Here is the paragraph in which he said it to provide some context:
Never mind the dumbbells like the ones listed above; they don’t know about what they are talking. To say that salvation was “by grace . . . through faith” (see Eph. 2:8) in both Testaments (the position taken by the faculty members of every major Fundamental and Conservative College, University, and Seminary in America) is anti-biblical heresy of the worst sort. People in the Old Testament did not even go to the same place as people in the New Testament. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob did not go where you go when you die (2 Cor. 5:8 cf. Eph. 4:8–10); that is an undeniable Biblical fact. (Bible Believers' Bulletin, July 2011, p. 2)
Ruckman sometimes has guest speakers preach in his church who believe salvation was by grace through faith in both testaments. Considering how Ruckman labeled those who hold this view, could it not be said that Ruckman sometimes has fellowship with and invites those who hold to what he considers "anti-biblical heresy of the worst sort" to preach in his pulpit?
For more on this topic, we recommend the following article: Ruckman's multiple plans of salvation for different ages.
He is at least giving them a fair shot to prove their point. The other churches don’t allow anyone except those who are from their recognized schools or are in agreement with them. The Bible is very clear on this subject. Old and New Testament salvation are not the same.
How could a person who reads the Bible believe salvation is the same in the O. T. ? Just read and see what God has to say and throw the ” scholars” out!
How? Well, when I read my Bible, I come to a passage in Hebrews. To be more precise, Hebrews 11. This is where Paul the Apostle was describing how the O.T. Saints had faith. Look closely at 11:26. There it describes how Moses had faith and he esteemed the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt. How is that possible? Because Christ is preached even in the O.T. Salvation has always been by faith. Anyone who reads their Bible and pays attention to it will see that.
If the above Paul is not aware of, Christ is God. And if he would just read verse 28 he kept the Passover.
First and foremost anyone who studies the bible must know that all Scripture give given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in rightousness.(2 Tim. 3:16) Second any student of the Bible has to admit and acknowledge that all the Bible is for us not to us. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needed not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of tuth. (2 Tim 2:15) Anyone who can read should have better knowledge than to quote scripture out of the book of Hebrews since that book was written to THE Hebrews during the tribulation. And if Old Testament Salvation is the Same as New Testament salvation(which it isn’t) then why did our Lord and Saviour have to die on the Cross of Calvary. Why not keep the Old Testament way. Which required a sacrifce. The reason is that Jesus Christ died was to be the final Sacrifice. He died for our sin thus Starting New Testament Salvation. To think that Old Testament Salvation and New Testament Salvation are the same is utterly foolish. We don’t have a hebrew priest to serve as a mediator between us and God. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; We do not have to sacrifice a goat or lamb that is without spot or blemish. (And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour. Eph. 5:2)
I disagree that HEBREWS was written for people living during the tribulation. Jacobs trouble and other ‘tribulation phrases’ aren’t even employed. I challenge you to read through the book of Hebrews and you wont get a main theme concerning the great tribulation. The book of Hebrews has a lot of contrasts between the old and new covenants. Ihave several commentaries and the only one teaching this tribulation stuff is the man from Florida that many people blindly follow.
Right
when I said (Right), I was being sarcastic
If your hermeneutic consists of assigning certain books to fit the dispensational timeline, you might as well do you like JN Darby or CI Scholfield– reject the Bible, that is, follow it to its grandest conclusion as they did. Either the scriptures of truth are for the canon, or they are not and must be rejected toto caelo. The long list of patriarchs said to have been saved by faith where in the Old Testament, which yes is a different covenant, but the agency was no different than that of the new testament. This is also the testimony of Galatians 3.8–9, and the fourth chapter of the book of Romans; was Paul wrong on two counts writing under the same inspiration as other patriarchs? From what you write, you would have that to be so. “Aut insanum est, aut versus facit” or “Either he is mad, or is composing verses”, quips Horace.
Much learning doth make thee mad.
First of all, I am at this website because I met a “Ruckmanite” and he was very confused on some passages. But I will say please read your Bible as it regards to this topic. Salvation was always by faith. Old and new testament. Read Romans 4, Galatians 3 and HEBREWS 11. Old testament saints saved by faith. Not that they were deserving of their salvation but that they believed God.
