Monday, May 1, 2017


Many people like to attack Dr. Ruckman, what you never see these people mention is how many thousands of people he gave the gospel to after being a pastor for decades! My comments on David Cloud's article in blue

DAVID CLOUD: A WARNING ABOUT PETER RUCKMAN  - (Friday Church News Notes, April 28, 2017,,, 866-295-4143)

HOSS: (Dr. Ruckman's death has been a year ago now, I'm not sure what the purpose is in writing a "warning" about a deceased person. That is, unless that person's teaching was contrary to fundamental doctrines (salvation by faith, trinity, eternal security, etc.) and was widely popular. Dr. Ruckman's teaching was not against fundamental doctrine nor is it widely popular. In fact, I would say that his popularity was at its peak in the 90's. Dr. Ruckman's personality and style of teaching is not something that appeals to contemporary Christianity and I seriously doubt that his popularity will grow any time soon. Especially since he has gone to be with the Lord. The writing of such an article this long after his death probably has more to do with a personal grudge against Dr. Ruckman and not doctrinal controversy.)

DAVID CLOUD: There are independent Baptist churches that are a great blessing to this dark world (very few), but some are cultic (most of them). And one of those is Bible Baptist Church of Pensacola, Florida, founded by the late Peter Ruckman.

HOSS: (How is it "cultic"? People sling the word "cult" around very loosely these days. The word "cult" itself merely refers to "a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc." Any denomination or group falls into that category. The word "cult" does not even refer to a group that is in error, that is just the popular usage. What most people mean by "cult" is a creepy group of hermits that zealously follow a doctrine that they disagree with. For example, to Trinitarians the Unitarians are a cult and vice versa. The two groups disagree on a core doctrine, therefore they believe the other group is a "cult". Bible Baptist Church does not disagree with any fundamental doctrines so I do not consider them a "cult" in the modern use of the word. It is true that I have met some people that were really devoted to the Bible teaching of Dr. Ruckman, of which some have carnally tried to adopt his personality. But not because they thought he was a god or a prophet, merely because they thought Dr. Ruckman was a cool guy and admired his speaking style. That is not cultic, it is CARNAL. "For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?"  1 Cor. 3:3-5)

DAVID CLOUD: This twice-divorced, thrice-married pastor exalted the King James Bible as "advanced revelation" superior to the Greek and Hebrew from which it was translated.
HOSS: You should always be suspicious when someone uses one sentence to hurl multiple attacks on someone and the attacks have nothing to do with each other. "twice divorced" is a personal/behavioral issue that has nothing whatsoever to do with a doctrinal issue such as the KJB inspiration/preservation.   


#1: Divorce and remarriage: "Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned" (1 Cor. 7:27-28). It is not a sin to remarry after divorce. It is true that Jesus said in Matthew 5:31-32 and 19:9 not to put away your wife, but Dr. Ruckman did not "put away" his wife, the left him and divorced him. I'm not sure why anyone cares about this issue anyway. 

#2 KJB "superior to the Greek and Hebrew": People love to isolate this statement made by Dr. Ruckman without ever giving the reasons he gave for making the statement. Taking a statement out of context to distort what someone believes is LYING. Dr. Ruckman made the statement that the KJB was superior to the original autographs in a video series on the KJB. In the video he outlined four reasons why it was better. The outline shown in the tape is this

  • Four reasons why the Authorized Holy Bible is superior to the unknown, non-existent "originals"

  1. You can read, teach, and memorize it
  2. It has separations between letters and words as well as sentences
  3. It has been responsible for more than ten times as many sinners getting saved as all the original autographs combined
  4. It is in the universal language of the end time, whereas Greek has been a dead language for more than 1,700 years.

You can purchase the booklet of outlines used in the video here for $1 :

DAVID CLOUD: He claimed that God shut the door of revelation in 1611 (The Monarch of Books, p. 9). In the books The Salient Verses and The Unknown Bible, Ruckman claimed to have discovered hundreds of advanced revelations in the Bible that no other man has found. He stated on page 347 of The Unknown Bible, "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?" These new teachings include the idea that angels are 33-year-old males, that all believing women will receive 33-year-old male bodies at the Rapture, that when the believer is born again his soul is literally cut loose from the inside of his fleshly body, that demons are winged creatures ranging in size from that of flies to eagles, and that the soul is an invisible bodily shape.
HOSS: He was referring to the "greatest Bible teachers in the world" sarcasticly. The so called greatest Bible teachers don't even believe the Bible.
As for those particular teachings that Dr. Ruckman believed...

