing. Certainly you have the discernment to distinguish between those things and personal attacks on a brothers character and ministry? The former should be welcomed – the latter should be roundly condemned!)

In closing I want to state: The 1st 10 years of my Christian life I bounced around from “pillar to post”, visiting various churches (brethren; independent Bible; Congregational; Pentecostal; Southern Baptist; and Independent Baptist. Not once in those 10 years did any one in positions of authority (elders-pastors, etc.) ever tell me about the Bible “issue”; not once did they tell me how to study the Bible; not once did they teach me how to “rightly divide” the word of God!

When I got a hold of brother Ruckman’s books and tapes I learned those things. Strange isn’t it? No elder, pastor, or teacher in those 10 years did their job – but brother Ruckman did. Don’t you think that I should have a certain amount of appreciation for God using this man to open my eyes to the great “Truths” of the Bible, especially when no elder, pastor, teacher did?

You can accuse me of being a Ruckmanite, but I refuse to accept the label (that’s how Humanists dismiss the truth – through labels). Most of my reading and listening of brother Ruckman’s material was done between the years of 1968 through the middle 1980’s. From the mid 1980’ to 2003 there were years that went by when I never read anything of his (you’ll have to accept my word for that). You see once you get the “principles" of rightly dividing the book down, you don’t need a man to “guide” you anymore.

I don’t know much, but this one thing I do know (personally) about brother Peter Ruckman – God has used him mightily in the defense of His Holy Word and the brethren should be “very careful” when it comes to constantly criticizing him. God uses fallible men (warts, freckles, frailties & all) – Peter Ruckman is a “servant of the Most High God – let God judge him (you can be sure He will).

Romans 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

Yours for the Lord Jesus Christ and for His Holy Word,

George Anderson

Brother jerry's Post #65

Is that your "job"? That's funny - I always thought it was the Holy Spirit's job:

John 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

John 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

I "guess" I was wrong or am I? Why do so many modern day Christians "think" that hey can replace the Holy Spirit and God's word in this present world? :rolleyes:

"doctrine and words are fruit"

Wrong again brother!

You must Scripturally distinguish between the "works" of the flesh and "fruit". The following is the Scriptural definition of "works" & "fruit":

Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

You said: "doctrine and words are fruit" - and yet the Holy Bible contradicts you - which is right? Hmmm?

"Doctrine"; "words"; & "works" are never "Fruit" - although "Fruit" can lead to "Good Works"; "Pure Words"; and "Sound Doctrine" - Never put the cart before the Horse! :)

I don't think I have to answer this one (post #66) as George covered it inpost #69.

George,

The fact is that it is not right to suggest that following abusive remarks with, "and I say that with charity" automatically makes whatever words preceded them okay. The words that preceded them may have been perfectly innocent, but that's not what's being intimated.

Was Jerry right to point this out? Yes
Do you have the right to criticize him for that? Yes. Were you right to do so????

You, or anyone else, do have the right to give your views to the contrary. Clearly there is some disagreement on what type of language it is appropriate for a Christian leader to use. No matter how godly a man may be in most things it is still important to warn those who may follow him of any possible problems.

Even if Jerry had said the same thing before it's still right for him to reaffirm it when the subject is brought up again. You don't stop reproving sin just because you've done it once.

It's interesting that Proverbs 26:18, 19 which is being misapplied on another thread would more apply applies here.
Even though I've never made any personal comments against Dr. Ruckman it's insinuated I'm anti-Ruckman. Brother Wilder has never answered my response to this comment I won't suggest he is dishonest and lacks integrity as you have me. In post 48 you asked me Who have I condemned? George, you're doing the same thing you've accused me of.

George, I'm happy Dr. Ruckman helped show you the truth. But I'm not going to automatically accept every thing he might do just because he's 50%, 90%, or 99 and 44/100 percent right.

I generally agree with your assessment of Dr. Ruckman and "Rev" Wright, but I do find it interesting you use almost exactly the same argument Wright supporters do to defend Dr. Ruckman. There's a church in town that I would, I believe wisely, not advise people to go to even though I've not sat through many sermons, I'm positive the pastor is a genuine believer, and appears to be solid doctrinally. But there is evidence of a serious problem and, thankfully, I'm convinced there is a better church.

