Ruckman Reference Bible
 

To all,



Do you all know that Dr. Ruckman has his own study Bible coming out at the end of the year? It will be called The Ruckman Reference Bible. I will be glad to see Bible come out. Has anyone heard any updates on the Ruckman Reference Bible?

http://www.kjv1611.org/BBB/2005/jun-05.pdf


I talked to them about it a few months ago and have not heard any news about it lately.


Atlas

Wow, cool! This should be interesting. Good find.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Stephanos,


Yes it will be a good deal. I hope it comes out soon.


Atlas

Bro. Ruckman told me it would be quite awhile before it is done. He told me this in July when he came to East Tennessee. But when it does get done it will have A LOT of notes in it. Hopefully it will come out soon as possible though.

Cody,



Did he give you any idea how long, any idea at all?

It's good to see you by the way my friend.


Atlas

No, he just said awhile. I guess you could just keep calling the bookstore and asking them when they think it will be done.

I wonder if it will be a PCE.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Stephanos,


I have no idea about this question. That would be very nice indeed if it was going to be a PCE. I'll try to ask that the next time I call. I'll call and make an order later and I'll report back on this and other questions.


Atlas

Guys,

I called in and made an order I also ask about the Ruckman Reference Bible. I was it will be out in Jan. or Feb. of 2009. I was told that they are now working on the appendix, and needed to make sure all of the information is correct. I ask if it was going to be like the Thompson Reference Bible, Dake Study Bible or Scofield Study Bible. It will be on the format of the Scofield Study Bible. IE: Center Column Reference. I guess they will also be doing footnotes, she said something about footnotes but I do not recall what was said. She was in a hurry. She had other calls coming in.

I'm kind of glad that the Ruckman Reference Bible will come out 100 years to the year after the Scofield Study Bible. It is my hope that the Ruckman Reference Bible will have the same affect as the Scofield Study Bible had in the early 1900's. J. Frank Norris gave the IFB of their guts, and Dr. C.I. Scofield gave most of them their basic theology in the early 1900's to the later part of the 1900's.

The IFB's built their churches on the methodology of J. Frank Norris. Then they used the Scofield Study Bible to teach their members and their IFB college students theology. I hope that we will be able to use the Ruckman Reference Bible for our new study Bible. It's my hope that we can and will go back to Dr. J. Frank Norris methodology on church building. The dirty little secret is that every big IFB church in our nation now has left the Frank Norris style of church building. For some reason hard preaching and repentance has left many of the main line IFB churches. Maybe we can get back to basic IFB roots and styles of Bible study and Bible based church building.

Right as Dr. J. Frank Norris took First Baptist Fort Worth the Scofield Study Bible came out, all in the same year 1909. I think this may have been part of God's plan. It is my hope that the Lord will use the Ruckman Reference Bible just as he used the Scofield Study Bible. If the church is not to lukewarm to use this new resource we may have some hope. Please pray for this work and that it will have a good impact for the Lord and help rebuild the IFB movement.


Atlas

I personally prefer the Reformation Study Bible published by Ligonier Ministries and/or the Evidence Bible published by Living Waters. Also, I use the Ryrie Study Bible as well. I find each one helps my ministry.

Prefer over what? The Ruckman Reference Bible isn't even out yet. Personally I prefer to keep my study material seperate from the Word of God. I won't be using the Ruckman Reference Bible as much as I use my Cambridge Bible, but will certainly love to read what Dr. Ruckman has to say in this new Bible. Brother Peter sure knows the Scriptures quite well, and I think anyone can benefit from what he has to say.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Well, that's one of the biggest mix ups I've ever seen :P

Reformed Theology + Lordship Salvation + Free Grace Dispensationalism

How do you know which commentary is right brother?

