What About Peter Ruckman?

[Praus]

What About Ruckman?
Copyright 2012 by David W. Cloud
This edition January 2012
ISBN 1-58318-032-X

link -> What About Ruckman?

This book is published for free distribution in eBook format. It is available in PDF, MOBI (for Kindle, etc.), and ePUB formats from the Way of Life web site.

Published by Way of Life Literature, PO Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143 (toll free) - fbns@wayoflife.org
link -> Way of Life Literature

Canada: Bethel Baptist Church, 4212 Campbell St. N., London Ont. N6P 1A6, 519-652-2619
Printed in Canada by Bethel Baptist Print Ministry

Introduction

This report was published in its first edition in O Timothy magazine, Vol. 11, Issue 11, 1984.

______________​

Peter Ruckman, whose headquarters is in Pensacola, Florida, is the author of many books in defense of the King James Bible, and for good or bad his name has become intimately associated with this issue.

On January 24, 1985, I wrote to Dr. Ruckman from the mission field in South Asia and told him that I believed he had done more damage to the cause of the King James Bible than many of its detractors. I said:

“...your writings--because of the spirit in which they are given--actually make me desire to flee from whatever beliefs you are propounding. I sincerely fear ... that you have done more damage to the cause of the truth of the preservation of the Textus Receptus and the faithful translations thereof than have the enemies of this position.”​

I know these words make even some of my friends cringe, but I still believe this. Why? Because his strange thinking, his multiple divorces, his angry spirit, his arrogance, his Alexandrian cult mentality, his extremism regarding the KJV being advanced revelation, and his bizarre private doctrines tend to cause men to reject the entire issue.

Dr. Ruckman’s teaching has also caused many unnecessary divisions and problems in churches. It is one thing if a Christian tries to stand for the King James Bible and leaves a church that does not so stand, but it is quite another matter if a Christian becomes caught up in Ruckman’s peculiar doctrines and harsh spirit and comes to the conclusion that his church is apostate merely because it does not accept all of the jots and tittles of Ruckman’s thinking even though it is a church that does not use or defend the modern versions.

An example of this occurred Bethel Baptist Church in London, Ontario. Pastor Wilbert Unger stands unhesitatingly for the King James Bible, but he does not swallow Ruckman’s doctrines. To many Ruckman followers, though, if a man does not believe about the KJV what Ruckman believes and does not accept the KJV as “advanced revelation” that can correct even the Greek and Hebrew from which it was translated and as the apex of Bible infallibility, he is not a true Bible believer. To believe that the KJV is an accurate translation of the preserved Word of God is not enough. Some years ago the printer for Bethel Baptist Church began reading some of Ruckman’s books and came to this conclusion. He felt that Bethel was not a Bible believing church and he began talking to some of the members, promoting Ruckman’s views, stirring up trouble. He finally left the church because of this and left a gap in the printing ministry which the Lord had led the church to start.

This type of thing has happened frequently, sometimes resulting in church splits.

Let me also say that not every man who appreciates Peter Ruckman is a quarrelsome church splitter. I know several gracious Christian gentlemen who appreciate Dr. Ruckman to some degree. They particularly appreciate the fact that the man stands for an infallible Bible in a confused, wicked hour. They appreciate the fact that he has stirred the pot and caused some to look at the Bible version issue, and they are willing to overlook his problems.

While each man must make up his own mind, I don’t believe an extreme position on an issue is a blessing to that issue, and I don’t believe a mean-spirited defense of the truth furthers the truth.

Ruckman’s Errors

For the record, I want to list the Ruckmanisms that I reject and the reasons why I believe that the man is dangerous.

KJV Is Advanced Revelation

Consider some of Ruckman’s statements to this effect:

“The A.V. 1611 reading, here, is superior to any Greek text” (Peter Ruckman, The Christian’s Handbook of Manuscript Evidence, Pensacola Bible Press, 1970, p. 118).​

“Mistakes in the A.V. 1611 are advanced revelation!” (Ruckman, Manuscript Evidence, p. 126).​

“A short handbook, such as this, will not permit an exhaustive account of the marvelous undesigned ‘coincidences’ which have slipped through the A.V. 1611 committees, unawares to them, and which give advanced light, and advanced revelation beyond the investigation of the greatest Bible students 300 year later” (Ruckman, Manuscript Evidence, p. 127).​

“A little English will clear up the obscurities in any Greek text” (Ruckman, Manuscript Evidence, p. 147).​

“If all you have is the ‘original Greek,’ you lose light” (Ruckman, Manuscript Evidence, p. 336).​

“If you are able to obtain a copy [of Ruckman’s proposed new book] you will have, in your hands, a minimum of 200 advanced revelations that came from the inerrant English text, that were completely overlooked (or ignored) by every major Christian scholar since 90 A.D.” (Bible Believers’ Bulletin, Jan. 1994, pp. 2, 4).​