I understand things were different in the old testament. The savior hadn’t come. They made sacrifices and gave offerings but all these things were a shadow of Christ. Read the ending of Col 2. How could the old testament saints be saved? By the blood of Christ. The blood of bulls and goats could never take away sin, read Hebrews 10. Once Jesus Christ accomplished his work on the cross. He was raised and gives us a new life. His blood was applied to all those who had faith in the true and living God.
This is important because God did not change his method of salvation. He revealed it in Christ.
Romans 16:25-26
25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, 26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
Show me where any OT saint was born again into the body of Christ.
I have not said that (about OT saints having been born again into the body of Christ) nor anyone in the comments section so far. Therefore you do not deserve a response.
All you people trying to give biblical scriptural doctrinal statements concerning this subject is honestly a waste of time. You cant fix ignorance! People in the old testament couldent have been saved by grace through faith! They was saved the same in the old testament as they will be in the tribulaion. It is a faith works system. Any one who disagrees dont understand or believe in dispensation. And if you disagree my friend its not disagreement with me. Its with Gods word!!! NO NEED TO CAST PEARLS BEFORE THE SWINE. PIGS DONT KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH IT!
It is a “faith works system” at any time?
That is a contradiction in terms according to the Bible itself! And giving “biblical scriptural doctrinal statements” will not be “A waste of time” as you say. Romans 11:6 (KJV) And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
Romans 4:2-3 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.
The above passage so blatantly contradicts Ruckman’s position, that instead of admitting the Bible is right and he is wrong, Ruckman has to make Abraham an exception.
All this and so much more documented on this website prove conclusively that Ruckman is a false teacher who tries to pass himself off as a Baptist.
Your scripture in romans is speaking of salvation after the gospel was fullfilled. Saying that now in this current dispensation we are saved by grace.and if by grace we are saved then" works "under the law dispensation is not longer fit. Eph2:8 …… Also Abraham was not justified by works alone agreed… But by works with faith as romans says works without faith "whereof to glory" so faith without works is dead under the law. Just as grace without faith is dead. Rom 5 teaches that in the time of abraham there was no law. Not until exod19 therefore sin was not imputed unto them… After law it was works but not works alone it was works/faith…. After the gospel it was grace through faith plus 0 minus 0.. During tribulation it will go back to works faith again.
Brother Webmaster,
You might consider placing this article where Ruckman flat teaches the same hyper-dispensationalist model described from his writings in a chalk talk.
Our churches brother need some more hyper-dispensationalist. We need somebody that can tell the difference between the way God deals with man from adam to moses…. From moses to John3 were people was saved on just the power of God before Jesus fullfilled the law by death burial ressurection… From John 3 to the book of Acts where the transition from law to grace occurred.. Then from there to the tribulation period… Then from there to the millennial reign….. All of these were different dispensations where God dealt with man differently…
No takers aye?? Figures.. Bible usually clears up convictions/teachings that the bible dont teach.. I love it boys keep it coming..
Why is it Wilson thinks this website is a bully pulpit? If he were consistent, he would realize I Timothy 6.20 through 21 ban all foolish questions as well as strife. The only way a man can be made to differ is his departure from established scriptural orthodoxy. Stated another way, a Ford Pinto is not a Maserati; anyone who says otherwise is only self-duping, being subverted and sinful, condemned by himself. Titus chapter three is yet in the sacred Bible.
Salvation in either compact, works or grace, is evidently sola fide and sola gratia. See Deuteronomy 30.6, Ezekiel 11, 16, 36 to 37, Jeremias 31 to 32 and Zachariah 4.6. Interestingly, the latter prophet comnects this by way of the crucifixion to the Master Jesus Christ. It seems even in death Ruckman still did not communicate an effective, systematic hermeneutic, even the grammatical historic one behind dispensation.