Just out of curiousity brother Luke, where did you hear about these Bibles? I'm always curious where so many strong KJB believers keep up on things. I want to stay current as well, so I too can warn people about such things.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Eric,


http://www.evidencebible.com/

Tell us why this Bible with notes by apostates is so wonderful? You must be kidding or something. Why would I want any Bible that has notes from Dr. D. James Kennedy.

http://www.coralridge.org/default.aspx

So you are anti Ruckman and pro Dr. D. James Kennedy.

Do you mind if I ask you what you think of Dr. Ian Paisley?


Also does the Reformation Study Bible even come in KJV? I can not even find a Reformation Study Bible, KJV online. All I can find is an ESV or NKJV.

I will agree with you one the Ryrie Study Bible, KJV. It is a very good study Bible. I have had one for about five years and other than a Scofield Study Bible, I'd say it is the best on the market. Well that is until the Ruckman Study Bible comes out. I would gladly recommend the Ryrie Study Bible, KJV to anyone. It is a verd study Bible. Everyone should own a Ryrie Study Bible. I also have Thompson Chain ok for a few things.

The Common Man's Reference Bible also one of the best study Bibles on the market. I have yet to see it correct the KJV. IT has some good notes and is also worth buying.


http://www.purewordsoftruth.com



Atlas

Re: EricWGreene's comments (3 Posts)
 

Aloha Eric,

I find it "instructive" that you joined this Forum on 09/17/08 and have made three Posts (all on 09/17/08-see below), the first which takes the Scripture out of "context" and presumes to know our motives; the second where you "malign" a fellow Christian brother in Christ; and the third where you give us your personal "preferences" for three different "Authorities" that you "prefer" to guide you in your "studies".

Is Bible College/Institute necessary?

Your quote:
Your comments betray your biases - in favor of a smug "intellectual" and "academic" approach to Bible study that is contrary to the Biblical command concerning how we are to study. There is nothing in 2 Timothy 2:15 or in 1 John 2:20-21, 27; or in 1 Corinthians - the entire Chapter 2 that indicates that we "need" a "teacher" or "commentator" in order to receive spiritual understanding from God.

When you study the Bible it is NOT "safe to assume" ANYTHING! Especially that those Christians that came before, us who may have been intellectually and academically "inclined", and who possibly might have been seeking positions of "authority" within the body of Christ, had anymore spiritual discernment than those of us who are on this forum who are not well known or "published".

To assume that Christians that have written books have received an "unction" from God that we don't have is fallacious and self deceiving.

Your application of Proverbs 11:14 is "faulty". The verse is not referring to teachers of the Holy Scriptures, it's referring to "counsellers" [Proverbs 11:14 Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellers there is safety.] Do you see the word teachers in the verse? Is there anything in the verse that indicates a "need" for teachers? Where is there any reference to the word of God or Scripture? Hmmm? The verse is in reference to "FALLING" and "SAFETY". No counsel = "falling" (NOT - failing to understand God's word!). A multitude of counsellers = "safety" (NOT safety in the numbers of "commentators" - But SAFETY!)

Had you searched the Scriptures, instead of relying on the "commentators", you would have found what kind of "safety" was being spoken of: [Proverbs 24:6 For by wise counsel thou shalt make thy war: and in multitude of counsellers there is safety.] The "safety spoken about is "SAFETY" in WAR; SAFETY from ENEMIES! NOT "safety" in a multitude of Bible "teachers" or "commentators"! Please notice - I didn't need any teacher or commentator to show me this truth. All that I needed was the Holy word of God (One "Authorized" Holy Bible - NOT three "preferred authorities" :() and the Holy Spirit, who lives inside of me, and in all born again Christians.

When you talk about Bible "interpretation" and "our interpretations" and the "interpretations" of those who came before us, you are treading on "dangerous ground". Are you not aware [2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.] that we are not to "privately interpret" the scriptures?

You talk about: "all of us have proceeded with the same ignorance that we will read the scriptures as God intended without preconceived assumptions." And you yourself have jumped to an "assumption" that "all of us" think like you!

