The biggest, fattest, most whopping lie according to Ruckman

Peter Ruckman tries to elevate himself by accusing virtually everyone else who disagrees with him of being a liar. He will make flippant statements such as, "Every major, recognized Christian scholar in this century is an habitual, chronic, intentional, pathological LIAR (Gen. 3:1)." (Ruckman, Peter. The Christian Liar’s Library. 1997, p. 212). If you followed Ruckman's delusional thinking, he will have you convinced that he and his few followers are the only honest people left on the planet. His writings are filled with such statements as, "I would be surprised if an honest ministerial student graduated from BJU," (Ibid., p. 180) and "I just recorded nineteen of the most hellish, outrageous LIES ever recorded on 'planet earth' since 4000 B.C." (Ibid., p. 314). With this in mind, try to imagine what could possibly be "the biggest, fattest, most whopping lie any criminal ever perjured himself with." In Ruckman's world, this is what it is:

Zane Hodges, lying like a dead dog, said that in his childhood he could remember that the congregations "stood to read responsively from SCRIPTURE." (p. 14).
Like h*** they did.
That is the biggest, fattest, most whopping lie any criminal ever perjured himself with “under oath.”
Zane Hodges has never heard "the SCRIPTURES" being read by any congregation in his life. He knew it when he lied about it. (Ruckman, Peter. The Christian Liar’s Library. 1997, pp. 41-42)

What would possess Ruckman to say such a thing? Ruckman believes his KJV was "given by inspiration of God," and he therefore believes that only those who believe like him have the right to use the term "Scripture" for their translation.  All others are liars. For more information, see Ruckman's self-serving interpretation for 2 Timothy 3:16.

Virtually every time Ruckman accuses someone of lying, it is over a difference of opinion or a totally subjective matter such as in the above extreme example. Often when Ruckman accuses others of lying he is nitpicking about the failure of others to say things his way exactly, even when involving such common terms as BibleScripture, Word of God, the Greek, etc. The absurdity involved in Ruckman's logic is akin to calling people liars for using the term "Guinea pigs" when the creatures so named are not pigs and do not come from Guinea, or calling people liars for referring to a certain cereal as "Grape-Nuts" when it is made from neither grapes nor nuts. When a given term of that nature is understood and accepted by society, no deception is involved.

Here is another example from Ruckman's writings of what we are trying to demonstrate. Ruckman is claiming there is a major difference between the terms Bible and Word of God:

You say “Ruckman, you are too persnickety. You are nit-picking; the two words (“THE BIBLE” and “THE WORD OF GOD”) are the same thing.” THE TWO THINGS HAVE NEVER BEEN THE SAME IN ONE WORD OF PRINT ANYWHERE IN THIS PUBLICATION, QUOTING AN ALEXANDRIAN, AND WILL NEVER BE THE SAME IN THE WRITINGS OF ONE WRITER QUOTED IN THIS PUBLICATION, TILL HELL FREEZES OVER.
That time, YOU lied. (Ruckman, Peter. The Christian Liar’s Library. 1997, p. 131)

Ruckman claims he and his followers are consistent when they use such terms as "the Bible:"

With US (dig that one!) there is no sophistries, no cloaked mysteries, no double talk that needs definitions, no excursions into cloudland to unravel the mess we made of things, no Jesuit casuistry, no twisted applications, invented terminology, or ad lib’s like “we may CALL” or “To all INTENTS,” etc. To US (dig that word, baby!) the expression “THE BIBLE” means “THE BIBLE.” You pick up THE BIBLE. It is The Holy Bible, commonly called the Authorized Version. It is an English Bible… (Ruckman, Peter. The Christian Liar’s Library. 1997, p. 185)

How is it that a “Ruckmanite” will tell you which Book he is referring to everytime [sic] he says “Bible,” “Book,” or “Scriptures,”… (Ruckman, Peter. The Christian Liar’s Library. 1997, p. 91)

When we say “Bible,” we mean A BOOK YOU HAVE IN YOUR HAND. (Ruckman, Peter. The Alexandrian Cult, Part 6. 1981, p. 11)

Now it is our turn to be absurd and nit-pick Ruckman-style to see if he is consistent with the expression "the Bible" as he claims in the above three quotes. With the three previous quotes in mind, observe the following sentence in which he uses the expression "the Bible:"

The Bible was written by thirty-six to forty authors over a period of sixteen hundred years… (Ruckman, Peter. Theological Studies, Booklet 15. 1988, p. 5)

Could Ruckman have meant the Authorized Version in the above quote? Did the AV take 1,600 years to write? Of course not. There are times when technically speaking a reference to "the Bible" cannot possibly mean a translation. If it was necessary to be highly technical, it could be said that the KJV is not so much the Bible (or Scripture, or Word of God), but rather a translation of the Bible. However, it is our belief that it is proper to refer to the KJV as the Word of God, the Scriptures, the Bible, etc., in the non-technical sense which is generally understood. Ruckman's use of different meanings for a term–while claiming only one meaning all along–is a fallacy known as equivocation.

If we were to look at Ruckman's credibility in subjective matters where we would reach different conclusions, we would be able to easily accuse Ruckman thousands of times of being a liar. However, we do not consider that a fair premise with which to judge others, including Peter Ruckman himself. On a related note, we deplore the tactics of a website we have seen (to which we refuse to link) that accuses "Ruckman & Company" of assorted serious crimes with documentation ranging from he-said-she-said to non-existent. As much as we disagree with Dr. Ruckman, we believe in taking him to task with information that is verifiable.

If we were to look at Ruckman's credibility in matters that are not so subjective, there would be many statements in his writings that are suspect. The very book The Christian Liar’s Library listing 320 Christians of whom Ruckman considers to be liars contains an example of a very questionable statement that is not subjective. On page 94, Ruckman mentions how many times a year he has read the Bible through during different stages in his life. The total comes to 268 times. However, on page 300 of the same book, he claims to have only read the Bible through 140 times, a difference of 128 times! Could this be an honest mistake? We do not know. For more examples of Ruckman's credibility being put to the test, see Testing Ruckman's Credibility and Dr. Ruckman against himself or Do as I say, not as I do!

 

Would you like to comment? Comments must be respectful. All comments will be moderated. The reason a comment may not be approved could range from provocativeness, going off topic, lack of substance, lacking Christian grace, baseless accusations, etc.

*