Listen friend lets not be talking about grammatical errors. Reread your article gospel standard baptist if you feel the need for that! 2nd of all dispensationalism comes in many forms.. i am an ultra-dispensationalist… because the bible makes very clear that God not only deals with man differently in grace than law…law from before law etc.. but also salvation cannot be obtained the same way now as under the law.. therefore salvation by grace through faith plus 0 minus 0 cannot be obtained until the grace of God was fullfilled by sending his son to calvery.. prjor to the testater death which was Jesus christ salvation was 100% a faith works system!! But anytime God spares one from hell it is considered the Grace of God. But that does not mean he was saved by grace!! Read gospel of John ch1 and you will see moses did not deliver a package of grace coming down from the mount..he delivered LAWS!! Aka works!! IJesus fullfilled the law and traded and gave me GRACE!! before the law is another subject.. can people not see that salvation is not the same!! I would happily debate any scholars on this topic.. my email in which i can be reached is jmw14ew@gmail.com..please dont hesitate to reach out to me.. Bibal doctrine is worth the time of debate etc for me to teach people contrary to the false teachings that alot of people is getting from their pulpits!! Let God be true and EVERY man a liar.
I can assure you, Wilson, I have NO intention on talking to you. Why ever the Webmaster allows you to comment is a mystery to me because you only quarrel whenever you come rather than refraining from strife; you are heady when you ought to be meek. Why would I talk to you anyway; you would not listen as you on this site demonstrate again and again! You are exactly like the charismatic I departed from, save that I hope you are not trusting in an experience as they typically do. Timothy 6.1 to 7 applies. You have a popish view of justification and cannot be truly thought to be in Christ if you believe there are different ways of deliverance as you emphatically state. Go back to EW Bullinger's or Ruckman the occultist's commentaries, for you would do well to take his other Christ and other gospel. Let the reader notice what accursed fruit eminates off of the Ruckmanite tree, fleeing far away from it. I Peter 3.9 through verse 12.
Let me as well add that Wilson referencing Romans has called me a LIAR after being refuted from the covenant of works on his popish doctrine of ultra-dispensationalism with its rejection of the Five Solas, consequently scriptural salvation in all ages by Grace, Faith, All of the Scripture, to the Glorification of God, by Christ Alone, and yet he has the AUDACITY to want to debate! This is from beneath and not above (Jas. 3.15-7). It is as the Proverb says an honor to depart from strife but it likewise says a fool will be meddling. I am no scholar having only been taught of God in the wilderness, with no more than at the beginning my Bible to read, having lost all family for Christ upon leaving charismatism. Could someone explain to a veteran of the Louisiana special education system how this is meek behavior from Wilson? Furthermore, I have already quoted from chapter 11 of the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession showing the inspired covenant of grace does not say the equally-inspired old compact had a different soteriology as well as the old league itself in the chapters above. https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Proverbs-27-22/
Why would you talk to me? Ummm im pretty sure you just did by replying to my comment.. im not trusting in an experience.. im trusting in the grace of God.. what are you trusting in? Im not charismatic!! Im a Bible believing baptist!! My view of justification is by grace through faith !! That is however not how it was obtained under the law!! Please by all means contact me anytime.. we can even have a public Biblical debate on the doctrine of salvation..im not a bully.. im a Bible believer.. by the way the apostle paul was "rude in speech".. so call me rude..2corinthians 11:6.. im not any where close to the man he was!! Are you brother..
Logic is not a part of Ruckmanism, and I speak as an ex-Ruckmanite. The Five Solas are the most fundamental statement of the Christian faith, all accursed by Rome in the Trent Councils over 100 times, because the strumpet on many waters believes the true gospel to be absolute heresy in the highest degree (it is why we Poor Men were geocided). To state in a different covenant or time period of sacred writ does NOT affirm these five solid statements is to have a popish view of justification via a synergy of works with faith, especially since it has been demonstrated Isaiah 55 with numerous other passages teach the same. This is then contradicted by affirming the Five Solas for a timeframe but not for another, especially since covenant and not dispensations or administrations are what God made with men. There are but two, the expired covenant of works, and that of grace wherein is contained the redemption of the foreordained. What putrid fruit on the Ruckmanite tree!
