Home » Posts tagged 'theology' (Page 3)

Tag Archives: theology

James White / Thomas Ross Bible Version Debate (KJV vs LSB) is Now Live!

I am happy to report that you can now watch the James White / Thomas Ross debate on Bible versions (the King James Version Only debate)!  The topic was:

 

“The Legacy Standard Bible, as a representative of modern English translations based upon the UBS/NA text, is superior to the KJV, as a representative of TR-based Bible translations.”

 

James White was in the affirmative.

Thomas Ross was in the negative.

 

The debate can now be viewed on the following sites (click for your choice): FaithSaves   Rumble   YouTube

 

It can also be watched using the embedded video below:

Please “like” the video on YouTube and Rumble and share comments about it on those websites as well as on the blog here.

 

I am thankful for the work put in by the follower of James White who edited the video.  I would like to have a somewhat improved version where one can see both the debaters and the slides at the same time, instead of only one or the other, and if that project gets completed, we will definitely plan to inform the blog readership about it.

 

May the truth of the perfect preservation of His infallible Word be more widely received as a result of this debate.  Soli Deo Gloria!

 

Please also read the James White / Thomas Ross Bible Version debate review, part 1, here (with more to come) or watch the video on FaithSaves, Rumble or YouTube.  Lord willing, there are more parts to come reviewing the debate and its arguments.

TDR

James White / Thomas Ross Debate Review Video #1

After my debate with James White of Alpha and Omega Ministries, James posted his post-debate thoughts. (I have also written a few thoughts.)  I was quite surprised to hear him make affirmations about my character such as that he “knew” I was “not intending to” bring the audience along with me, that I had a “really, really deep disrespect for the audience,” that “Ross didn’t care. He wasn’t debating for us,” that I did not understand what a text type was, or even “anything like that at all,” and so on, rather than expositing Scripture on its own preservation or demonstrating that even one quotation in my presentation, or one fact I pointed out, was inaccurate.  I believe that the fact that he spent his post-debate analysis attacking me instead of dealing with my arguments may tell you something about how the debate went–I was very thankful for the blessing of the Lord in the debate itself for the cause of God’s truth.  (Let me just add that not one of the thoughts James claims that he “knew” about my motives and so on, to my recollection, even entered my mind one time before I heard him make them in his post-debate analysis.)

 

The debate video itself, Lord willing, will be live soon; it takes a lot more work to get a video like that done than it does to create a video where I am just ruminating about the debate.  Feel free to subscribe to my Rumble and YouTube channels to get notified as soon as the video becomes available.

 

You can watch my initial post-debate response, giving my thoughts on how it went, as well as responding to James White’s allegations, with the embedded video below, at faithsaves.net, on Rumble, or on YouTube.

 

My sincere thanks again to those who prayed for me and for those who helped in many other ways.

TDR

 

The Servant Song of Isaiah 53 (Isaiah 52:13-53:12)

How is your grasp of the glorious servant song of Isaiah 53 (specifically Isaiah 52:13-53:12)? As part of the series on how to teach an evangelistic Bible study, I have taught through the passage verse-by-verse.  Knowledge of Isaiah 53 is not only edifying, but it is helpful for Jews, for Muslims (who say Christ never died a substitutionary death and rose again, but this was added into the New Testament–so why is it in the Old Testament?), for atheists and agnostics who deny the reality of predictive prophecy in the Bible, and for anyone else who simply needs the truth in this passage, the “Gospel according to Isaiah.”  The series through Isaiah 53 is now complete.  If you would like to listen to the series–or watch the entire series on how to teach an evangelistic Bible study here–see an example of how to lead these here and get copies of the studies here (or get a Word doc here to personalize for use in your church), please watch the embedded videos below or click on the link here.  If they are edifying, please “like” the videos and feel free to share a comment.

 

Note–the first video completes the discussion of a different topic before getting into Isaiah 52:13-53:12.

Video #1:

Video #2:

Video #3:

Video #4:

Video #5:

Video #6:

Video #7:

Video #8:

Video #9:

Video #10:

Video #11:

TDR

James White / Thomas Ross debate format: King James Version vs. LSB

I am looking forward to my upcoming debate with Dr. James White. Please note the planned format below for the debate. Thank you very much for your fervent prayers and possible fasting for me and for the debate.

James White Thomas Ross King James Bible Legacy Standard Bible debate Textus Receptus Nestle Aland

Debate Topic: “The Legacy Standard Bible, as a representative of modern English translations based upon the UBS/NA text, is superior to the KJV, as a representative of TR-based Bible translations.”