“We shall deal with the English Text of the Protestant Reformation, and our references to Greek or Hebrew will only be made to enforce the authority of that text or to demonstrate the superiority of that text to Greek and Hebrew” (Peter Ruckman, Problem Texts, Preface, Pensacola Bible Institute Press, 1980, p. vii).​

“Observe how accurately and beautifully the infallible English text straightens out Erasmus, Griesbach, Beza, Nestle, Aland, Metzger, Trench, Vincent, Davis, Wuest, Zodhiates, Elzevir, and Stephanus with the poise and grace of a swan as it smoothly and effectively breaks your arm with one flap of its wings. Beautiful, isn’t it? If the mood or tense isn’t right in any Greek text, the King James Bible will straighten it out in a hurry” (Ruckman, Problem Texts, pp. 348, 349).​

“The original Hebrew had nothing to do with Genesis 1:1-3 at all [referring to Ruckman’s heresy that the flood of 2 Peter 3:5-6 speaks of a flood that took place in Genesis 1:2]. It only muddied the issue. Hebrew is of no help at all in understanding the passage” (Peter Ruckman, The Unknown Bible, Bible Baptist Bookstore, 1984, p. 67).​

“The King James test is the last and final statement that God has given to the world, and He has given it in the universal language of the 20th century ... The truth is that GOD SLAMMED THE DOOR OF REVELATION SHUT IN 389 BC AND SLAMMED IT SHUT AGAIN IN 1611” (Peter Ruckman, The Monarch of Books, Pensacola, 1973, p. 9). [Brother Cloud: In fact, God slammed the door of revelation shut in about 90 A.D. with the completion of the New Testament.]​

If Ruckman is right, where was the infallible Word of God prior to 1611? What did the churches do from the time of the apostles until the 17th century? And what did they do before Ruckman came upon the scene to create this doctrine, because it is certain that no one taught it at an earlier date?

And if Ruckman is right and the Lord slammed the door of revelation shut in 1611 and if the KJV was “infallible” and “inerrant” in 1611, why is the edition we use today revised? If the KJV was inerrant in 1611 that would seem to mean that even the italics and spelling and punctuation was perfect, but it was modified in thousands of places. Between 1762-69 an extensive revision was carried out by Cambridge and Oxford Universities. The majority of the changes pertained to the correction of printing errors (e.g., “seek good” in Psalm 69:32 was changed to “seek God) and updating spelling (such as dropping the Old English “e” after the verb--feare, blinde, sinne) and expanding the use of italics.

Hundreds of the changes to the KJV that were made in the 18th century were more substantial, such as the following:
• 1 Samuel 16:12 -- “requite good” changed to “requite me good”
• Esther 1:8 -- “for the king” changed to “for so the king”
• Isaiah 47:6 -- “the” changed to “thy”
• Isaiah 49:13 -- “God” changed to “Lord”
• Isaiah 57:8 “made a” changed to “made thee a”
• Ezekiel 3:11 -- “the people” changed to “the children of thy people”
• Naham 3:17 -- “the crowned” changed to “thy crowned”
• Acts 8:32 -- “shearer” changed to “his shearer”
• Acts 16:1 -- “which was a Jew” changed to “which was a Jewess”
• 1 Peter 2:5 -- “sacrifice” changed to “sacrifices”
• Jude 25 -- “now and ever” changed to “both now and ever”

Peter Ruckman and his followers need to explain what the terms “infallible” and “inerrant” mean when used to describe the King James Bible. Does it apply to spelling? Does it apply to the italics?

They need to tell us exactly which edition of the KJV is infallible and inerrant.

If they say that the 1611 itself was infallible and inerrant, they need to explain why they don’t use the exact 1611 today.

The KJV Is Given by Inspiration

In The Christian’s Handbook of Biblical Scholarship, pp. 271-272, Ruckman claims: “The King James Bible was ‘given by inspiration of God.’”

This is to confuse inspiration--which is a process whereby the Scriptures were given through holy men of old--with preservation, which is the process whereby God has kept the Scriptures since their original inspiration.

2 Timothy 3:16 refers to the giving of the Scripture.

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.”​

The process of inspiration is further described in 2 Peter 1:20-21:

“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”​

These passages do not describe the copying of Scripture texts or the making of translations.

It is the doctrine of preservation that guarantees that the God would watch over the divinely-inspired Scripture to preserve it for future generations (Psa. 12:6-7; 100:5; Mat. 5:18; 24:35; etc.). This is the process whereby God preserved the Scripture in the Hebrew and Greek texts and in accurately translated versions.

The King James Bible is the preserved Word of God in English insofar as it is an accurate translation of the divinelyinspired Word of God in Greek and Hebrew, not because it was "given by inspiration" in 1611 and thus became "advanced revelation."

Justifying Multiple Divorces

Peter Ruckman has been divorced two times and married three times yet he has been a pastor all along and he defends his unscriptural marital status in his book on divorce and remarriage and mocks those who challenge his qualification.