Finally, Wilson invited me to debate him yet does not seem to comprehend how a conversation works. Merely on principle I do not conversate with heretics who cannot understand a conversation since the gospel is not a waste of time; such a debate is, particularly from someone who is too double-souled to see he called me a liar but yet wants to debate.
you need to read john 7;19. no one ever kept the law according to Jesus. stop your selective editing by ignoring all the texts that disprove what you are trying to teach. dr. H.A. Ironside thoroughly refuted ultra-dispensationalism. go to withchrist.org/ultra.htm Good article Vadious
I never stated anyone kept the law!! Please reread!! I said Jesus fullfilled the law.. and that prior to Jesus fullfilling the law they was NOT saved by grace through faith!! They was saved so to speak by works and faith!! After Jesus christ my saviour died people then was saved by grace through faith!! This is not a hellish doctrine it is a biblical doctrine!! I am not trying to bash or be rude.. this website was created to bash and belittle the teachings of a great man of God.. because some of you dont agree does not mean i or brother ruckman was wrong!! My doctrine that i teach is also the farthest thing from "popish" im 100% against catholic teaching.. im an independent bible believing baptist!! I was told by my apostle and your apostle if you are saved the apostle paul.. he said for the church which im part of to follow him as he follows christ!! Im not told to follow any other dispensation of teaching doctrinally except for PAULS!! Im the farthest thing from a charismatic!! I actually teach against that doctrine!! I was not saved on an experience or a feeling brother was you?? I was saved by the miraculous grace of God through faith!! As paul said in Galations 5:1 to srand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Nobody in the old testament was justified the way i was justified when i was born again!! Nobody in the old testament was regenerated or born again period!! I was.. nobody in the old testament under the law was instructed to be born again!! I was!! Friends can you not see the difference between redemption under law and redemption under Grace!! I dont offer up yearly sacrifices on an alter in hopes of atonement!! My high priest the man christ Jesus was my high priest was my lamb the ultimate sacrifice he reconciled me he justified me.. not by the hopes of the right sacrifice in hopes of hearing the bell ring and a sigh of relief that ive been forgiven!! But i am forgiven because Christ fullfilled the law became the Lamb of God therefore i cannot be saved the same in the dispensation of grace as they where under the law!! Romans is the first book in the bible in which we can doctrinally apply to us the church!! If you disagree then your not disagreeing with me my friend.. you are disagreeing with Gods word!! Let God be true and every man a liar!! I pray that God will show you the difference.. i put his words and the understanding of them not in my teachings but i place them in the hands of the author of his book kjv1611.. GODS WORD!! to God be glory!!
in the O.T. works was keeping the law according to Paul. Gal.3:10-11. Ruckman correctly taught salvation by grace through faith.[i listen to a lot of his salvation videos] I am saying he is in opposition to Paul's teaching on OT salvation. study Paul in Romans 4:6. David was saved under the law without works. When Paul spoke about the jews in the OT, he clearly taught they were not saved by works[works of the law. study these passages in context. Romans 9;31-10:4,Rom 1;1-2, 4;2. 3;20, Gal 2;16-18 3;8-11, chapter 4,acts 15;11 HEBREWS 3;17-4;11,. PAUL TOLD US TO CONSENT TO THE WORDS OF OUR LORD JESUS.1Tim.6;3-4. In John chapter 3, Jesus is talking to NICODEMUS,an OT jew under the old covenant. remember, when Jesus told Nicodemus to be born again, they were still under the law because Jesus hadn't died yet. Nicodemus was amaster[teacher] and Jesus chides himfor not knowing that. Jesus told him to be born again and they were still under the law. read luke 7;50 in context.they were still under the law and the woman was saved by faith alone in the messiah. read john chapter 4. same thing. Read ISIAH 53;1-6. Luke2;25-32. there were some looking for the coming messiah, but a lot of Israel was in unbelief. Paul lays this theme out in Romans 9-11. I have a Ruckman church near me that some of my family goes to and they used to teach salvation by grace 30 years ago[same as Ruckman] taught, but they have gone into heresy and now teach LORDSHIP SALVATION , so new people aren't really saved at all. [Lordship salvation=faith and works] I never joined that church and i'm glad i didn't . NTbelievers,after they are saved, are sealed with the HOLY SPIRIT Ephesians 1;13. This is God's order of salvation for the church. one must remember the church is a unique group. OT believers were not indwelt by the HOLY SPIRIT except the Spirit would come upon them for the purpose of serving God. OT believers had faith in the shed blood of a sacrificial lamb to cover their sins until the Lamb of God would come and shed his blood to take away their sins. LEV. 16;10-11. JOHN 1;29. HEBREWS CHAPTERS 9 AND 10. Study these passages with an open mind and ask GOD TO SHOW YOU-HE WILL!