1.) Angels are always mentioned as being males in the Bible. Though no verse says that they are 33 year old males.

2.) Cloud isolates "believing women" at the rapture to make it sound strange. What Dr. Ruckman taught was that ALL believers would receive a body like Christ's at the rapture. He based this off Phil. 3:20-21. I personally do not agree with that. But who cares? It isn't a big deal.

3.) The soul being cut loose from the body was based on Col. 2:11, spiritual circumcision.

4.) Demons are referred to as birds in the Bible, so they may be winged (Rev. 18:2, etc). However, David Cloud gave no quote from Dr. Ruckman on this (why?).

DAVID CLOUD: In his tract Millions Disappear: Fact or Fiction? Ruckman claimed that men are saved in different ways in different ages, by faith plus works in the Old Testament and in the Tribulation and by works alone in the Millennium.
HOSS: That is true, and that isn't a strange doctrine. Most dispensationalists believe that. 

DAVID CLOUD: In his book Black Is Beautiful, Ruckman described his belief in space aliens. He suggested that some of the medieval plagues were caused by UFOs, that a B-52 bomber was downed by a UFO and that aliens disemboweled the crew members, that a crew member of a US Navy ship was transported into the future, that the CIA operates underground alien breeding facilities (p. 256), that there are web footed aliens, blue aliens with blue blood (pp. 85, 86), black aliens with green blood (p. 244), grey aliens with clear blood (pp. 310-11), and that Adam originally had water in his veins instead of blood (p. 185).

HOSS: Dr. Ruckman gave documentation for all of those alleged conspiracies (which is what Black is Beautiful is, a book on the different conspiracy theories). Those ideas were not things he made up. It is clear that David Cloud isn't trying to discuss the documentation on UFO sightings or the alleged conspiracy theories, he is just trying to sling these statements out to make Dr. Ruckman look bad.  

1 comment:

  1. I have not been following your blog for long, but I just wanted to tell you I enjoy it. I was saved as a younger person, but then didn't know that there was anything more to it. I can look back and see the hand of God in my life protecting me from some of the things that my friends got into trouble with. I was always the good kid who kept his nose clean, helped out anyone that was in need and all that. I got into a serious car accident at the age of 20, and felt like God had taken me by the back of the neck and shaken me up and said that I needed to get my act together. My then wife and I began to attend a Baptist church, and it was obvious to me that I was meant to be a pastor. I attended Bible college for one year, but my ex wife was having emotional issues and could not handle my being gone for so long, and so I had to drop out. Fast forward a few years, and she said to me, I don't love you, I think I hate you, and I want a divorce. Then in about the next breath, she says, but we could keep trying to work it out, if you want to. I found myself separated and back home with my parents at the age of thirty. My ex wife suddenly had no more emotional trouble, she was happy for the first time in years and I was miserable. But what should I do? I know, many would say, never give up, but I loved her, and didn't want to see her go back to the bad place where she had been and so we divorced. I ended up remarrying a woman who I am crazy about, we are going on 25 years married. I am no longer a Baptist either, I have many doctrinal issues with them, but mostly I see such a disconnect with what they say and what they do, like I suppose most churches today. However, that doesn't mean that I can accept that when they say that they are saved by grace and then proceed to live and force others to live as if it is about works. Or that when they say that baptism is just an outward sign of that which has taken place inside, and yet such premium is placed upon it that it is almost a part of their salvation plan. I guess that I don't have to bore you with any more details of my life for now, but I just wanted to stop in and say hello, and thank you for your blog. And by the way, I believe that the KJV is the correct version, as well, but I also just simply like it, because of it's beauty and majesty in it's language, and the poetic nature of some passages that should be poetic. It is an amazing translation, that has been a friend of mine for many years.


Your questions or comments welcome.