You know what helped finally fully convinced me of the truth behind the KJB? It was by looking at sites run by modern-version-onlyists and seeing how confused and often even hateful they were. They would also try to squelch any debate.

As far as I'm concerned I'm done with this. We're just going around in circles. If I feel prompted to reply to some post I will, whether or not you, or the majority of people here agree with it. I will try to be circumspect and avoid fruitless arguments (see how long I keep this promise :)). Diligent will be the only one who will have the final say as to when I'm no longer able to post.

George, I know many of your posts have been very helpful. Your knowledge and wisdom are appreiciated. I still reserve the right to disagree with you.

In my defense
 

First, George, I accept your apology for misinterpretation in post # 23 of this thread.

George, I would ask that you please read the posts that I have made on this thread and one other that references Dr. Ruckman. Then, would you respond to my statements as you have Jerry's. I believe that my request is fair considering the number of times that my name was included in recent posts by you, before your apology. You have on several occasions indicated that one should do sufficient research on Dr. Ruckman's work before criticizing him. It is difficult to read everything that he has written, and listen to everything that he has said, but it should not take long to review my posts.

My first discussion, which had nothing to do with the man himself or anything that he believes, was in the thread about his soon-to-be-printed study Bible. The thread is found on "Bible Versions", page 2, with the title "Ruckman Reference Bible". NOTE: This thread was begun by Atlas, an ardent supporter of Dr. Ruckman.

- I made a post (p.1, #5) about my general disagreement with Study Bibles. I did not even mention Dr. Ruckman's name. George, I would think that you would completely agree with my statements, based on your comments about commentaries.
- pbiwolski made a post (p.1,#7), mischaracterizing my post, and I responded to him (p.1,#10), again saying nothing against Dr. Ruckman.
- The last post I made (p.2,#11) was a light-hearted speculation about what Dr. Ruckman's new study Bible could be called. See Atlas' post (p.1,#6) "RRB" and his response to me. (p.2,#12), and others later that did not find fault with me.

My next entries into this volatile issue came at the beginning of this thread, again started by Atlas, not a critic of Dr. Ruckman. In response to Atlas' opening post, I took the time to read some of the bulletins, beginning with the first one available on the net. I was curious to see what was all the fuss. I had heard enough negative statements from people I trusted to be wary, but I knew that Dr. Ruckman is one of the most well-known defenders of the Scriptures, and since they were available, I would let him speak for himself.

- My first post (p.1,#2) criticizes his printing of completely unkind humor. Read my post for a full explanation. Was I wrong?
- My following posts on page 1 (#5, 6, 8, & 10) were attempts defend myself and to get a reasonable response to my criticism about the jokes. I was falsely accused by Atlas (as to the supposed number of "anti-Ruckman" posts that I had made to that point). This was never corrected by him.
- My final response to Atlas was on p.2,#12, when I said that I would not discuss the matter further with him. At that point, he had still not answered my question as to the appropriateness of the jokes.
- In post #14 on p.2, you commented on my prior posts, and incorrectly determined that I had "an extreme personal dislike for brother Ruckman" and had "animosity towards a fellow Christian".
- I briefly responded to your post with #16 on p.2.
- You, in turn, apologized in # 17, and then did a very reasoned explanation of various terminology.
- Atlas addressed me directly in post #18, to which I did not respond.
- In post #19, I gave a lengthy response to your post. I felt that I did a faithful, unbiased explanation of my position. I would ask that you and others who are currently discussing this topic re-read the last two paragraphs and critique them fairly.
- My final post (3/20, p.3, #23) was a response to an abusive post by geologist (p.2,#20) in which he called those who disagree with Dr. Ruckman "a bunch of pious, thin skinned nannys". He then ended his post with a mocking comment to which I took offense. That may sound "thin-skinned" but I was calling attention to a statement that (to me) demonstrated a bad attitude.