His first marriage was before his conversion, and it ended in 1962 when his wife left him and filed for divorce. He began pastoring the Brent Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida, soon after that.

In 1972 Ruckman married the divorced wife of one of his former students. When a vote was taken in Brent Baptist as to whether the congregation supported his second marriage, 200 voted for it and 100 opposed it.

He subsequently resigned and started the Bible Baptist Church in Pensacolain 1974 with 17 people.

In 1988 Ruckman's second marriage ended when his wife walked out and sued for divorce.

Ruckman’s third marriage was to a member of his church, a mother of three.

Divorces do not take place in a vacuum. They take place in an environment filled with anger, carnality, hostility, bitterness, and sin. That is not judgmentalism; it is fact. Some of my divorced friends confess this as forcefully as I do. In fact, consider how Ruckman himself describes his family life in days gone by:

“I have had two wives desert me after fifteen years of marriage ... I have been in court custody cases, where seven children’s futures were held in the balance; in situations where Gospel articles were being torn out of typewriters, Biblical artwork torn off the easels, women trying to throw themselves out of cars at fifty m.p.h., mailing wedding rings back in the middle of revival services, cutting their wrists, threatening to leave if I did not give my church to their kinfolk; deacons threatening to burn down my house and beat me up; children in split custody between two domiciles two hundred miles apart, and knock-down, drag-out arguments in the home sometimes running as long as three days” (The Last Grenade, p. 339).​

That is what the man admits took place. That is only a small glimpse into the sin and confusion surrounding those years. Friends, you can label me a judge if you want, but a man with that type of family life has no business in the pastorate. Let him preach on the streets. Let him preach in the jails. Let him preach in the nursing homes. Let him preach in other ways, but we must obey the Bible and reserve the pastorate for men who have godly homes.

Ruckman mocks those who call for high standards for the pastorate and who don’t believe a divorced man fits God’s requirements for the office. He calls them hypocrites and Pharisees. Consider how he describes his third marriage:

“... we got married in a regular Sunday night service after the offering was taken up: bridesmaids, wedding cake, rice, shaving cream on the car, the whole works. Standing room only. I WAS FLAUNTING MY FAITH IN THE FACE OF THE APOSTATE FUNDAMENTALISTS WHO WERE GOING TO ‘CASH IN’ ON MY MARRIAGE” (Ruckman, The Full Cup, p. 280).​

On page 211 of his biography, Dr. Ruckman says that those who ask the question, “Do you think a divorced preacher is qualified for the ministry,” are “SELF-RIGHTEOUS PHARISEES.”

This mocking, ungodly attitude has encouraged other men that it’s O.K. to be divorced and remain in the pastorate and even to flaunt the same before anyone who disagrees. Yes, sadly, many have followed Ruckman’s lead.

 

[Praus]

Men Are Saved in Different Ways

Ruckman claims that men are saved in different ways in different dispensations.

He believes men were saved by Christ's blood plus works in the Old Testament, that they will be saved by faith plus works in the Tribulation, and that they will be saved by works alone in the Millennium.

In Millions Disappear: Fact or Fiction? Ruckman says:

“If the Lord comes and you remain behind, then start working like a madman to get to heaven, because you’re going to have to. ... You must keep the Ten Commandments (all of them, Ecclesiastes 12:13), keep the Golden Rule (1 John 3:10), give your money to the poor, get baptized, take up your cross, hold out to the end of the Tribulation, wait for Jesus Christ to show up at the Battle of Armageddon, and be prepared to die for what you believe. In the Tribulation you cannot be saved by grace alone, like you could before the Rapture.”​

Romans 4:1-8 plainly states that both Abraham before the law and David under the law were saved by faith without works.

“What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.”​

This is the only plan of salvation God ever has had and ever will have: salvation by grace alone through faith alone based upon the shed blood of Jesus Christ alone.

The Old Testament saints did not know what the New Testament saint knows, but Romans 4 makes it plain that the Old Testament saints were saved by faith without works. Like Abraham, they believed God and it was counted unto them for righteousness.

Those who are saved in the coming Tribulation will also be saved through faith in the blood of Jesus Christ.

“These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” (Rev. 7:14).​

For more on this see the chapter “Salvation Is the Same in the Old Testament and the New Testament”

Strange, Fleshly Name Calling

Some of the choice names Ruckman calls men who disagree with him are the following:
• “jackass”
• “poor, dumb, stupid red legs”
• “silly asses”
• “apostolic succession of bloated egotists”
• “two-bit junkies”
• “two-faced, tin-horned punks”
• “incredible idiots”
• “egotistical jack legs”
• “conservative asses whose brains have gone to seed”
• “cheap, two-bit punks”
• “stupid, little, Bible-rejecting apostates”

Dr. Ruckman can get pretty vulgar. He calls the New American Standard Version “more of the same old godless, depraved crap” (Satan’s Masterpiece--the New ASV, p. 67).