Mr Stanton —
It is best to pray this confused, double-minded Wilson be enlightened from his darkness, especially if he has rejected salvation in the former covenant was identical to that of the new. James' epistle seems upon a careless reading to contradict the other sacred messengers, yet this is undone by the fact Romans chapter two when compared to James makes the identical argument; likewise, in listing Abraham the former idolater who in faith left Ur of the Chaldees and Rahab a harlot, whose red rope was a sign of her trust, James preached no other message than that published abroad. He would have been accursed by his counterparts had it been so. Notice who is listed in Jesus' lineage in the first chapter of Matthew in addition to Luke's third chapter.
i meant leviticus 17;10-11 and not 16;10-11, although it teaches about the scapegoat dying and also removing or carrying away their sins intothe wilderness.it's a picture of 2 things being accomplished-dying for sins and also removing them. it's a type or figure of what the coming Messiah would do.
to monergist i didn't mention James in my response to Wilson because wilson would only listen to Paul and reject James because of his ultra-dispensationalism. If you are teaching someone in heresey it i a waste of time to quote scriptures that they will ignore. i learned that listening to Dr. Walter Martin on tape [now deceased] in how to deal with those in error' i have been engaging JW's for 30 yrs.
Mr Stanton —
Dr WR Martin was sadly heretical on several points, namely his rejection of monergism as well as his modernistic New Evangelical mindset. II Timothy 3.16 refutes this idea, as well as Martin himself because of what the texts says. The text of James states man is justified not by works but faith. If they will not hear, they have not got ears to hear. Wilson has already lied as well as ignored the fact he agrees with Rome while having the audacity to lecture me. When he has read the Bible 14 times in four years, I'll listen; he never will. I read the scriptures more than most any Ruckmanite; never in apologetics compromise as Dr Martin's vain philosophy sometimes did, especially with his popish textual criticism addmitted in the Catholic Encyclopedia fathered by Richard Simon (1638-1712) in the article Higher Criticism. This is not as he claimed an "exacting science" as he claimed on the Ankenberg show, but a means of destroying Sola and Tota Scriptura.
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/search.php?hs=1&q=who+hath+ears+to+hear
Read the first 7 verses of James!! Not wrote to the "church".. You cannot tell me it is!! If you say it is you will have to ignore what it says to do so!!!
Let me help… It says " to the twelve scattered abroad" are you part of those 12 tribes? NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!
I don't know why some you supposedly educated people who uses words longer than a dead snake can't understand not to pull scripture for dispensational truths out of a book in a different dispensation!! All scripture is for us to use.. And is profitable some for doctrine, some for reproof,some for instruction in righteousness,, but not all those books can be taught for church doctrine in this dispensation.. If salvation is the same now as it was then Sunday when you go to church or whatever the next day you meet back at your local assembly is, get you a lamb and a bullock and slit its throat tell your pastor to set down and get out of your way and you catch that blood and sprinkle it on the mercy seat and oh 1 more thing some time between now and then meet all the qualifications of being a high priest because this "work" will only be accepted for atonement from a certain lineage and let me know if you received forgiveness!! I mean my goodness to say that redemption is the same from an animal sacrifice as it is from the Son of God is sacrilige!! Also to say that people was saved from something that was a type of the Son of God or a picture of what was to come is foolish!! I don't get money in my bank account from somebody saying they got money that will be in my account ONE DAY!! I CANT PAY MY BILLS WITH MONEY THAT I DONT HAVE!! Not can people be redeemed on a promise made under the law that he was coming.. I was bought with a price redeemed praise God once the payment of my saviours blood was shed! Those people was not kept or sealed by the holy spirit,I AM!! Big big difference.. By grace through faith not of works!! The high priest had to do "work" to obtain atonement!! My high priest did the work for me!! Those people had to repeat yearly..I DONT!! I don't need recapped every year like the average Baptist around these parts do.. Aka free wills. They was saved by a faith/works system.. That's why Paul had so much trouble getting the Jew to accept the gospel..ROM10 they had a deal but not according to knowledge!! Can't the difference be seen my friends
Here again, Isaiah 55.1-7 does not say the soteriology of the Hebrews was a mixture of faith with deeds; I defy you to explain where there is a book of Isaiah in the new covenant. You have another gospel as well as another Christ, sir, one forming the basic soteriology of the Jehovah's Witnesses or of Rome.