I would point out here, that I find it disturbingly frequent for those who strongly support Dr. Ruckman to (sometimes viciously) attack those who question his methods. They also mimic his rough style when speaking or writing about others with differing ideas. (example: Geologist's so-called "joke" is Ruckman-like, based on the messages that I have heard.) While you have not been one of those who do nothing but hurl ridicule at us, you have in your recent posts joined the attack with unfair assumptions, evidenced by your statements about me, for which you sincerely and repeatedly apologized, and I have accepted. [p.s. Thank you, Jeff, for sticking up for me. I had not read this thread since 3/30 until today.]

Brother George, I think that Jerry has been likewise unjustly attacked. His character has been questioned, and he has not been given a very fair hearing. I must admit that I did not read every word that he wrote, but those that I read, in my opinion, were reasonable issues relating to the topic.

I do agree that much of the teaching about the text issue by Dr. Ruckman has been useful in the continuing debate. I can completely understand the fervor with which those whose lives have been benefited by him defend the man. I just believe that it is incumbent that those who God has given exceeding great skill and responsibility to guard themselves lest their "good be evil spoken of:" (Romans 14:16) and no one can deny that Dr. Ruckman's own words have been used to discredit him and his work.

Thank you for your attention in this matter, and may God's Grace be with you and your family,

Now if you guys want to get in on a really worthy fight, come join me at
http://finalauthority48270.yuku.com/forums/11
There are some tough talkers there that you can rightly mix it up with!

Brother Tim, I just checked that forum out there and it is a doozy... After looking over a few things, I don't have time for such debates trying to convince someone that God can preserve His Words... One poster seems to me meant to make it his life goal to convince everybody there that you can read any version and all is well... (I say no, but if he is ignoring the dropped verses, or Herod not celebrating passover but rather celebrate easter then what's the point?Tell him once then tell him twice if he reject it, move along I say...)

So many churches are "NIV" possitive. I'd hate to have to "scap" them as lost causes. I have a great "dislike" for new versions. But, it seems like there are less and less churches to go to anymore because of their "modernizing". I was on staf with a church that used so many different versions of the Bible, it's a wonder anyone learned anything (well MY version says...). It was frustrating.

Brother Jeff,

Re: Your post (#72)

I wouldn't suggest that you, or brother Jerry, or others, that I have had "differences" on this Forum with should be banned from posting - NEVER!

You are not heretics! I can see banning "kooks", heretics, or people who use abusive or real "foul" language - but not those I disagree with, and I would never ask him to do that.

However, since I answered all of your questions (inquiries) I have a shorter list of questions to ask you. I had the "courtesy" to answer all of your questions, civilly I might add, I hope that when I post my questions, that you will have the same courtesy to answer mine (and you have been civil & courteous, so I don't have to insist on that.)

Your brother in Christ,

George

Timothy, there is one on that forum with whom I will not converse. His handle is steelmaker".

Brother Tim,

I have sincerely apologized to you twice (and once to brother Jerry). Once because I used the word "animosity" in describing brother Jerry's and your attitude towards brother Ruckman, which when you pointed out that the definition was "hatred" - it was obvious to me that you certainly didn't harbor "hatred" towards him. (That could be considered a "minor" point by some, but I try to be as "concise" as I can be when I speak or write.)

The second offense against you was far more egregious (which I have admitted fully - and for which I am truly sorry). Had I been more careful in reading the posts it wouldn't have happened - but I can't take back what was written, I can only apologize, which I have done.

However, I believe that my original premise still stands, and it is not how brother Jeff states it; formulates it; or crafts it. The premise is NOT - do brother Jerry or whoever else chooses to criticize brother Ruckman have a "right" (a civil "right") to criticize him (be my guest - criticize away - it used to be a free country). The point that I was trying to make (through all of the "clutter") is: Is it "RIGHT" according to the Holy Scriptures? Is it the "RIGHT THING" to do as brethren? (Especially since very few of those who are crticizing him know very much about him except for "hearsay" or like yourself, who don't like his rough or crude language. Why are some of the brethren hung up on "Civil "Rights", but have little or no concern for WHAT IS RIGHT & WHAT IS WRONG? (According to the Scriptures)?