In The Unknown Bible, p. 100, Ruckman says, “You see how people get all screwed up?”

Ruckman believes God has called him to speak like this:

“God called me to sit at this typewriter and pour forth VINEGAR, ACID, VITRIOL, AND CLEANING FLUID on the leading conservative and fundamental scholars of 1900 through 1990. ... God is in charge. He ... destines me to sit at this typewriter and LAMBASTE, SCALD AND RIDICULE these Bible rejecting fundamentalists who ‘believe the Bible is the Word of God,’ ... I hereby dedicate myself anew to the task of DESTRUCTIVE CRITICISM AND NEGATIVE BLASTING against every adversary of that Holy Book...” (The Bible Believers Bulletin, Dec. 1985).​

Ruckman’s spirit and language is not scriptural. He is fighting for a holy Book in an unholy manner, and it is confusion.

James 3:13-17 says:

“Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works WITH MEEKNESS OF WISDOM. But if ye have BITTER ENVYING AND STRIFE in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work. But the wisdom that is from above is first PURE, then PEACEABLE, GENTLE, AND EASY TO BE INTREATED, FULL OF MERCY AND GOOD FRUITS, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.”​

My friends, this passage from the King James Bible condemns Ruckmanism. It tells me that Ruckman’s spirit is earthly, sensual, and devilish. Enjoying Ruckman because he “gets after those Bible perverters” is the same carnal spirit as enjoying a good dog fight when the dog you have betted on is the biggest, meanest one around. “Sic ‘em, Pete, sic ‘em!” It is entertaining, and it is satisfying to the flesh, but God says bitter envying and strife is earthly, sensual, devilish. God says heavenly wisdom is peaceable, gentle, and full of mercy.

2 Timothy 2:24-26 says:

“And the servant of the Lord MUST NOT STRIVE: BUT BE GENTLE UNTO ALL MEN, apt to teach, PATIENT, IN MEEKNESS instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.”​

Didn’t the Lord Jesus and the apostles use some strong language? I know what Jesus called the Pharisees in Matthew 23. I have read how Paul, filled with the Spirit, spoke of the false teacher in Acts 13:9-10. I know the severe plainness with which the Spirit of God speaks of false teachers in passages such as 2 Peter 2 and Jude.

But there is a world of difference between the language used in the Bible and the language used by Peter Ruckman. There is a world of difference between the spirit of a Peter and a Paul or a Jude and the spirit of Peter Ruckman.

There is also a distinct difference between the way the Spirit of God deals with a saved but erring man and the way He deals with an unregenerate corrupter of the gospel.

There is a vast difference between the way the Lord Jesus Christ dealt with His own disciples and the way He dealt with the Pharisees. The same distinction is evident in the way that Paul dealt with Peter’s hypocrisy in Galatians 2 and the way he dealt with the unsaved false teacher in Acts 13. Yet Ruckman makes no difference between the Pope, a Christ-denying theological modernist, or an erring fundamental Baptist brother in Christ. He lumps men such as John R. Rice and Stewart Custer together with John Paul II and Karl Barth and treats them in the same ridiculous manner.

Peculiar Doctrines

Ruckman has a proud, cultic attitude that he alone has discovered truths that no one else in church history has discovered.

In bragging up his book The Salient Verses, Mr. Ruckman makes these comments:

“If you are able to obtain a copy [of Ruckman’s proposed new book] you will have, in your hands, a minimum of 200 advanced revelations that came from the inerrant English text, that were completely overlooked (or ignored) by every major Christian scholar since 90 A.D. This would include all of the modern Bible revisers (1800-1999), all of the faculty members and staffs of every major ‘Fundamental’ (Conservative and Evangelical) seminary, university, and college in Europe and America since 1500, and every Greek and Hebrew scholar (or teacher) since 1611. ... Actually, if a Bible believer has this work he will have the accumulated knowledge of Cornelius Stam and Ethelbert Bullinger ... Clarence Larkin and C.I. Scofield, Ewing, Osborne, Tilton, and PTL ... Pember, Peters, Gaebelein, Pentecost, Lindsey, Kirban, Rockwood, Webber, and Van Impe ... plus the Puritans, Reformers, major evangelists (Moody, Sunday, Finney, Torrey, Wesley, etc.) and all that ANY Greek and Hebrew scholar ... ever found out--that was SO--in the last 200 years” (Ruckman, Bible Believers’ Bulletin, Jan. 1994, pp. 2, 4).​

In The Unknown Bible, Ruckman claims to hold to 14 “biblical truths” which all other Bible teachers have overlooked. On page 347, Ruckman modestly claims:

“Do you realize that in these last two chapters, you have learned a dozen things that were unknown to the greatest Bible teachers in the world? In 2000 years of church history, they haven’t even been able to find the passage which dealt with these things we have been talking about.”​

Some of Ruckman’s long-overlooked “biblical truths” include the following:

1. Angels are thirty-three year old males without wings; and all women in the Church Age will receive thirty-three year old male bodies at the Rapture.