 

Affirm: James White

 

Deny: Thomas Ross

 

How the time will go:

 

Brief introduction to the speakers and an explanation of the character of the debate.

 

Opening presentation: 25/25

Second presentation/rebuttal: 12/12

Cross-examination #1: 10/10

Cross-examination #2: 10/10

Third presentation/rebuttal: 8/8

Concluding statement: 5/5

Very short break to gather any additional questions from the audience

Questions from audience the rest of the time.

 

For more information, see the James White / Thomas Ross debate page here.

Gail Riplinger & Acrostic Algebra-an Update for the LSB / KJV James White Debate

As many blog readers may know, I should have the privilege, Lord willing, this upcoming February of debating Dr. James White of Alpha & Omega Ministries on the topic “The Legacy Standard Bible, as a representative of modern English translations based upon the UBS/NA text, is superior to the KJV, as a representative of TR-based Bible translations.” Dr. White has debated or discussed the King James Only position with people like Gail Riplinger, author of New Age Bible Versions and leading New Age conspiracy theorist, and Steven Anderson, the acclaimed Holocaust denier and promoter of “1-2-3, pray after me, 4-5-6, hope it sticks” evangelism.

James White Thomas Ross debate The Legacy Standard Bible, as a representative of modern English translations based upon the UBS/NA text, is superior to the KJV, as a representative of TR-based Bible translations; Gail Riplinger New Age Bible Versions

I have found a great argument to use against the Legacy Standard Bible which will be defended by James White.  Rather than using arguments from my resources on Bibliology or from Thou Shalt Keep Them: A Biblical Theology of the Perfect Preservation of Scripture (also here; Amazon affiliate link), I have an update to Dr. Gail Riplinger’s argument from Acrostic Algebra.

 

Dr. Riplinger, as you may know, wrote the book New Age Bible Versions. David Cloud has a review of her book. She has also written a large volume about why Christians should not study Greek and Hebrew.  Ms. Riplinger herself is highly qualified in the Biblical languages-as a little girl she took Latin in school, and she taught English to immigrants from Greece.  She received an honorary doctorate from Hyles-Anderson College, indicative of the scholarship of New Age Bible Versions, with which Hyles-Anderson wishes to identify.  (I am reminded of the honorary doctorates that my first year Greek class received-all the students formed their own school one day, and we gave everyone an honorary PhD, ThD, DD, or comparable honorary doctoral degree-except for one student, to whom we gave an honorary GED.) While many Hyles graduates are not known in the scholarly world, they do excel at gathering crowds of children with candy, leading them to repeat the sinner’s prayer, and then baptizing millions of them on the backs of church buses, often baptizing the same children many times, thus creating more sinner’s-prayer-repeaters by far than the number of converts gathered on the day of Pentecost, when Peter, not having read Hyles’s church manual, told the lost to repent instead of telling them to ask Jesus into their hearts (although the converts at Pentecost seemed to stick around a lot longer, even without gifts of soda pop and candy, Acts 2:41-47).  Dr. Riplinger also has earned degrees in home economics, which help her to be qualified not only to be a keeper at home, but also to write scholarly works on textual criticism and Bible versions. Among many other fine arguments by Mrs. Riplinger, her Acrostic Alegbra stands out, proving the New American Standard Version and New International Version are inferior to the Authorized Version:

  • Step 1: (NASV – NIV) – AV = X
  • Step 2: (NASV – NIV) – AV = X
  • Step 3: (ASI + NV) – AV = X
  • Step 4: ASI + NV – AV = X
  • Step 5: SIN = X

 

Clearly, the fact that one can get to the letters “SIN” from the NASV and NIV in this fashion proves the inferiority of these Bible versions.

 

Since I am supposed to debate James White on the LSB, or Legacy Standard Bible, which is an update to the NASV, it is appropriate that I also update Dr. Riplinger’s Acrostic Algebra.  Note:

 

The LSB leaves things out, as do other modern versions.  If one leaves out the middle line of the “B” in “LSB,” one is left with “LSD,” a dangerous drug which is a SIN.  Thus, just like the NASV and NIV, through acrostic algebra, lead to SIN, so does the LSB.

 

-QED

 

My discovery of this argument reminded me of the quality argumentation of leading atheist Dan Barker, who, employed Dorothy Murdock’s great mythicist scholarship in my debate with him. Ms. Murdock argued that Moses is borrowed from pagan mythology because of a 16th century AD Michelangelo painting displaying horns on Moses’ head, which represent psychedelic mushrooms or LSD.  Barker also employed the weighty arguments of Barbara Walker, an author of books about tarot cards and knitting, in our two debates over the Old Testament.