Again you say: "Therefore we errantly conclude that all those who came before us must have had an agenda. We make these judgments assuming that we are a capable final judge on the motives of those who studied before us." Speak for yourself - we don't all think alike, or like you. Once again you "presume" to know our motives or thoughts when it comes to the "commentators", when many of us do not judge them at all. To be honest - I'm not so concerned with the motives of dead commentators, I'm more concerned with people today ("preachers", "teachers", "commentators", et al.) who pervert the Holy words of God in the "here and now".

Because I choose NOT "rely" on the "commentators" for spiritual discernment am I guilty of pride and arrogance? You said: "we must be careful that we do not hold ourselves above others in such a prideful and arrogant manner." Just because some of us on this Forum don't "rely" on others (from the past or the present) for discernment, understanding, and wisdom, doesn't make us proud or arrogant, and you certainly are mistaken in your judgment if you judge us so. :confused:

You come on this Forum and in a"clever" off-hand manner you accuse us of "ignorance"; of holding "preconceived assumptions"; of "error"; of "wrong interpretations"; "pride"; and "arrogance"; and then you have the "gall" to malign and cast dispersions on a brother in Christ who has labored for the Lord Jesus Christ, probably longer than you have been alive, and you expect us to be civil with you? Or to welcome you with open arms?

Peter S. Ruckman's work

Your quote:
Before you say another word about brother Peter Ruckman, you should read some of the 278 Posts > under the "Chit-Chat" Section of this Forum > under the heading "Dr. Ruckman before you bad mouth someone who, you obviously know little about. You have demonstrated a proclivity to unjustly judge a fellow brother in Christ who has devoted his entire life and ministry for nearly 60 years to upholding the word (words) of God.
[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.]

You've got a lot to learn about Christian conduct. Just because a man speaks plainly and strongly criticizes anyone who messes with the Holy words of God, doesn't mean that he is "behaving themselves badly". This is Humanistic thinking and reasoning. But on the other hand you have come on this Forum and insulted all of us, but because you used "good words and fair speeches" and not "crude" or harsh language, you think that you have been sweet and lovely - not so!

Ruckman Reference Bible

Your quote:
It must be "wonderful" to be able to CHOOSE between so many "Authorities"! That way, instead of relying on the Holy words of God and the Holy Spirit, you can rely on your own intellect and "preferences" (for "light"?). :(

When a person comes on this Forum and in the first day they post 3 Posts that are clearly meant to cast aspersions, insult, and denigrate (all without using "harsh" or "crude" language - of course :p) those of us on this Forum and brother Peter Ruckman - it raises the question: Is this person here to EDIFY, or has he come to impress us with his "knowledge" and "expertise" and to debate and divide? Time will tell - It always does. ;)

Oh, by the way - welcome to the Forum. :rolleyes:

Isn't the evidence bible by Ray Comfort? That's enough info for me to avoid that one, Lordship Salvation makes me sick to my stomach, literally.
I don't know a lot about all these other teachers / preachers but I do know that the Words in My Bible are from the LORD Jesus Christ
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
and he told me through those words that If I studied [2 Tim 2:15] under the guidance of the Holy Spirit which was promised to me , He would lead me into all truth!
John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Ohhh how little the greatest teacher there has ever been and ever will be is overlooked!

PeopleoftheWay, I wholeheartedly agree with you. The best "study" Bible is one that requires you to read the Scriptures, rather than jump to the explanation by a man just below the text. Well-meaning or not, accurate in their interpretation or not, the notes printed within the covers of a Bible cause less prayerful study by oneself and more reliance on someone else for the understanding of the Word.

http://www.ericwgreene.com/

site speaks for itself, promotion of Lordship salvation.