2. The plan of salvation for Tribulation saints is faith plus works and the plan of salvation in the Millennium is works alone.

3. When the believer is born again, his soul is literally cut loose from the inside of his fleshly body. (Ruckman takes spiritual circumcision very literally!)

4. Demons are winged creatures ranging in size from that of flies to eagles. “I know they [demons] have to be small. ... there’s two little animals that have wings. One’s a fly and the other’s a mosquito. Know what these things are? They’re pictures of demons. THE THINGS HAVE WINGS” (Ruckman, Demons and Christians, Bible Baptist Bookstore, 1976, side 1).

5. Sexual unions constitute marriage in God’s sight.

6. The soul is an invisible bodily shape. “The problem is the word ‘soul,’ but since there isn’t one pre-millennial, soul winning, fundamentalist who knows what a soul is (see the entire library of books published by Eerdmans, Baker, Zondervan, and the Sword of the Lord before 1970) ... The soul in the Bible is an invisible BODILY SHAPE. In the Old Testament, the soul is almost synonymous with the body, for it is STUCK TO IT till death” (Ruckman, Problem Texts, p. 145).

7. The flood mentioned in 2 Peter 3 is not Noah’s flood but is one that supposedly occurred at the judgment of the earth, when Satan was cast out of Heaven. Ruckman admits that no other Bible teacher has held this view: “Now who could get a message so simple all muddled up? Answer: Every major fundamental Bible scholar and teacher in the United States, without one exception. If you were to ask Henry Morris what the verses refer to he’d say Noah’s flood: ditto Harry Rimmer, Clarence Larkin, J. Vernon McGee, Swindle (sic), MacArthur, Bob Jones III ... the Scofield Board of Editors” (Ruckman, The Unknown Bible, p. 67).

8. “God has ordained on this earth 12 boundaries, with 12 nations, who are destined to leave this earth (transported by angels--Luke 16:22), and populate outer space infinitely and forever, beginning with the 12 constellations that are seen on the earth once every 12 months” (The Unknown Bible, p. 588).

9. “In eternity, the Christian is in New Jerusalem; he is in his apartment house that is made out of transparent gold, like clear glass. ... He is called out on trips, and these trips take him to Mars, Jupiter, Venus, Saturn, Uranus, etc. transporting couples into gardens placing them down and saying, ‘be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth’“ (Ibid., p. 592).

Some Ruckmanites have challenged me to refute the Ruckman doctrines we have cited. I don’t have to refute them; they are self refuting for the simple fact that they have no biblical authority, just as Rome’s dogmas of purgatory and the ascension of Mary are self refuting.

Why should we have to refute nonsense? The Bible instructs us to avoid the foolish and unlearned questions of heretics (2 Tim. 2:23; Titus 3:9-11), and Ruckman’s new doctrines certainly fall into this category.

Ruckman and UFOs

According to one of Peter Ruckman’s books, Black Is Beautiful (1996), UFOs are real, and if you doubt it you are an unbeliever like David Cloud.

(He mentions me at least thrice in the book, slanderously lumping me together with men who attack the King James Bible and labeling me an “apostate fundamentalist,” which is his working principle. If Ruckman says two plus two equals five and you don’t agree, you are an unbelieving “jack leg” and a “bloated egotist.”)

Peter Ruckman believes that some of the medieval plagues in Europe were caused by UFOs, that a B-52 bomber was downed by a UFO and that aliens disemboweled the crew members, and that a crew member of a US Navy ship was transported into the future. He believes the CIA has implanted brain transmitters in children, old people, blacks, and prisoners (p. 243) and operates underground alien breeding facilities (p. 256).

He believes in Atlantis (p. 171) and the Bermuda Triangle, time warps (p. 160), creatures with one eye (p. 173), web footed aliens, blue aliens with blue blood (pp. 85, 86), black aliens with green blood (p. 244), and grey aliens with clear blood (pp.310-11).

He believes that Adam originally had water in his veins instead of blood (p. 185).

He believes that the government is involved with UFO animal mutilations (p. 247). He believes that black helicopters carrying UN troops are “circling your homes” with the mission of attacking and imprisoning the populace (p. 233). He believes the U.S. federal government has kidnapped people and kept them alive in “amber liquid” (p. 230). He believes that the CIA flies around in space ships developed from technology gained when the government made a deal with aliens to allow them to kidnap children and use their organs as food and to experiment on U.S. citizens (pp. 291, 295-297).

Ruckman does not use facts; he abuses them. When his arguments are examined carefully and the nonsense and ranting and misused documentation is filtered out, one finds that he often builds his case upon thin air, fables, and half-truths.

