[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

The issue isn't so much whether there is a sense of irony (imho, not really joking, more irony) in some of the usages of 'advanced revelation' by Peter Ruckman, the issue is how so much is put under this heading unclearly, especially by the critics.

e.g. Rick Norris thinks that the idea that the italicized words are fully scripture constitutes Peter Ruckman "advanced revelation".

Preferably without switching to a discussion of Gail Riplinger, please note:

Rick Norris
Riplinger seems to hold to the same unscriptural advanced revelation view as Peter Ruckman. In an earlier book, Riplinger even suggested that the words in italics in the KJV should be regarded as inspired. She wrote: "The veracity of the italics in the KJV have been proven true to such a degree that this author feels no need to pick them out and set them apart as uninspired"

In this article .. italicized words .. is what Rick Norris comes up with, with all his meticulous critiques of anything he can try to come up with under the sun.

Yet many on this forum would agree that we make no scriptural authority distinction between the italicized words and straight fonts. So we would be similarly accused. Whether or not we used the phrase 'advanced revelation', we would happily be guilty as charged of considering every single word as full pure and perfect scripture.

Check the web. Most critics don't give any examples at all. And the Bible Believers Bulletin, available on the net, gives a good dozen or two examples in depth, in a series of articles from Peter Ruckman, of where the English King James Bible is superior to "the Greek" (allowing for "the Greek" to be a term with many usages itself).

Now we may not agree with his examples (I felt they were generally good solid examples when I looked at them a while back). However anybody who is critiquing the Peter Ruckman view in comparing the King James Bible and the "original language texts" should actually address the examples he meticulously gives.

Now granted, this phrase "advanced revelation" seems to pull multi-duty, from italics, to English clarity where Greek is uncertain and less clear, to various other original language fuzziness issues. And then to actual doctrines, interpretations of Peter Ruckman, with which we may agree or disagree. (And most of us likely disagree with many.) The last batch does complicate the issue because the same term is being used for his specific interps. For the purposes here we should be discussing examples that are directly off of the English King James Bible text differentiations from the Greek or Hebrew.

(One personal example: I have even tried to study out whether "faith in Christ" and "faith of Christ" in the King James Bible .. perfect translation doctrinally with the proper and significant distinction .. are simply properly reflecting the simple and true Greek grammar differentiation that is lost by many modern doofus scholars. Modern textcrit-seminarian scholarship becomes so confused that they can barely even understand the question, much less yet give the answer.)

Personally I do not see any reason to get all concerned, in a huff, about the phrase "advanced revelation" or a phrase like "alexandrian cult". Simply look at the examples and consider them. If you consider them fallacious say why. If you dunno, say dunno. If you agree, and you don't like the term "advanced revelation" then offer your new, superior phrase for the phenomenon of English King James Bible textual clarity, majesty, perfection .. untrumped by any Greek or other language, and the KJB clearer and more able to be understood.

Before finishing this post, I am looking for any other examples discussed on the web, in addition to the Rick Norris attack on the italicized words of the Holy Bible.

In one article Peter Ruckman uses the term "advanced revelation" in a discussion of hyperdispensationalism. However it is not referring to a specific English-superior King James Bible teaching, so it is being used with another sense.

In another article John Henry, very solidly pro-KJB, distances himself from Peter Ruckman for "advanced revelation" for the King James Bible .. without a single discussion of examples or context or usage of the phrase.

Anyway, the examples in Bible Believers Bulletin are available for reading and discussion. Perhaps examples like - 2 Cor. 2:17 and "peddle" vs. "corrupt", one of the few examples given on the web in discussions of Peter Ruckman. Given in a Thomas Holland - James White discussion.

Interestingly, Thomas Holland discussed this very nicely, without trying to create an artificial distance from the Peter Ruckman view of the English and Greek on the verse.

http://members.aol.com/DrTHolland/1995letter.html
1995 Response Letter To White - Thomas Holland

Shalom,
Steven