Ed.
Indeed Tim, A great brother told me recently that its best to avoid those who are of celebrity status and those that run into intellect to hoodwink Christians into thinking they are "authority".
Every day by the grace of God I learn more through prayerful study and if I have a question I will first ask ALMIGHTY GOD! before anyone else!
Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
I have no dispute that God raised up Pastors and teachers [Eph 4:11,12], but let me tell you this, I have learned more from those who remain meek and humble themselves before God, not seeking fame nor fortune but seeking truth in God's written Word, for Christ himself made himself of no reputation.
Philippians 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

The kind of logic that puts men in "authority" over the brethren is to slide back in time to BEFORE the common man had the Bible in his hand to read himself. For this was God's plan for the KJB to give the "common man" His Glorious written word in english so they would NOT have to rely on "authority" to understand the Word Of God!

Hey Stephen,

There are a few places I tend to read

www.jesus-is-savior.com/recent_articles.htm

Not all of them are the best, but David Stewart does do a lot of research. This tends to be where I get a lot of info on false teachers from

www.wayoflife.org

Not the biggest fan of David Cloud, but he is pretty much always on the money with false teachers. He has an aversion to Dr Ruckman and Riplinger though, but his ministry was instrumental in me believing the KJB.

I also read several free grace blogs

indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com

This is lou martinueacs blog. He wrote a book on Lordship Salvation, and he is a good guy. Emailed him several times.

www.av1611.org

Not updated so much anymore, but for information on Bible versions, it's probably the best. Also good stuff on rock music, but the articles are a bit outdated (Amy Grant, Stryper and stuff.. not really too current).

So yeah, I just tend to read.. too much at times. Which causes confusion.

God bless

The Evidence Bible -

I owned one, so I can testify that this is actually what is written in it as the commentary for Matthew 7:21-23

"These are perhaps the most frightening verses in the Bible. Vast multitudes of professing Christians fit into the category spoken of here. They call Jesus 'Lord,' but they practice lawlessness. They profess faith in Jesus, but have no regard for the divine law. They tell 'fibs' or 'white' lies, take things that belong to others, have a roaming eye for the opposite sex, etc. They are liars, thieves, and adulterers at heart, who will be cast from the gates of heaven into the jaws of hell."

Basically, in order for Jesus to know you and not cast you into hell, you have to be sinlessly perfect.

What any Christian is doing being judged at the judgment of the nations I have no idea, but Comfort doesn't rightly divide.

Having said that, there are literally HUNDREDS of REALLY GOOD notes in the evidence Bible, but stuff like this just makes it a waste and is poison amongst the good stuff.

Wow.... That is a lot of responses... I will take the time to read them shortly as I am interested in what all of you have to say. Thanks for taking the time to write. By the way, I am thoroughly familiar with the theological perspective of all of the Bibles I listed. I am interested in not only deepening my own convictions but also I like to learn why others think the way they do. I find it helps me minister to people more effectively... Thanks again for the many responses, I look forward to reading them all...

Soli Deo Gloria!

Hey George,

We will have to agree to disagree on the "context" issue. I know what my KJV says and I stand by it, so you must be wrong. :)

Concerning Mr. Ruckman, Chette777 mentioned something negative about him. I would encourage you to get with him about spreading rumors against Mr. Ruckman.

Just as Mr. Ruckman guides many of you, I choose other teachers whom I believe are better Bible teachers.

I hope that helps resolve any confusion.

Thank you for the welcome to the board!!!

Brother Tim - why go to preaching services then? Why go to Sunday School? Why teach anyone? What is the difference between written instruction and verbal instruction? According to your logic we should all lock ourselves away with just a Bible lest we be affected by someone else's interpretation...

Peopleoftheway - very good research... I am impressed... :)

Explain to me your understanding of Lordship salvation and explain to me why it is unbiblical....

Luke - very good... except Ryrie is Moderate Free Grace not Free Grace. He wrote a book called "So Great Salvation" in response to both John MacArthur's book "The Gospel according to Jesus" and Zane Hodges "Absolutely Free". As I am sure you know MacArthur is Lordship salvation and Hodges is Free Grace.