 

I think that this update to Dr. Riplinger’s Acrostic Algebra should prove very convincing.  James White, get ready!

 

Note: Wishing to be fair, I tried to reach out to Ms. Riplinger by means of the website where she sells her books.  I asked her about the acrostic algebra. I would have liked to reproduce the response I received, which both asked about whether those who questioned her use of it had taken a class in symbolic logic at Harvard (which I assume she believes would somehow support her use of acrostic algebra-indicating she never took a class in symbolic logic at Harvard) and also said that the acrostic algebra was simply rhetorical rather than a substantive argument.  However, I was not given permission to reproduce the email.  So I wanted to give Ms. Riplinger a chance to defend the Acrostic Algebra in her own words, out of fairness, but I was not allowed to do so.

 

TDR

500,000+ Page Views for Faithsaves.net!

I am thankful that the Faithsaves.net website recently passed 500,000 page views. I suspect that is a larger number than the number of people who live in many of the towns and cities that blog readers here live in.  I am thankful that the website continues to impact people with God’s glorious truth.  Lord willing, I look forward to 1 million views as the next significant milestone.

 

As discussed on the page here, one can get bumper stickers, car magnets, T-shirts, and shirts with collars promoting the gospel and faithsaves.net. We have appreciated the opportunity for our vehicle to be an instrument that gives people the opportunity to spread the truth.  Many businesses have information all over their company vehicles; why should not those who are about their Father’s business do the same?  (Of course, if your church already has decals or other information they recommend, by all means consider them.)  (If you buy something on the link above–or practically anywhere else on the Internet–you can save by doing what this article says–click through a portal first, or, for Amazon, do this first.)

TDR

Charles Spurgeon: My Conversion Testimony

Have you ever read the conversion testimony of the famous Baptist preacher Charles Spurgeon?

Charles Spurgeon conversion testimony

It is a blessing to read.  Here it is:

 

I sometimes think I might have been in darkness and despair until now had it not been for the goodness of God in sending a snowstorm, one Sunday morning, while I was going to a certain place of worship. When I could go no further, I turned down a side street, and came to a little Primitive Methodist Chapel. In that chapel there may have been a dozen or fifteen people. I had heard of the Primitive Methodists, how they sang so loudly that they made people’s heads ache; but that did not matter to me. I wanted to know how I might be saved, and if they could tell me that, I did not care how much they made my head ache. The minister did not come that morning; he was snowed up, I suppose. At last, a very thin-looking man, a shoemaker, of tailor, or something of that sort, went up into the pulpit to preach. Now, it is well that preachers should be instructed; but this man was really stupid. He was obliged to stick to his text, for the simple reason that he had little else to say. The text was,—

“Look unto Me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth” [Isaiah 45:22]

He did not even pronounce the words rightly, but that did not matter. There was, I thought, a glimpse of hope for me in that text. The preacher began thus:—“My dear friends, this is a very simple text indeed. It says, ‘Look’. Now lookin’ don’t take a deal of pains. It ain’t liftin’ your foot or your finger; it is just, ‘Look.’ Well, a man needn’t go to College to learn to look. You may be the biggest fool, and yet you can look. A man needn’t be worth a thousand a year to be able to look. Anyone can look; even a child can look. But then the text says, ‘Look unto Me.’ Ay!” said he, in broad Essex, “many on ye are lookin’ to yourselves, but it’s no use lookin’ there. You’ll never find any comfort in yourselves. Some look to God the Father. No, look to Him by-and-by. Jesus Christ says, ‘Look unto Me’. Some on ye say, ‘We must wait for the Spirit’s workin’.’ You have no business with that just now. Look to Christ. The text says. ‘Look unto Me.’ ”

Then the good man followed up his text in this way:—“Look unto Me; I am sweatin’ great drops of blood. Look unto Me; I am hangin’ on the cross. Look unto Me; I am dead and buried. Look unto Me; I rise again. Look unto Me; I ascend to Heaven. Look unto Me; I am sittin’ at the Father’s right hand. O poor sinner, look unto Me! look unto Me!”