The commandment from the Lord Jesus Christ is very clear:

"Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment." John 7:24

How can anyone judge this man; or his works; or his ministry - IF they are not personally familiar with him; or his books; or his ministry? What is so difficult about that? We are commanded NOT to judge according to appearance and yet that is what these people are doing - if they haven't met the man: haven't heard him preach or teach; haven't read at least 10 or 12 of his various books; or seen or heard his tapes.

Again the Scriptures also point out:

Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Luke 6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:
Luke 12:57 Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?


James 4:11 Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.
James 5:9 Grudge not one against another, brethren, lest ye be condemned: behold, the judge standeth before the door.

Romans 14:13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.

Do those of us who profess to believe the King James Bible "practice" what it says? Or do we pick and choose what to believe and what to follow?

Whenever people on this Forum choose to unjustly criticize brother Ruckman: (And I quote from brother Jerry in regards to Ruckman's materials: "Chew the meat and spit out the bones is great advice if you are eating a steak - but not if the steak is poisoned." - "Poisoned"? Pretty strong criticism in my Book! Please note: I haven't layed this kind of a charge against anyone on this Forum.); or should they choose to lay unwarranted (or unprovable) charges against him such as: (he teaches "wacky doctrines" (?); "quirky doctrines" (?); heresies"(?); "he is a hyper-dispensationalist" (?); "the re-inspiration of the KJV or the KJV translators," (?); etc.; etc. I will respond: If you choose to be critical of someone, at least be specific! NAME (by direct "quotes") "the poison"; NAME -"the wacky or quirky doctrines"; NAME -"the heresies"; PROVE -"he's a hyper-dispensationalist" (definition first and by his words); DEMONSTRATE -"Re-inspiration of scripture" (whatever that means).

It's real easy to throw out accusations. it's much harder to back them up! For example: "The U.S. government introduced aids into America to kill off people of color!" (It true - if believe people like the "Reverend" Jeremiah Wright!) But on the other hand "Reverend" Wright couldn't PROVE his allegations and accusations if his life depended on it!

Am I asking for too much? In light of the Scriptural warnings about judging (especially another brother in Christ)? I think not.

Your brother in Christ,

George

Brother Tim, {A Post Script to your Post}

I read through your post #72 (for the third time) and find myself in agreement with nearly all of it.

I find your responses thoughtful, carefully measured, and reasonable. I was wrong to cast you in the light I did (too hasty - but no excuse).

I agree completely with your statement below:
And you will note that though I admire brother Ruckman as a Bible Defender; Preacher; Teacher; Evangelist; and Author - I do not emulate him (although some here may think I do). Nor do I imitate his writings. However, God has not called me to the "ministry" that he has. (Thank God!). And so I don't question his use of harsh or crude language (even against Christians - "religious" people today) unless it can be proven that it is unwarranted.

Harsh and or rude speech in itself is not a sin. (The Lord used harsh language against the religious people of His day - not so much against ordinary people. And Paul could also put out some pretty harsh language and admitted that his speech was "rude".) That doesn't excuse the use of it if it is done in the flesh i.e. carnally. That is why if someone presents verifiable evidence that brother Ruckman is "out of line" somewhere (anywhere), you won't find me defending him at that point. I have never defended "wrong doing" on the part of my 7 children; or my Christian friends. And I try real hard not to defend "wrong doing" on my own part. Sometimes it's real difficult since: Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

I hope this settles whatever dispute or differences that we may have. :)
[2 Corinthians 5:18]

Again, your brother in Christ,

George

OK Jeff, I meant Jerry as far as the slander about Dr Ruckman's teaching, judged out of haste, sorry about that. Its not about whether or not you are with or against Dr Ruckman, its about do you believe and accept the AV 1611 as the final authority for the Christian in all matters of faith and practice, and do you rightly divide the word of truth as instructed in the KJV that you won't find in the modern versions.