There is a case to be made to state a denial of the adorable Godhead on the part of ultra-dispensationalism. If Jesus Christ the Master is the lone, all-sufficient Ombudsman, Prophet, King & Priest of the church, which according to just Stephen existed in the wilderness, as well that the gospel is euangelion aionios or the Apocalypse 14.6 everlasting evangel, he was all these things to the Hebrews & soujourners as well as those among the isles. Denial of this is to deny Jesus Christ; denial of these also denies the Spirit's potent work in salvation, as well as Jehovah's decrees of the new covenant; this same Jesus is as well from everlasting (Mi. 5.2). Likewise, since the Ancient of Days in Daniel seven gave to he who also appears in chapter 10 or Apocalypse chapters one & 19, the Faithful & True, in a covenant transaction (we call it the covenant of grace; dispensationalism says the church age), Mid-Acts Dispensationalism would then have to charge the Ancient of Days with incompetency & the Faithful & True as a false Messiah. If correct, Ruckman did have issues on eternal generation which he rebuffed. The denial of the Triad is not on their paper creedal declarations but in the actual offices, deed in addition to the persons of the sacred Triad. It is non possumus to lean on God while denying his nature & his mighty acts.
If I may also add, euangelion/euangelizo is most interesting because the ultra-dispensationalists insist the Pauline gospel differs from the Preterite (Peter's) because of alleged different revalatory mysteries. Since almost all the mentions of the aforementioned gospel are in Paul's church letters, it is of great interest John employs this in Apocalypse 14.6, as well the four mentions evenly cut between Matthew as well as Mark. The supposedly Judaic message of the gospels in contradicted by the fact the SINGULAR euangelion/euangelizo of Matthew, Mark in addition to John is likewise the evangel or gospel of Paul who repeatedly proclaims a gospel to the two flocks, Jew or Gentile. This embarrasment on the part of ultra-dispensationalism, or semi-ultra-dispensationalism like Ruckman's comes from a rejection not only of the Hebrew & Greek original languages, but English. This is amplified seeing as that Ruckman held a perfect, inspired English text since the everlasting gospel is also singular. Likewise, though the tidings of good things hoped on in the covenant of works were plural in the tidings, they are singular in case as Hebrew bears forth, much like the good news is singular yet stated in plural. The following is an interesting conversation on EW Bullinger's private translation between a noted Minority Text Greek scholar, Dr AT Robertson, & HA Ironside, noteworthy dispensational fundamentalist commentator recorded in the latter's Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth —
Go to bed.. u will accomplish more by that than preaching heresy
(This is your quote notice how you sound. Because Christ is preached even in the O.T. Salvation has always been by faith. Anyone who reads their Bible and pays attention to it will see that.) Try to read your Bible before you open your mouth. Holy Spirit in OT came upon a man and left him. Did you never read John 7:38-39,16:7,14:16 Notice Saul, 1 Samuel 16:14 But the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him . Also when was last time you offered a lamb for your sin Ex 29:36. Did you never read what Jesus told the man in Mat 19:16:-17. Didn't you ever read about Lazarus. When he died he went down not up. Luke 16:19-26 Jesus went down and let them out Eph 4:8-9. I am sorry but Dr. Ruckman is so far ahead of you, I don't believe you will ever catch up. Have a nice day!
Ruckman supporters have the absolute worst character of any born again Christian group. Take a bow, sir.