I myself am a Reformed Baptist (2nd London Baptist Confession, 5 Solas, 5 Points of Calvinism, Baptistic Covenant Theology, Amillennial).

I choose to reference the works of many different theological perspectives to deepen both my own convictions but also to understand the perspective of others.

Personally, I prefer the ESV. But, my church is KJV-only. So when I teach I use the KJV. Years ago I used to be KJV-only and led my SBC church to change the constitution to be officially KJV-only. I even attended the Beale Street Blast back in 2004. My pastor is KJV-only and preaches from Ruckman's commentaries. Currently, I own http://www.biblepreachingarchives.org but I am in the process of transferring it to a KJV-only person as my convictions have changed.

Hodges is just nuts. He isn't even preaching ANY gospel. There is no death, burial or resurrection in his gospel. I don't think he stands for free grace. I think he stands for fire insurance. A man doesn't even need to know about the cross, sin, or the deity of Christ to be saved according to hodges. At the least, Macarthur and Ryrie are in agreement on the foundation of Christianity, that Jesus is God, born of a virgin, died for the sins of the world.

I know hodges believes them as well, but he denies they are part of the facts to be believed in when getting saved.

I don't know why you say very good though. Was I sitting an exam?

You may find this is not the forum for you friend, but you are most welcome. Do not be surprised when your reformed theology is rebuked, refuted and generally ignored.

Let me state this clearly though. We are NOT Arminian. We are mostly Bible Believing Baptists, although I believe there are a few Open Brethren on here as well. We believe, well most of us do, in Eternal Security of the Believer, and the FREE gift of God, received through faith in His Son Jesus Christ. We are dispensational in beliefs, and many of us respect the writings of Dr Ruckman.

Our dear brother Stephen is a mennonite and loves God dearly, and while he has had heated discussion with the forum over certain issues, he has done it in a manner of grace and love that is uncommon amongst many Christians.

So welcome to the forum :)

Hey Luke - thank you for the response...

You were not sitting for exam, I was just complimenting you on your knowledge.

I would never accuse anyone here of being Arminian. Before I was Calvinistic, I was much like all of you and I hated it when Calvinists would call me Arminian when in fact I was not.

I am not here to be a jerk. I would like to share some things I have come across in my own pilgrimage. I am sure I will not be here for a long time, but as I am passing through I appreciate the hospitality.

Reformed Baptist is an Oxymoron. I'm having a hard time making sense of the rest of these statements. This is quite an amalgam of "many different perspectives". I call it ecumenism, or compromise.

No offense meant EWG. Thanks for sharing from your pilgrimage as you pass through.

I have listened to some of biblepreachingarchives a long while back. Anyway, you got a lot on your plate to fulfill "(2nd London Baptist Confession, 5 Solas, 5 Points of Calvinism, Baptistic Covenant Theology, Amillennial)".
Is there room(time wise, or theologically) for the Great Commission?

Is there room(time wise, or theologically) for the Great Commission?

Or any point, since all the elect will be saved...

ericwgreene,

A perfect "sophistical" answer: I demonstrated from scripture the "context" - you "preferred" to ignored the context and privately interpreted the verse to support a preconceived conviction, and then added to the Holy words of God to suit your own purposes.

I was dealing with what you said - not with what brother Chette said. You can try to "misdirect" (another device used by "sophists") my criticism, but you criticized a fellow brother in Christ and that was the issue I was dealing with - which you artfully chose to ignore.

If you read my Post - I not only never said that brother Peter Ruckman was my "guide", I made it perfectly clear (for anyone with a minimum of reading comprehension) that I rely solely on the Holy Spirit as my guide when it comes to spiritual understanding. I don't rely on any man (living or dead) to "guide" me through the Bible.