When he had gone to about that length, and managed to spin out ten minutes or so, he was at the end of his tether. Then he looked at me under the gallery, and I daresay, with so few present, he knew me to be a stranger. Just fixing his eyes on me, as if he knew all my heart, he said, “Young man, you look very miserable.” Well, I did; but I had not been accustomed to have remarks made from the pulpit on my personal appearance before. However, it was a good blow, struck right home. He continued, “and you always will be miserable—miserable in life, and miserable in death,—if you don’t obey my text; but if you obey now, this moment, you will be saved.” Then, lifting up his hands, he shouted, as only a Primitive Methodist could do, “Young man, look to Jesus Christ. Look! Look! Look! You have nothin’ to do but to look and live.” I saw at once the way of salvation. I know not what else he said,—I did not take much notice of it,—I was so possessed with that one thought. Like as when the brazen serpent was lifted up, the people only looked and were healed, so it was with me. I had been waiting to do fifty things, but when I heard that word, “Look!” what a charming word it seemed to me! Oh! I looked until I could almost have looked my eyes away. There and then the cloud was gone, the darkness had rolled away, and that moment I saw the sun; and I could have risen that instant, and sung with the most enthusiastic of them, of the precious blood of Christ, and the simple faith which looks alone to Him. Oh, that somebody had told me this before, “Trust Christ, and you shall be saved.” Yet it was, no doubt, all wisely ordered, and now I can say,—

“E’er since by faith I saw the stream

Thy flowing wounds supply,

Redeeming love has been my theme,

And shall be till I die.”

 

I do from my soul confess that I never was satisfied till I came to Christ; when I was yet a child, I had far more wretchedness than ever I have now; I will even add, more weariness, more care, more heart-ache, than I know at this day. I may be singular in this confession, but I make it, and know it to be the truth. Since that dear hour when my soul cast itself on Jesus, I have found solid joy and peace; but before that, all those supposed gaieties of early youth, all the imagined ease and joy of boyhood, were but vanity and vexation of spirit to me. That happy day, when I found the Saviour, and learned to cling to His dear feet, was a day never to be forgotten by me. An obscure child, unknown, unheard of, I listened to the Word of God; and that precious text led me to the cross of Christ. I can testify that the joy of that day was utterly indescribable. I could have leaped, I could have danced; there was no expression, however fanatical, which would have been out of keeping with the joy of my spirit at that hour. Many days of Christian experience have passed since then, but there has never been one which has had the full exhilaration, the sparkling delight which that first day had. I thought I could have sprung from the seat on which I sat, and have called out with the wildest of those Methodist brethren who were present, “I am forgiven! I am forgiven! A monument of grace! A sinner saved by blood!” My spirit saw its chains broken to pieces, I felt that I was an emancipated soul, an heir of Heaven, a forgiven one, accepted in Christ Jesus, plucked out of the miry clay and out of the horrible pit, with my feet set upon a rock, and my goings established. I thought I could dance all the way home. I could understand what John Bunyan meant, when he declared he wanted to tell the crows on the ploughed land all about his conversion. He was too full to hold, he felt he must tell somebody. (C. H. Spurgeon, C. H. Spurgeon’s Autobiography, Compiled from His Diary, Letters, and Records, by His Wife and His Private Secretary, 1834–1854, vol. 1 [Cincinatti; Chicago; St. Louis: Curts & Jennings, 1898], 105–108.

 

Note that Spurgeon was not told to come to the front of a church building and repeat a sinner’s prayer, or told to ask Christ to come into his heart–those methodologies did not yet exist, as Dr. Paul Chitwood demonstrates in his history of the sinner’s prayer.  Spurgeon was directed to embrace Christ directly by repentant faith–the right thing sinners should be counseled to do today, and which, enabled by the Holy Spirit through the power of Scripture, will lead to multitudes of true conversions.

 

Note as well that in Isaiah 45:22 the word translated “Look” commonly means “turn.” One turns from his sin to look to Christ alone for salvation–repentance is implicit in saving faith.

 

Spurgeon directed people to embrace Christ directly by faith, rather than telling them that if they sincerely repeated the words of a prayer they would be saved, throughout his ministry.  Here are some examples of the evangelistic counsel he gave to seeking sinners, from his book Around the Wicket Gate (cited from here):

 

When the Lord lifts His dear Son before a sinner, that sinner should take Him without hesitation. If you take Him, you have Him, and none can take Him from you. Out with your hand, man, and take Him at once! When inquirers accept the Bible as literally true and see that Jesus is really given to all who trust Him, all the difficulty about understanding the way of salvation vanishes like the morning’s frost at the rising of the sun.

Two inquiring ones came to me in my vestry. They had been hearing the Gospel from me for only a short time, but they had been deeply impressed by it. They expressed their regret that they were about to move far away, but they added their gratitude that they had heard me at all. I was cheered by their kind thanks, but felt anxious that a more effectual work should be brought about in them. Therefore I asked them, “Have you indeed believed in the Lord Jesus Christ? Are you saved?” One of them replied, “I have been trying hard to believe.” This statement I have often heard, but I will never let it go by me unchallenged. “No,” I said, “that will not do. Did you ever tell your father that you tried to believe him?” After I had dwelt a while upon the matter, they admitted that such language would have been an insult to their father.