Consider one example of his reasoning. An old Bolivian legend tells of a non-human race that had webbed feet. Old comic books about Daffy Duck and Donald Duck depict creatures with webbed feet (p. 85). Therefore, according to Ruckman’s logic, the legend must be true and Donald Duck must be a secret depiction of aliens!

Ruckman concludes his “summary of evidence” with these words
:

“If a twentieth-century college educated American does not believe in UFOs (and UFO occupants) he is MENTALLY SICK. He should see a shrink” (Ruckman, Black Is Beautiful, p. 343, emphasis in original).​

If that is so, then please make me an appointment!

For 39 years, since I was converted by the grace of Jesus Christ, my sole authority has been the Bible, and the bottom line is that the Bible says nothing about UFOs and therefore it is not something I need to concern myself with, because the Bible is able to make me “perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works” (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

The verses that Ruckman cites in support of UFOS are taken out of context and grossly misused, not even remotely supporting such nonsense (e.g., Gen. 6:1-5; 2 Sam. 5:24; 2 Ki. 2:11; Isa. 14:29; Ezek. 1:4; Zech. 5:1-3).

Ruckman believes that the aliens are demons who are preparing to take control during the Tribulation and he cites Revelation 9:2-3, but this does not describe UFOs and it has nothing to do with events in our day. Revelation 9 describes demons who are currently imprisoned rather than appearing on earth.

Beware of men who claim to have found brand new things in the Bible that no one has seen in 2,000 years. As we have seen, Ruckman has entire books of such claims.

That is delusion and arrogance, and pride goeth before a fall.

The Lord Jesus Christ and the apostles did not teach God’s people to worry about UFOs or to rage against the government. They taught us to honor those in authority and submit to them (Rom. 13:1-7; 1 Pet. 2:13-25), to live obedient and holy lives and to dedicate our lives to preaching the gospel to the ends of the earth until Christ returns (Mat. 28:18-20; Acts 1:8). You don’t see the apostle Paul ranting against the Roman Empire and mocking its emperor.

Someone who has read Ruckman’s book might be saying, “Brother Cloud, do you believe the United States is a godly country?” Of course it is not. “Don’t you believe the USA is coming under the control of global powers?” Of course it is. “Don’t you believe there are international conspiracies?” Of course there are. “Do you believe the mainstream media gives out the truth?” Of course I do not.

But none of this adds up to blue-blooded aliens and the CIA conducting experiments in alien cloning!

Dear friends in Christ, beware of the cultic element in the independent Baptist movement. Peter Ruckman has been able to prosper because there are so many gullible men who are responsive to the cultic entrancement of bombastic self promoters.

Those who honor Christ more than man and whose sole authority is truly the Bible and whose ultimate Teacher is the indwelling Spirit (1 John 2:27) will mot be deceived by pompous deceivers.

Conclusion

While I have serious problems with Dr. Ruckman, I also have serious problems with many of his detractors. Many of Ruckman’s most bitter enemies are trying to discredit the idea that there is an authoritative Bible anywhere in the world. They have their own rotten agenda, undermining men’s faith in the preservation of God’s Word (in any practical sense) and attempting to pollute their minds with the strange, unscriptural, convoluted theories of modern textual criticism.

“Who, then, can we trust?” some might be thinking? The Word of God says, “Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm ... Blessed is the man that trusteth in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord is” (Jer. 17:5, 7).

Man is imperfect even at his best. Our confidence must be in Jesus Christ and in His eternal Word. Let no man shake your confidence in that.

 

[Praus]

TEACHINGS OF PETER RUCKMAN
The CORNERSTONE CHALLENGE, April 2000, Cornerstone Baptist Church - Home
CORNERSTONE BAPTIST CHURCH, P.O. BOX 438, BELMONT, MA 02478 , Rolland C. Starr, Pastor

link -> http://www.cornerstonebaptistmetroboston.org/attachments/File/Topics/Ruckman.pdf

WHY THIS ARTICLE? Why bother to take up such a subject? Well, one reason is that I am often asked if I believe what Ruckman believes (especially about the KJV). I assure you I don't! In fact, there are a good many areas of disagreement. Also, people frequently ask about the man and what he believes. Then, many have been misled through his teachings. Because he takes a stand on the KJV (though a perverted one) and he seems to have some truth, new Christians and those untutored in the Word sometimes believe his errors. Another reason is there are times when it is necessary to sound the alarm; something that few are willing to do. It is widely known that to reveal any of his heresies will bring down a large dose of vitriol (which he claims God has called him to dish out). Well, I have been vilified by better people than Peter Ruckman. Before I get into the problem areas, I do want to say that I know some good men who hold to one or more similar beliefs. They are not bitter and divisive (like many of his followers) nor do they hold to all of the erroneous doctrines of Mr. Ruckman. I know some preachers who went to Mr. Ruckman's school years ago. Much of the false teaching has been added since.