And so we are still left with the fact that in your first three "Posts" on this Forum, you as a "newcomer" - took the only scripture you cited (in all three of your posts) out of context; slyly "intimated" that we all are "ignorant"; have "preconceived assumptions"; that we have embraced "error"; have the "wrong interpretations"; and are full of "pride" and "arrogance"; and have clearly demonstrated by the rest of your Posts since your initial posts, that you have a "preference" for which ever Bible suits your purposes for the moment and have a preference for dead Calvinists (and possibly some that are alive) privately interpreting the Holy Scriptures for you.

So the charges still stand, although you "skillfully" tried to deflect them, and make them of no importance, and ignored 90% of the rest of my comments. Nothing has changed. You have come here to stir up trouble and to "argue" with whoever will engage you, and at some point when you find out that you are unable to persuade us to your "preferences", you will silently fold your tent and slip away into the darkness from which you came. :mad:

I don't debate Humanists or Sophists - there is "no profit" in it! :(

2 Timothy 2:23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.

A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

You're way to kind. I've been a royal pain in the rear! George, and Chette are witness to that. I have a lot to learn. I just don't always see it that way, lol. This certainly is a good place to do it.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Actually, I teach folks at my church to how to do evangelism... The funny thing is that all of the non-Calvinists I know are pretty much apathetic about evangelism while claiming Calvinists don't evangelize. Whereas many of the Calvinists I know are much stronger on evangelism.

I find that most non-Calvinists only read books about Calvinism by other non-Calvinists. I think it would be helpful if people read books about Calvinists written be Calvinists. It might give them a greater appreciation for Calvinism.

So you have placed yourself as prosecutor and judge... I think it is clear who your final authority is... YOURSELF. Violation of the 1st and 2nd Commandment.

How is it an oxymoron? How is it compromise? Just because someone disagrees with you does not make it compromise. Compromise is a buzzward like Obama's "change". It is empty of meaning unless clearly explained. How have I compromised?

Claiming any Baptist distinctives while holding the tenets of Reformed Theology in light of history's accounts of persecution of Baptists by the Reformers-Calvinists, and theological disparities is for lack of better(worse) words, an oxymoron-compromise. You could put hypocrite in there also. Kind of like professing Christianity, and voting for "change"-Obama.

Compromise a "buzzword"??? Only if you're not clear on your convictions.

e.g., quotes by ericwgreene

"I know what my KJV says and I stand by it"

"Personally, I prefer the ESV."

"I myself am a Reformed -Baptist"

"my convictions have changed"

"I choose to reference the works of many different theological perspectives to deepen:confused: both my own convictions but also to understand the perspective of others."

A review of true history will reveal to you that Baptists were largely reformed at the outset. Only at the end of the 19th century did they really begin to change. By and large - non-reformed Baptists either become liberal (Liberty University) or legalistic (IFB movement).

Secondly, compromise is having convictions but ignoring them to be accepted by others. Changing a conviction is not compromise. Only those who have never learned have never had a change of heart/mind on any matter. Truly, all people rejected Christ before receiving Him. Therefore all of us must be compromisers if the definition of compromise is change of conviction.

I think you will find he used HOLY SCRIPTURE! as final authority and Judge.
you have Judged a brother by "yourself" and not by scripture.

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.
Brother George admonished with scripture, he did not JUDGE of himself, but through ALMIGHTY GOD'S written word.
Your posts on this forum have been the very underlined, join a forum, post contention, then leave.
Romans 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
You straight out judged a brother of the two most important commandments without any scripture!

Thats wonderful that you can share things from your own pilgrimige, but please use the "search" feature on the forum. But what you are sharing has been raised in many posts on this forum, and I for one am tired of the contention it brings.

You asked me in a previous post what my understanding of "lordship salvation" was, my understanding is this.
Lordship salvation, is the teaching that a sinner must forsake their sins to be saved
Your site follows the "way of the master" teaching of Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron the following is a statement from Ray Comforts site.