I then set the Gospel very plainly before them in as simple language as I could, and begged them to believe Jesus, who is more worthy of faith than the best of fathers. One of them replied, “I cannot realize it: I cannot realize that I am saved.” Then I went on to say, “God bears testimony to His Son, that whosoever trusts in His Son is saved. Will you make Him a liar now, or will you believe His Word?” While I thus spoke, one of them started as if astonished. She startled us all as she cried, “O sir, I see it all; I am saved! Bless Jesus. He has shown me the way, and He has saved me! I see it all.” The esteemed sister who had brought these young friends to me knelt down with them while, with all our hearts, we blessed and magnified the Lord for a soul brought into light. One of the two sisters, however, could not see the Gospel as the other had, though I feel sure she will do so soon.

Did it not seem strange that, both hearing the same words, one should remain in the gloom? The change which comes over the heart when the understanding grasps the Gospel is often reflected in the face and shines like the light of heaven. Such newly enlightened souls often exclaim, “It is so plain; why is it I have not seen it before this? I understand all I have read in the Bible now, though I could not make it out before. It has all come in a minute, and now I see what I never understood before.”

The fact is, the truth was always plain, but they were looking for signs and wonders, and therefore did not see what was there for them. Old men often look for their spectacles when they are on their foreheads. It is commonly observed that we fail to see that which is straight before us. Christ Jesus is before our faces. We have only to look to Him and live, but we make all manner of bewilderment of it, and so manufacture a maze out of that which is straight as an arrow.

The little incident about the two sisters reminds me of another. A much-esteemed friend came to me one Sunday morning after service to shake hands with me. She said, “I was fifty years old on the same day as yourself. I am like you in that one thing, sir, but I am the very reverse of you in better things.” I remarked, “Then you must be a very good woman, for in many things I wish I also could be the reverse of what I am.” “No, no,” she said, “I did not mean anything of that sort. I am not right at all.” “What!” I cried, “Are you not a believer in the Lord Jesus?” “Well,” she said, with much emotion, “I, I will try to be.” I laid hold of her hand and said, “My dear soul, you are not going to tell me that you will try to believe my Lord Jesus! I cannot have such talk from you. It means blank unbelief. What has He done that you should talk of Him in that way? Would you tell me that you would try to believe me? I know that you would not treat me so rudely. You think me a true man, and so you believe me at once. Surely you cannot do less with my Lord Jesus.”

Then with tears she exclaimed, “Oh, sir, do pray for me!” To this I replied, “I do not feel that I can do anything of the kind. What can I ask the Lord Jesus to do for one who will not trust Him? I see nothing to pray about. If you will believe Him, you shall be saved. If you will not believe Him, I cannot ask Him to invent a new way to gratify your unbelief.” Then she said again, “I will try to believe.” But I told her solemnly I would have none of her trying; for the message from the Lord did not mention trying, but said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved” (Acts 16:31). I pressed upon her the great truth, that “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life” (John 3:36); and its terrible reverse: “He that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” (John 3:18).

I urged her to full faith in the once crucified but now ascended Lord, and the Holy Spirit there and then enabled her to trust. She most tenderly said, “Oh sir, I have been looking to my feelings, and this has been my mistake! Now I trust my soul with Jesus, and I am saved.” She found immediate peace through believing. There is no other way.

 

There are numbers of resources that can help churches follow the Biblical evangelistic methodology of Spurgeon today, rather than the corrupt “1-2-3, pray after me, 4-5-6, hope it sticks” salesmanship of  people like Jack Hyles. May the number of Baptist churches who counsel the lost Biblically increase greatly for God’s glory and for the multiplication of true conversions.

 

TDR

The Judgmental Church: Apostolic, New Testament, and Seeker-Friendly?

The Judgmental Church!

Everyone knows that being judgmental is one of the greatest sins that a person can possibly commit.  The sin of being “judgmental” is mentioned and condemned in the following verses in the Bible:

 

 

 

 

 

The sin of being judgmental is regularly mentioned in 1st and 2nd Opinions, books which most people are much more committed to living by than they are, say, the Pauline epistles and the Gospels.

While being “judgmental” is not mentioned in the canonical New Testament, only in the pseudepigraphical 1st and 2nd Opinions, and the passage in the Sermon on the Mount that people misuse to prove this position actually commands one to help one’s brother remove even a speck or smaller sin from his eye (that is, Christ commands one to judge) as long as one does not hypocritically have a beam in one’s own eye (Matthew 7:1ff.), there are plenty of memes and commonly supported cultural images for it, which, in the eyes of many, should be a sufficient substitute for the total lack of support in the inspired text of Scripture.

