[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

The Bible Believers Bulletin has actually been online for at least 3-4 years, the accessibility and visibility of the Bulletins has varied at times. I have always enjoyed reading the Bulletin, agree or disagree with various points, and must have missed or bypassed any Polish jokes the first few years. Perhaps the Lord Jesus shielded my sensitive eyes and ears. (Hmm.. my grandparents on my dad's side were from the Kracow region .. do we view that as Poland or the Austria-Hungary region of the times ?)

Personally I heard Peter Ruckman speak one night about two years ago in a church in Connecticut, it was a fine evening, and I picked up a CD of an earlier night that had been more about the Bible versions issues. On the web I was kicked off a couple of Ruckman-oriented forums some years back, in circumstances that I remember with a bit of a smile and more. Most of my reading of his material has been the Bible Believers Bulletin and some articles here and there, I have never quite plunged for "Manuscript Evidences" and books like that. I am not sure that on the technical level they will offer much that I don't have now from other sources more accurately and deeper (based on the material that I have read) however I am sure his 'pure Bible' books would generally be an interesting read with lots of excellent analysis and exposition.

What I hope to find on KJB boards is more of a fair and interesting discussion of his views and influence on the pure Bible understanding, strengths and weaknesses analyzed, teachings shared. Instead there is what appears to me to be almost incessant chatter about issues I find far less interesting. Does Peter Ruckman have some oddball doctrines in his books ? Possibly in some realms, I would have to research it. Has this been good or bad in his personal life ? I really dunno. Does he attack some folks that are generally pro-KJB too quickly or too harshly ? I can think of a couple of cases where you might say yes to that and perhaps one friend has been on the receiving end. And I did meet David Cloud once in my earlier King James Bible days and enjoyed the chat. Does Peter Ruckman speak harshly ? Well, he was fine in the talk and tape I heard.

True, the Bible Believers Bulletin uses "Alexandrian Cult" a lot. And I hesitated on that for some years, until I got more involved with the pure Bible issue, and I saw that this was a solid and true way to describe the fog of confusion and illogic and rebellion against the word of God that takes hold of the anti-pure-KJB folks. Personally I use the phrase sparingly. Yet I appreciate that Peter Ruckman shares that insight consistently.

What I would like to see more discussed is his views on the Bible. Clearly he has almost single-handedly raised the bar so that anyone who tries to pit "the Greek" (sounds like "the Bears") against the King James Bible will be challenged. And I think this is a very good thing, and likely this is the source of a lot of the discomfit. This is rarely discussed (other than to try to find to criticize a "double inspiration" quote from Ruckman).

Just glancing at the March BBB I see a number of interesting points already. No Fundamental Doctrines Affected is a very good article worthy of a careful read. The Final Authority for Choosing the Final Authority is a good read. In the Bulletin he states his position on Ruth 3:15 that he and she are both acceptable and true (something that many here would disagree with).

And there is at least one area in the Bible discussion where I think Peter Ruckman (and Sam Gipp) has taken a position that is scholarly uncomfortable. That is the 'LXX as myth' view, where I think the majors are minored and the uncertains are declared too dogmatically. And taking this hardline hard-to-defend view can actually hurt the fascinating explanation of why the Greek OT is totally deficient and not the source of New Testament quotations.

There is a lot in the Bible Believers Bulletin that I skim without much comment. Also there are articles that I find fascinating, and read carefully. Like the series about places where the English corrects the Greek. By reading and analyzing those articles we could really learn a lot, have a lot to discuss, whether we agree with this or disagree with that. Yet I have never seen this done, even on a pro-King James Bible forum.

My interest on these types of boards is really to discuss his articles with respect and fairness. After all, he did pave the way, in modern times, for the right and peace and comfort to declare clearly and fully :

"the King James Bible in my hand is the pure and perfect word of God"

Without having to look over our shoulder for "the Greek" or the approval of "the seminarian". And without adding the scholarly nuances and approval (and less strong position) of a Edward Hills type of textual theorist.

And I appreciate that Peter Ruckman has paved the way to be able to make such a declaration in defense of God's pure and perfect word.

Shalom,
Steven