Source: http://www.livingwaters.com/good/022.shtml

Do you sin? Did you forsake your sins to be saved? Do you live a sinless life?
On the same webpage Ray Comfort calls salvation the "free gift of eternal life" yet his words add works to that "free Gift"


Romans 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
Ephesians 2:8
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Your agenda here is strife and contention, its obvious from your posts. In case you didn't realise, this forum is for KJB Believers! why even bother posting on such a site if you don't hold the KJB as the inerrant word of God?

The problem with following the teaching of Ray Comfort is, in most things he is spot on regarding scripture, but when it comes to salvation and eternal salvation , he is way of the mark.
I will agree with you that we do, of course need pastors, evangelists, teachers
Ephesians 4:11,12 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
BUT notice that the Apostle Paul says straight afterward

Ephesians 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
I personally don't take much to do with "celebrity" Christians, never have done, I concentrate on the Bible and my instruction from the Holy Spirit of God, however, I do take on board the instruction of learned brothers, who have made themselves of NO reputation

Philippians 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:


If you wish to follow Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron, that is your business, but please do not come onto this forum and propogate their teaching. This forum consists of a bunch of sinners from all walks of life and all areas of God's Glorious earth and we are all just trying to get by as best we can through our Saviour's Grace and written word until our LORD comes for us or calls us home.

Ecclesiastes 10:1 Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savour: so doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisdom and honour.

Re: ericwgreene
 

Aloha to all on the Forum,

If you will – please read the following definitions and see if they don’t apply to certain people who have joined this Forum over the past few months:


Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
soph·ist·ry - noun, plural -ries.

1. a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning.
2. a false argument; sophism.


American Heritage Dictionary
soph·is·try - n. pl. soph·is·tries

1. Plausible but fallacious argumentation.
2. A plausible but misleading or fallacious argument.

WordNet
sophistry – noun

a deliberately invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone [syn: sophism]


Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
Sophistry

Soph"ist*ry\, n. [OE. sophistrie, OF. sophisterie.]
1. The art or process of reasoning; logic. [Obs.]
2. The practice of a sophist; fallacious reasoning; reasoning sound in appearance only.

Quote:

The juggle of sophistry consists, for the most part, in using a word in one sense in the premise, and in another sense in the conclusion. --Coleridge.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
cas·u·ist·ry – noun, plural -ries.

1. specious, deceptive, or oversubtle reasoning, esp. in questions of morality; fallacious or dishonest application of general principles; sophistry.

2. the application of general ethical principles to particular cases of conscience or conduct.


American Heritage Dictionary
ca·su·ist·ry
n. pl. ca·su·ist·ries

1. Specious or excessively subtle reasoning intended to rationalize or mislead.
2. The determination of right and wrong in questions of conduct or conscience by analyzing cases that illustrate general ethical rules.

WordNet
casuistry - noun

1. argumentation that is specious or excessively subtle and intended to be misleading
2. moral philosophy based on the application of general ethical principles to resolve moral dilemmas


Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
Casuistry

Cas"u*ist*ry\, a. 1. The science or doctrine of dealing with cases of conscience, of resolving questions of right or wrong in conduct, or determining the lawfulness or unlawfulness of what a man may do by rules and principles drawn from the Scriptures, from the laws of society or the church, or from equity and natural reason; the application of general moral rules to particular cases.

The consideration of these nice and puzzling question in the science of ethics has given rise, in modern times, to a particular department of it, distinguished by the title of casuistry. --Stewart.

Quote:

Casuistry in the science of cases (i.e., oblique deflections from the general rule). --De Quincey.

2. Sophistical, equivocal, or false reasoning or teaching in regard to duties, obligations, and morals.


Our “friend” (I use the word “loosely”) ericwgreene fits the above description perfectly, and that is why I called him a “Sophist”. I try not to use words carelessly or make accusations lightly, BUT, there comes a time to “call a spade a spade” and let the cards fall where they may.

People, like ericw, do not come to this Forum to “edify” or to “learn” – they come to debate and argue (as evidenced by the number of Posts they post per day). Our “friend” ericw has an astounding 14+ posts per day! It is a sad and tragic fact of life that the U.S.A. has become a nation of Sophists (due to the government school system & media), which simply means that practically everyone is their own FINAL AUTHORITY in all matters.