Were the New Testament Churches Judgmental?

Did the apostolic, New Testament churches judge? In addition to Matthew 7:1ff., Christ commanded: “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment (John 7:24). So Christ commanded people to judge–it was not only not a sin, but it is a sin to fail to judge. Did the New Testament churches follow Christ’s command to judge? Consider 1 Corinthians 14:23-25:

23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad? 24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all: 25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.

Wow! Not only did this New Testament church fail to recognize the (alleged) sin of judging, but Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, wanted every member of the congregation to be judging. In fact, if a new visitor comes to a church service, “all” are supposed to judge him, with the truth of Scripture, and by this means he will not be turned off by their being so “judgmental,” but on the contrary, he will fall down on his face and will worship God, recognizing that God is in them of a truth.

Consider also Isaiah 1:21:

How is the faithful city become an harlot! it was full of judgment; righteousness lodged in it; but now murderers.

It was good for God’s people to be “full of judgment.” That was being “faithful,” and was characteristic of “righteousness.” When that stopped it was unfaithfulness, spiritual harlotry.

The second greatest commmand is to love your neighbor as yourself–the only greater command is to love God with your whole being. What is involved in loving your neighbor? Note Leviticus 19:17-18:

17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him. 18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

Rebuking others is showing your neighbor love–just like not hating him, not avenging, and not bearing grudges. Sin is the greatest evil, so rebuking your neighbor, so that he does not sin, is one of the kindest and most loving things you can possibly do.

The Apostolic, New Testament Way to Be Seeker-Friendly

Do you want visitors to your church to come to true conversion? Do you want your church to glorify God and follow the New Testament? Then start having lots of judging of others go on, so visitors can fall on their faces and confess God is in you of a truth. Exercise lots and lots of God-glorifying, loving, non-hypocritical, but Biblically accurate judgment. That is part of loving your neighbor as yourself. Reject the Satanic advice of the world, the flesh, and the devil that you are not supposed to judge anyone or anything. As in so many other situations, this idea is exactly the opposite of what the Bible actually says.

John 7:24; 1 Corinthians 14:23-25; Isaiah 1:21, and Leviticus 19:17-18 should be carefully expounded in every evangelical “church growth” book that actually cares about what God says about the church and that wants genuine growth, not cancerous pseudo-growth. So should the fact that “come as you are” is a lie-the Biblical advice is “sanctify yourselves.” But I’m not holding my breath–I suspect that, in the minds of many, the sin of being judgmental, as condemned in 1st and 2nd Opinions, will continue to greatly outweigh the evidence to the contrary from Christ, the apostle Paul, Moses, and Isaiah.

don't judge woman weird head in bag

“You mean I am wrong in saying being ‘judgmental’ is a sin condemned in the Bible? How DARE you judge me about that!”

TDR

Peter Ruckman’s Multiple Ways of Salvation Heresy, part 2 of 2

In part one of this study of Peter Ruckman’s heresy about different ways of salvation in different periods of time, four questions were given for disciples of Ruckman to consider.  This part provides several more questions for those who have adopted or been influenced by Ruckman’s heresy on this issue.

Peter Ruckman heretic multiple ways salvation Rapture dispensationalism KJB1611 Tribulation Law Moses
Peter Ruckman, heretic

5.)   Does the idea that anyone at any time can be saved partially by works deny the depths of the sinfulness of the human heart? Isaiah, confessing what Israel will pray at the end of the Tribulation, affirms: “But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away” (Isaiah 64:6). If even the “best” we can do is a filthy rag—is itself sinful—how can it help one to be saved? We deserve to go to hell for the “best” thing we have ever done, because of how our indwelling sin leads even our “best” actions to be tainted by sin.  Does that not obliterate salvation by works at any time?  If not, doesn’t it strongly impact how we preach the gospel even now?  If Ruckman is right (God forbid), then we can’t tell sinners: “Salvation by works is hopeless and impossible!” but only can say, “Right now God has decided salvation is by faith in this time period, but salvation by works really is possible—the Catholic church is right when it teaches salvation by faith and works; it just puts that way of salvation in the wrong time period.” Isn’t that an attack on the gospel even now?  Is it OK to make salvation by works possible, and salvation by faith alone to be a mere dispensational distinction like whether or not it is OK to eat bacon or lobster?