RUCKMAN'S POSITION ON THE BIBLE. First of all let me say that I believe that the King James Bible is the inspired, infallible, preserved Word of God. But it was not given by inspiration as the originals; the translators never claimed such. It is not an original but a translation of what had already been inspired and given by God. However, since it is an accurate copy of those writings, it is obviously the inspired Word of God. It is not one bit inferior to the originals, nor is it any better. How can an exact copy, of a perfect original, be better? Yet Mr. Ruckman believes that the KJV was inspired as were the originals. He says that it is actually better than the originals and that you can even correct the Hebrew and Greek with the KJV. How can you correct what is perfect? He writes: "The truth is that God slammed the door of revelation shut in 389 BC and He slammed it shut again in 1611." This goes along with another one of his far-fetched claims that the KJV gives "advanced light and advanced revelation..." That is heresy! God's revelation was closed about 95 A.D. with the Book of Revelation and there is no "advanced revelation" beyond that. Of course, cultic individuals always claim to have some information or insight that no one else has. If you do not adhere to what Mr. Ruckman teaches, you are an apostate and you will also be called a few choice names; possibly "jackass," "silly asses," "some incredible idiot," among a long list of slanders for those who disagree with him.

RUCKMAN'S OTHER HERESIES. There are too many to give here, but we will list a number of the more obvious ones. Mr. Ruckman says that people were saved different ways in different times. By the way, he is a dispensationalist, but the last I heard he taught there were eleven dispensations. He teaches that men were saved in the Old Testament by faith plus works. For example, Noah was saved because he obeyed God and built an ark, not simply because he believed God. According to him, in this age, we are saved by grace; but in the Tribulation men will be saved by faith and works, while in the Millennium salvation will be based on works alone. In a booklet he put out on the Rapture he asks what a person should do if he misses the Rapture. He says that he should work like crazy and keep the commandments of God for this is the only way he can be saved. This means people will be in heaven who made it without Christ and His sacrifice! That is heresy! In Rev. 5:9, it says, "Thou (Christ) art worthy..." Period! This is at the Throne of God; there are people there from all different ages. It's so plain: "There is none righteous, no not one!" Rom. 3:10 (which is a quote of Ps.14:3). The eleventh chapter of Hebrews shows that all the O.T. saints were saved by faith! Nobody ever made it to glory except by faith and no one ever will! If you say that someone was ever saved, or ever will be saved by the law or some other good works, you make God a liar. That's no charge that I want to make! "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall NO FLESH BE JUSTIFIED." Gal.2:16. Unfortunately, there seems to be quite a few who follow his line of false doctrine. You can believe Ruckman if you want to; (One of the curses of our day is man worship), I believe God! Ruckman teaches that a woman must obey her husband, even if he tells her to sin: "...we are shown that wives should obey their husbands in cases when they are told to do something that contradicts Scripture." Among many other false teachings he believes that Judas was not human because Jesus said, "One of you is a devil." One of his worst teachings is Jesus was capable of sin and that He could have fallen. Now, there have been some men who were much closer to the truth than Ruckman who held to that position. However, it is still heresy. Was Jesus God? The Scriptures bear abundant witness to that truth. That's what it is all about. Even the unbelieving Jews when asked why He should die said, "Because he made Himself equal to God." The King James Bible says, "For God cannot be tempted with evil." Jas.1:15. He also teaches there will be no women in heaven but that all will be thirty-three year old males who look exactly like Jesus. There are other false or fanciful teachings, but we have neither the time nor desire to elaborate.

A STRANGE VIEW OF MARRIAGE. Mr. Ruckman believes that marriage is nothing more than having sexual relations with someone -"flesh joined to flesh," is how he describes it; apparently one is married every time he has sex. He says a piece of paper or a ceremony doesn't constitute a marriage. There is more to marriage than a piece of paper, but the Bible shows that couples were formerly married. This is obvious from a number of incidents in the Word of God, not the least of which is the marriage in Cana of Galilee, which Jesus honored with his presence. Mr. Ruckman apparently believes that one can be divorced and remarried for a number of reasons. He has been married three times while in the ministry and divorced at least twice. The Word of God declares that a Pastor, Elder or Deacon must be "the husband of one wife." This sort of antinomianism is pleasing to the flesh and we live in a day dominated by the flesh, even in Christian circles. Many who claim to be saved are living on a low, carnal, plane. There have always been some who adapt their doctrine to their conduct - God help them!

HIS ARROGANT, SELF-IMPORTANT ATTITUDE. How is this for an inflated ego? David Cloud quotes Ruckman's new book, The Salient Verses: "If you are able to obtain a copy (of this book) you will have, in your hands, a minimum of 200 advanced revelations that...were completely overlooked (or ignored) by every major Christian Bible scholar since 90 A.D... If a Bible believer has this work he will have the accumulated knowledge of Cornelius Stam and Ethelbert Bullinger... Clarence Larkin and C.I.Scofield... Hickey, Gorman, Swaggart, Dake, Roberts, Terrill, Hagin, Allen, Ewing, Osborne, Tilton, and PTL...Pember, Peters, Gaebelein, Pentecost...plus the Puritans, Reformers, major evangelists (Moody, Sunday, Finney, Torrey, Wesley, etc.) and all that any Greek and Hebrew scholar...ever found out - that was SO - in the last 200 years." Frankly, I don’t think some of those people know very much, but some were great Bible scholars. It is an impressive list and Peter Ruckman knows more than all of them. So much for self-importance. He also excels in arrogance. Mr. Ruckman has contradicted and put down just about everyone of note who ever made a statement on the Scriptures. In addition to some of the names mentioned above for those who disagree with him, he uses two-bit junkies, incredible idiots, stupid. Of course, anyone who dares disagree with him is an "apostate." He said, "God called me to sit at this typewriter and pour forth VINEGAR, ACID, VITRIOL, AND CLEANING FLUID on the leading conservative and fundamental scholars of 1900 through 1990." I for one do not believe God ever called him to do such a thing! That sounds to me like something the devil would get you to do but not God. No matter how sound a man is in the faith, if he dares to contradict Mr. Ruckman, he will find his name in print with all sorts of slander attached to it. This is a man of God? My Bible says, "And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men..." II Tim.2:24. Now his defenders will say that Jesus used some harsh language at times. Yes, He did. But He never used the kind of language that Peter Ruckman uses! Furthermore, Jesus used hard words with the scribes and Pharisees, those who would deliberately destroy the truth, but not with the weakest believer or even unbeliever. When James and John wanted to call fire down on those unbelieving Samaritans, Jesus rebuked them saying, "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of." Jeremiah had some strong words for the people of his day (though not words like Ruckman's) and at the same time he was filled with compassion for them. The people of his day were not interested in the truth, they would not repent, but he still cared and wept over them.

IT'S YOUR CHOICE. It's up to you, you can believe Mr. Ruckman or you can believe the Word of God. It always comes down to this. I have long observed that most people believe what they want to. With the exception of the few who bow their knees to God and repent, down through the ages men have gone their own way and believed what they wanted to. False teachers have no lack of followers; they never have. Whatever you want to believe or do, if you look around (usually it won't take much looking), you will no doubt find it. But just remember this, some day you are going to face God and the only standard will be the pure Word of God. You will not have an opportunity to bring up your explanation or excuses. Dr. Ruckman's interpretation, or yours or, mine won't amount to anything. Be sure of this, if your interpretation contradicts the Scriptures, you are wrong! It doesn't matter how many agree with you or how great a status they have in this world, if what they teach doesn't line up with God's Word it is condemned. I find that the greater part of God's Word is rather easily understood. After all, it wasn't written by scholars nor for scholars. It was written for the average person though there are a few portions which are "difficult and hard to be understood." You must be saved if you are to understand anything. Of course, God has ordained pastors and others to help us but not all are helpful. I believe it was Spurgeon who said something like this: There are some preachers whose only claim to fame is they startle their congregations with some new heresy every week. If you will honestly "compare Scripture with Scripture" you will be able to discern truth and error. Unless you "Study to shew thyself approved unto God..." you may become prey to all sorts of error and confusion. Would you rather be different, popular, or right?

 

[JaumeJ]

He would be no different from L. Ron Hubbard, another man with his own way of thinking, with a new way of believing ultimate truth...........

 

[posthuman]

He would be no different from L. Ron Hubbard, another man with his own way of thinking, with a new way of believing ultimate truth...........

​is it really "ultimate truth" if men keep coming up with "new ways of believing it" ?

 

[Huckleberry]

I used to go to a Ruckmanite church in the 90s. Back then I didn't know what that meant or who he was, but after several months in that church, I bought and read one of his books from that church's bookstore. Ruckman's a whackjob and probably the angriest "Christian" I've ever heard of, and I was able to figure that out on my own. Needless to say, I stopped going to that church soon thereafter.

That having been said, I will only use the KJV, not because of anything I learned from Ruckman, but from the cumulative studies I have been doing for the last 18 years. It is the most accurate, most honest, most complete translation of the Holy Scriptures we have in English. Every time a new version tries to "correct" it, they get it wrong. KJV is still the best selling book of all times, because it is the best one available.

 

[Praus]

That having been said, I will only use the KJV, not because of anything I learned from Ruckman, but from the cumulative studies I have been doing for the last 18 years. It is the most accurate, most honest, most complete translation of the Holy Scriptures we have in English. Every time a new version tries to "correct" it, they get it wrong. KJV is still the best selling book of all times, because it is the best one available.

Thanks for contributing to thread brother Huckleberry. The author of the original essay, David Cloud, is also KJV-only (I'm pretty sure) and he's embarrassed for the whole movement by Peter Ruckman which is the purpose of the essay.

To say the KJV is the best translation in English (KJV-best) is certainly an intellectually defensible belief which many godly men and women hold. KJV-onlyism isn't quite the same.