After dealing with Sophists and Casuists for 50 years, I have discovered that there is NO “cure” for Sophistry & Casuistry, and there is NO “changing” a Sophist! You CANNOT win an argument with a Sophist, and unless God intervenes they will remain that way their entire lives.

Once I find out a man (or woman) is a Sophist I cease dealing with them (there is NO PROFIT in endless debate or arguments) and once they find out that I refuse to engage them, they move on seeking their next “victim” to mislead and deceive.



Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
soph·ist - noun

1. often initial capital letter! Greek History.

a. any of a class of professional teachers in ancient Greece who gave instruction in various fields, as in general culture, rhetoric, politics, or disputation.

b. a person belonging to this class at a later period who, while professing to teach skill in reasoning, concerned himself with ingenuity and speciouseffectiveness rather than soundness of argument.

2. a person who reasons adroitly and speciously rather than soundly.

3. a philosopher


American Heritage Dictionary
soph·ist – n.

1. 1. One skilled in elaborate and devious argumentation.
   2. A scholar or thinker.
2. Sophist Any of a group of professional fifth-century B.C. Greek philosophers and teachers who speculated on theology, metaphysics, and the sciences, and who were later characterized by Plato as superficial manipulators of rhetoric and dialectic.
3. 
   [Middle English sophiste, from Latin sophista, from Greek sophistēs, from sophizesthai, to become wise, from sophos, clever.]

Online Etymology Dictionary
sophist

1542, earlier sophister (c.1380), from L. sophista, sophistes, from Gk. sophistes, from sophizesthai "to become wise or learned," from sophos "wise, clever," of unknown origin. Gk. sophistes came to mean "one who gives intellectual instruction for pay," and, contrasted with "philosopher," it became a term of contempt. Ancient sophists were famous for their clever, specious arguments.


WordNet
sophist

1. any of a group of Greek philosophers and teachers in the 5th century BC who speculated on a wide range of subjects

2. someone whose reasoning is subtle and often specious [syn: casuist]



Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
cas·u·ist – noun

1. an oversubtle or disingenuous reasoner, esp. in questions of morality.
2. a person who studies and resolves moral problems of judgment or conduct arising in specific situations.


American Heritage Dictionary
ca·su·ist – n.

A person who is expert in or given to casuistry.


Online Etymology Dictionary
casuist
1609, "one who studies and resolves cases of conscience," from Fr. casuiste, from L. casus (see case (1)). Often in a sinister or contemptuous

Quote:

"Casuistry ... destroys, by distinctions and exceptions, all morality, and effaces the essential difference between right and wrong." [Bolingbroke, 1736]

WordNet
casuist - noun

someone whose reasoning is subtle and often specious


Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
Casuist

Cas"u*ist\, n. [L. casus fall, case; cf. F. casuiste. See Casual.]

One who is skilled in, or given to, casuistry.

Quote:

The judgment of any casuist or learned divine concerning the state of a man's soul, is not sufficient to give him confidence. --South.

Our "friend" ericw is a Calvinist Philosopher, who will not be "persuaded" of the truth, even if we were to spend the whole of the remaining year trying to show it to him. He will persist with his heresies and false teachings as long as we persist in dealing with him. Remember: We cannot change a Sophist; and we cannot win an argument with a Sophist! They have no interest in the TRUTH, their only interest is to "argue" and "debate"! :mad:

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" [Jeremiah 17:9]

George,

I was just about to post that Eric was a troll, I'll guess you hit the nail on the head about times with your last post.

I thought I might as well add this to the list.

As an example this topic is called the Ruckman Reference Bible. Do you guys see how far Eric the troll has took this and other post off topic. Not only is Eric a troll, he is an apostate troll. The most vile of all trolls.


:D


Atlas