 

6.)   Why are verses that allegedly teach different ways of salvation in different time periods taken out of context in a major way?  For example, the Ruckmanite pamphlet referenced in part one claims that Revelation 14:12 proves salvation by faith and works in the Tribulation, but it does no such thing—it just proves that true faith will manifest itself in one’s life, a fact that is all over the Pauline epistles (Romans 2:6-7; Ephesians 2:10; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, etc.), all over 1 John, and all over the whole Old and New Testament.  Why is there so much misinterpretation going on?

 

7.)   Would salvation be by faith alone in the Messiah from the Fall until the Tribulation and then suddenly change? Wouldn’t we need very, very clear Biblical evidence for this—evidence that does not exist?

 

8.)   If we accept Ruckman’s claim here:

 

This means that in the Tribulation, you can lose it! … the truth that I’m talking about right now—taught first in 1954—is unknown to Pre-Millennial scholars.  (Ruckman, Peter. The Book of Revelation. Pensacola, 1982, p. 413)

 

Wouldn’t the gates of hell have prevailed against the church, contrary to Matthew 16:18; Ephesians 3:21? Was the church teaching lies about the gospel until 1954 when Ruckman came along to explain the truth?

 

9.)   Shouldn’t anyone who teaches multiple ways of salvation stop calling himself a Baptist, since there are no Baptist confessions of faith from the first century until modern times that teach this idea?  One thing that John Davis in his “Why have millions of people suddenly disappeared?” pamphlet and “Time for Truth!” website deserve commendation for is not having the name “Baptist” on his religious organization, but just “The Oaks Church.” That is honest. Someone who teaches ideas about salvation that have never been in any Baptist confession should not call himself or his religious organization a Baptist church.  When will you stop confusing people by dishonestly claiming to be a Baptist, when you reject what Baptists believe?

 

10.)  Ruckman makes many other incredible claims on things like aliens and the color of their blood to secret CIA alien breeding facilities that perhaps he is not credible.  Furthermore, he says: “There are SIX ‘plans of salvation’ in the book of Acts” (Bible Believers’ Bulletin Jan. 2007, p. 16.”  Does such an idea make Acts astonishingly confusing, instead of helping people understand God’s truth?

 

11.) Ruckman also wrote:  “Paul does not hesitate to misapply Habbakuk 1:5-6, in the Church Age” (Ruckman, Peter. How to Teach Dispensational Truth. Pensacola: Bible Believers Press, 1992, 1996, p. 37), claiming that Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, misapplies Scripture.  Such outlandish ideas permeate Ruckman’s teachings.  If we follow Ruckman, are we not leading ourselves into incredible confusion, even apart from the fact that Ruckman’s life indicated that he was not qualified to pastor, based on 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1? (See, e. g., What About Ruckman? by David Cloud).

 

12.) Why do Ruckman’s writings have such a carnal, ungodly spirit, so that one feels defiled by just reading a few pages of them? I have never been able to read through any of his books cover to cover; when I tried I could not get past what seemed like regrettably carnal name-calling.  What if Ruckman wrote in such a carnal way because he was himself a carnal man, not one who Christians should follow?

 

13.) Why do you use Romans 10:9-13 in gospel tracts, when Romans 10:9-10 is quoting Deuteronomy 30:14, and Romans 10:13 is quoting Joel 2:32?  If Romans 10:9-13 proves salvation by grace through faith in this period of time, but not in other time periods, why does Paul quote Deuteronomy 30, from the Mosaic dispensation, and Joel 2:32, which is about the salvation of people in the Tribulation period?  Is Paul misinterpreting the Old Testament, or is Ruckman misinterpreting the Bible?

 

14.) Romans 4:1-8 is one of the classic New Testament texts on justification by faith alone apart from works:s

 

Rom. 4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?

Rom. 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

Rom. 4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

Rom. 4:4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

Rom. 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Rom. 4:6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

Rom. 4:7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.

Rom. 4:8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

 

Paul proves the glorious truth that God justifies the ungodly apart from works by quoting Genesis 15:6 and Psalm 32:1-2, the experiences of Abraham and of David.  If salvation were by works in Abraham’s day or in King David’s day, how could Paul quote Genesis 15 and Psalm 32 to prove exactly the opposite doctrine, and if there are different ways of salvation in different dispensations, why does Paul prove his doctrine of unmerited salvation from the way people in the patriarchal and legal dispensations were saved?

 

15.) If you cannot answer the questions above, are you willing to reject Ruckman and his false teaching about the existence of multiple ways of salvation?

 

Read part one on Peter Ruckman’s Multiple Ways of Salvation Heresy by clicking here.

