Ruckman saying it’s wrong to use such terms as “the Greek” and “the Greek text”

Ruckman likes to make the rules. Let’s observe the rules that Ruckman imposes on others, and see if he follows his own rules, including people he defends. Here’s a large sampling of his rules on not referring to “the Greek,” “the Greek text,” etc.:

Ruckman making the rules

“The Greek Text” is the hallucination of a junkie on crack. (Ruckman, Peter. The Last Grenade. 1990, p. 118)

We corrected the Bible when we corrected the Greek text? What Greek text? There is no such thing as the Greek text. (Ibid., p. 113)

“The Greek” means nothing…There is no “sich a thang” as “the Greek Text” He knew it when he lied. “The Greek Text” is a hallucination of a man on pot…a fantasy. No such thing exists. (Ruckman, Peter. A Critique of the NIV. tri-fold tract, n.d., p. 2)

Why not go by the Greek text (or the Hebrew text)? Easy; there isn’t any. The Textus Receptus is not even “a Greek text,” let alone “the” Greek text. It is only a type of text, and there are many editions of this type.
(Ruckman, Peter. 22 Years of the Bible Believer’s Bulletin. Vol. 2 “Corrupt Bible Versions.” p. 150)

The expression “THE GREEK AND HEBREW” is as inane a piece of foolishness as ever busted out of a Halloween party: there is no such thing as “THE GREEK AND HEBREW” IN WHICH to put confidence. (Ruckman, Peter. The “Errors” in the King James Bible. p. 449)

There is no “sech of a than” as “the” Greek text; that is an Alexandrian cliché used by all professional liars to imply they have the original Greek text, and you don’t. (Ruckman, Peter. The Scholarship only Controversy, p. 144)

“THE Greek New Testament” is mentioned twice. There is no such animal on the face of this earth. (Ruckman, Peter. The Pastoral Epistles. 1989, p. 435)

If your pastor says “THE Greek says” or “THE Greek text says” or “the original Greek TEXT says,” he is nothing but a two-faced lying con man. (Ruckman, Peter. General Epistles. 2004, p. 85)

“THE GREEK” is a Satanic expedient used by all professional liars to INTIMATE that they have the original text, when they do not. (Ruckman, Peter. The Last Grenade. 1990, p. 42)

Falsehood. No such animal as “THE GREEK TESTAMENT” could be found anywhere since Constantine died.
(Ibid., p. 49)

There is no “THE Greek text.” (Ibid., p. 116)

First lie: “The Greek text says . . . .” There is no such thing as a Greek text. The man who says “the Greek text says” is a liar no matter what he says after that. (Ruckman, Peter. Bible Believers’ Bulletin. May 2008, p. 14)

Any mature Christian know that there is no such animal as “THE Greek text,” and the men who use this Satanic cliché no more believe what they are saying than when they say “We believe the Bible IS the word of God.” (Ruckman, Peter. Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians. 1973, 1980, p. 279)

1. There is no such thing as “THE GREEK TESTAMENT,” as anyone knows.
2. There is no such thing as “THE ORIGINAL GREEK TEXT,” which anyone knows.
3. There is no such thing as “THE GREEK TEXT,” which anyone knows. (Ruckman, Peter. The Pastoral Epistles. 1989, p. 452)

Why did the demon-possessed liar say “THE” Greek text (Bible Believers’ Bulletin. Jan. 2006, p. 6)

Every one of them is a chronic, pathological liar who will not hesitate to refer to “THE” Greek text, or even the “original” Greek text when he knows, as he lies, that he is lying like a Persian rug. (Bible Believers’ Bulletin. June 2003, p. 2)

Ruckman not following his own rules

In the following quotes we have underlined the terms that are relevant:

The Apocryphal books were ignored in choosing the Greek text for the AV. (Ruckman, Peter. The Bible Babel. 1994, p. 3)

We accept this position first by faith, then by comparison of versions, then by the fruits of the translation, then by motives of translators and publishers, then by manuscript evidence, and finally by translating from “the Greek.” (Ruckman, Peter. The Pastoral Epistles. 1989, p. 276)

The word in “THE GREEK TEXT” is [Greek word] (theo-pneustos). It means “God breathed,”…
(Ruckman, Peter. Bible Believers’ Bulletin Reprint Vol. 3 “Doctrinal Studies,” 2000, p. 207)

the Greek New Testament that produced the King James Bible (Bible Believers’ Bulletin. Oct. 2006, p. 2)

Not one change in the Greek text or one change in the wording of the English text in 370 years. Only English spellings and punctuation revised. (Ruckman, Peter. History of the New Testament Church. Vol. 2, 1984, p. 267 [chart])

This time we will stick with the “Textus Receptus Greek,” that is, the Greek text which apostate Fundamentalists finally adopted after stating the “HISTORIC POSITION” that the Alexandrian text was the best one. (Ruckman, Peter. Bible Believers’ Bulletin Reprint Vol. 3 “Doctrinal Studies,” 2000, p. 205)

We will end the citations with a case in which Ruckman refers to “the Greek text” of the KJV no less than four times on the same page:

Bible believers still have the authoritative text. …the Greek text… …the Greek text… …the Greek text… …the Greek text… (Ruckman, Peter. The Monarch of the Books! 1973, p. 18-19)

I could understand Ruckman admonishing writers to be careful about not giving uninformed readers the impression that there was only one Greek New Testament text. After all, dozens have been printed over the years, including Textus Receptus and critical editions. However, Ruckman takes advantage of this situation to attempt to portray scholars who use such terms as “the Greek” or “the Greek text” as liars who are intentionally deceiving. Ruckman may not realize that he has used some of those exact terms himself many times, as we have documented here. It is generally agreed that there is no dispute whatsoever about approximately 95% of the Greek New Testament, and the figures look even better when cases of mere spelling and word order are not figured in. In spite of this, Ruckman wants you to be paranoid about ever using a phrase along the lines of “the Greek says,” and will call you a liar or worse if you don’t follow his rules (which he doesn’t observe himself).

We will conclude with proof that the KJV translators used terminology that Ruckman condemns.

From title page of the New Testament of the 1611 KJV

2

 
 
 
From title page of the 1611 KJV

1

 

From The Translators to the Reader (preface of the KJV 1611)
4

 

Marginal note for Mark 7:3 in 1611 edition

3

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.

*