 

TDR

Peter Ruckman: Multiple Ways of Salvation Heresy part 1 of 2

You are out of town and are looking for a good church.  After doing online research, you find one and visit.  The church says “Baptist,” “independent.” They go soulwinning, telling people to repent and be saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. They all have King James Bibles. They say nothing about Ruckman. They reject Jack Hyles’s anti-repentance heresies.  They reject CCM, Contemporary “Christian” Music.  They believe in eternal security but are not Calvinist.  They dress modestly and believe in gender distinction.  They reject the charismatic movement.  They reject covenant theology and are dispensational, premillennial, and pretribulational.  Truths such as the resurrection of Christ, the Trinity, etc. are, of course, all believed.  The people are friendly and the pastor preaches with conviction and makes application.  Everything looks great!

 

You go to the tract area to pick up some gospel tracts.  The content seems fine for most of them.  Then you find a pamphlet about the future.  On one side it says: “Very soon millions of people shall suddenly disappear!”  Everything that it says in that part sounds fine.  But on the other side it says “Why have millions of people suddenly disappeared?” and in that section you are shocked when you discover statements that deny the gospel!  In this section, which is addressed to people who miss the Rapture, appear statements such as:  “Remember, to be saved you must put all your faith and trust in Jesus Christ and keep the commandments of God,” and “You can only enter [God’s] Kingdom  if you have put your faith and trust in Jesus Christ and … by … keeping the commandments.”  What is going on here?

 

You look at the pamphlet a bit more carefully.  You notice within it a drawing of people going up in the Rapture; one of the graves with a person going up says “Peter Ruckman.”  Hmm.

Peter Ruckman Rapture to heaven cartoon

Then you see that it is published by one “John Davis” who runs a “Time for Truth!” website and helps lead “The Oaks Church.”  You discover that these sectaries are significant publishers of Ruckmanite literature.

 

The church you thought was fine turned out to be one where Peter Ruckman’s heresy that there are different ways of salvation in different time periods is being believed and practiced, although they did not openly proclaim their Ruckmanism.  That is bad.  It is really bad.  Such a church is not one to go back to unless they repent and renounce their heresy on the gospel.  Multiple (alleged) ways of salvation is a false teaching to tolerate “not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you” (Galatians 2:5).  Ecclesiastical separation is commanded by God (Romans 16:17; 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1; Ephesians 5:11; 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14).

 

Ruckman believed an eternally secure salvation by grace alone through faith alone is only for the church age; supposedly in past times for Israel and in future times such as the Tribulation period salvation is not by repentant faith alone, but by faith and works.  What are some questions you can ask someone who believes or is being influenced by this heresy?  Here are a few.

 

1.)   Does the fact that Genesis 15:6 is referenced in Habakkuk 2:4, and these two verses are themselves referenced in James 2; Romans 4; Galatians 3; and Hebrews 10-11 show that justification has always been by faith alone, rather than by works?  (The extremely powerful nature of this development of salvation by faith alone from the patriarchal times of Abraham, through the Mosaic dispensation, into the New Testament is developed in the study “The Just Shall Live by Faith”). Why does Paul prove his teaching of justification by faith alone with these kinds of Old Testament texts?  Don’t these passages show that Abraham, Moses, Habakkuk, James, and Paul all taught the same human response was required to be saved—faith, and faith alone?

 

2.)   For century after century the Jews were singing Psalms with many verses such as: “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him” (Psalm 2:12). If salvation was ever by works in the Old Testament, why would God command them to sing that ALL who trust in God’s Son are blessed (not “some” are blessed, those who trust and also do enough works to be saved?) Is the Psalter deceiving Israel when it regularly teaches salvation by faith alone?

 

3.)   Why does Peter testify that ALL God’s OT prophets witnessed to justification by faith alone in the Messiah? “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins” (Acts 10:43).

 

4.)   Why is the Old Testament full of the truth of salvation by grace alone? (For example, the Sabbath teaches salvation by faith and resting from works, according to Paul in Hebrews 3-4, so from the very seventh day of creation God’s resting taught man: “There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his” (Hebrews 4:9-10). One major reason working on the Sabbath deserved the death penalty was to teach Israel what a grave sin it was to seek to enter God’s salvation rest by effort instead of resting in Jehovah and His provided atonement alone. Likewise, Moses told Israel that their being chosen was sheer and totally undeserved grace (Deut 7:6-8); the very preface to the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:1-2) indicates that Israel was to obey because they were already a redeemed people, not in order to merit salvation, just as believers today obey because they are already a redeemed people, not to merit salvation.  There are many texts such as: “Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price” (Isaiah 55:1-2); how? Through the Messiah, in the immediate context—Isaiah 52:13-53:12; 55:4.

 

Read part two on Peter Ruckman’s Multiple Ways of Salvation Heresy by clicking here.

 

TDR

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives