Safe Forever

[pseudorandom331]

Consider the source...

(See Ruckman‟s writings about a ten foot tall Antichrist with a bad right arm and a

bad right eye that will land in St. Peter's

square in a 600 feet in diameter by 60 feet

thick flying saucer, who will implant the

mark with his huge black lips.)

"Mark of the Beast", 1969, 1977, p. 106

[bitall4u]

if the bible was pure in words why do we have so many testaments there should only be 1

[rizoinabox]

i was after gyroscope, not this preacher. Anybody stop to think that something written by human hands and translated hundreds of times can be the word of God?

[zoogdog]

Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

Psa 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

[rizoinabox]

"The words of THE LORD" - not of man!

psa 12:7 - preserve them FROM this generation - sounds like keeping them away from man!

3:16 - inspiration of God is not God's word. inspiration is a calculated opinion of those inspired.

3:17 - man of God may be perfect? not even jesus was perfect.

you didn't even say anything then, you just quoted things. I just don't see how you need scripture to believe, if you feel god just believe!!!

[CRYSTALRIVERFISHERMA]

hebrews 4:12-13 read it kjv1611 1thessalonians 2:13 for this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us ,ye received it NOT AS THE WORD OF MEN,BUT as it is in truth,THE WORD OF GOD,which effectucally worketh also in you that believe .

[rizoinabox]

You are also guilty of not listening to what im saying. Only believing in god through a book is like reading a textbook on how to play tennis and saying you are a pro even though you have never picked up a racket. effectucally is not a word either!

[paolotagliano]

Completely agree rizoinabox. And Gyroscope fucking rock.

[samexmistake]

lol i was after them too. dear oh dear.

[aWreath0fBarbs]

Guardian obviously doesent understand what "enduring to the end" mean. this was in a time when christians would be tortured and martyred and burned alive. tell me, in this day and age, what the hell do you have to endure, being a christian. whats so hard about your life that you have to "endure to the end." ive never been happier than the day i became a christian. and anyway, the reformation happened for a reason. you think the catholics had it right? give me a break.

[ScientistALRIII]

@aWreath0fBarbs Soon will begin events described in Book of Revelations then You might understand what it means to endure... Besides IF You try today to not just stay silent but try to fight versus evil and shout YAHUSHUA name to people, then You would understand that it is some kind of tribulation... Regards.

[hchaynes]

MarkL3055

If you only knew.

[MarkL3055]

Nobody's saved.  It's a ridiculous concept made up to scare the naive into thinking they have to belong to a cult to get into the afterlife.

[k8ai]

All of you knuckleheads that say that you can lose it, how do YOU expect to keep it? Answer me...

[Guardian1223]

Show us someone interpreting the Bible to teach OSAS prior to the Protestant Reformation of 1517?

[Guardian1223]

No one here is saved.

Your salvation is conditional on believing in Jesus AND keeping his commands.

He that endures to the end SHALL be saved. (Future tense)

I Corinthians 15:1-2

"Moreover, brethren I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand by which also you are saved if you hold fast that word which I preached to you - unless you believed in vain"

OSAS did not appear as a Bible interpretation until the Protestant Reformation.

[Baptistpastor]

Do you know what the enduring to the end means? The context of the passage is the great tribulation not life. So, to enter the kingdom one must endure to the end of the tribulation. Also, contextually the vanity of 1 Cor. 15:2 is a reference to an unbelief in the gospel, specifically the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain).

[spencersmith312]

OSAS did not appear as a Bible interpretation until the Protestant Reformation.

Excuse me sir. Your ignorance is showing.

[Smittiox]

If I could get it through my thick skull to quit worrying whether I'm saved and just trust him, I could do a lot more than I am for God. I read hebrews 6 on a website at a time in my life when I quit drinking and finally picked up my bible of my own will and was trying to get right with God... it drove me back to drinking, I lost my job, my wife left me,then I quit drinking again and I had what felt like a nervous breakdown. This was the fruit it produced ... by their fruits you'll know em

[Smittiox]

with OSAS ,saved can mean a lot of different things these days besides what the Bible says it is. I believe it's more accurate to say once you've been born again you can't get unborn again. Theres more than one gospel in the Bible too .. the one in matthew is different than the one in romans. rightly divide but don't over divide. things changed after Jesus died on the cross.

[filoIII]

I sure hope OSAS is right, but I don't think so. Matt 10:22 and Mk 13:13 both state that he who endureth to the end shall be saved. Ezek 18:24 speaks of a once righteous man who started doing the ways of the wicked man. it says in his trespasses and sins shall he die. sure sounds like a conditional security to me.

[lividmany]

Obviously, God preserved His words in ENGLISH for all of us to READ and BELIEVE or NOT BELIEVE. Those who must run to the Hebrew and Greek are going there in the hope that the obscurity of those languages will provide them an ESCAPE from what THEY DO UNDERSTAND in the ELIZABETHAN ENGLISH...

[Ruckmanite]

Go Troll someplace else,I'm watching videos.

[dreamvestor]

The KJV is available, and the originals are not. The O.T. is set out in the premillennial order, whereas the Heberw "originals" were not. The promise of the church that kept the word was given to the Philadelphia church (1500-1900), not to the early Apostolic church (AD 90-200)

[Ryguy969]

What? God preserved his word from then until today. He Didn't just do it for 1500. THat is blasphemy. God's Word was kept the moment he gave it and a promise to have the doctrines of GOD forever, not just to Philadelphia. All true churches kept the Word. In 600, you had access to the Word.

[dreamvestor]

I think you're confused. Just because God's word was and is preserved, it doesn't mean that people accept His preserved word. Although God's word is preserved, every church hasn't kept it. Wouldn't you admit that that's true?

[Ryguy969]

Yes, but there as always been the true Word and the True Church. Somewhere on this planet, There has always been God's Word and God's people. Period.

[dreamvestor]

Would God inspire a text and then lose it? Does God bear witness to a Divineley preserved text, or must you go to a seminary to find it?

[ibreuer]

Good explanation of eternal security. People today need Jesus Christ. They need salvation.

[Ruckmanite]

If you don't like good preaching, don't listen to it.

Why do you complain? All you do your whole life is complain. Why don't you go preach and save some souls from hell and stop riding Ruckman's coatails whining all the time. Do you know how stupid you look?

You know who I'm talking too. Go post your own videos so everyone can see how nuts you are Alex.

[lividmany]

It is weird how these guys repeat all of the lies they were taught in bibles schools. What a weak and foolish god they serve! He must be some kind of lunatic to have to rely upon Hebrew and Greek scholars to show us his words. What a clown...

[Ruckmanite]

Notice they only attack the King James Bible? They can NEVER say that they have a perfect Bible and they don't have a Final Authority except what comes out of there mouths every 5 seconds. Round and round they go,where they stop..they don't know. or care.

[Ryguy969]

What about the Textus Receptus and the Masoretic text?

[lividmany]

Ruckman makes good points on the video. Everlasting life wouldn't last very "ever" if one could lose it.

Why would I have to learn Hebrew and Greek to have the words of God?  Why am I able to purchase King James Bibles at the dollar store for $1?

[wamaricle]

Ryguy969, You said, "God's words are Hebrew, and Greek." Literally taken, this means you think the whole Hebrew and Greek lanuages make up God's words. If you mean what you said, you are a nut.

But scholarly like I am, I take it to mean that you believe the only the Hebrew and Greek Bibles contain God's word.

[Ruckmanite]

Go back to the Shadow!!!

YOU SHALL NOT PASS!!!

[Ryguy969]

What? Try defending you cause instead of rock throwing.

[Ruckmanite]

Fly you Fool.

[dreamvestor]

I believe that the originals were inspired, of course, but I believe God preserves His word also. If you try to correct the english with the "originals", your causing much more harm then good. The scholar suddenly becomes the final authority, rather than the word of God.

[Ruckmanite]

There are no "originals" around. But God's words are here perseved on earth as THE HOLY BIBLE also called The King James Bible. You can believe it or not. That is your choice. Many people say they don't believe in Hell either, is it there? Yes whether you believe it or not makes no difference. Hell is real and God's words are real.

[Ryguy969]

God's words are Hebrew, and Greek.

[dreamvestor]

Yep. God's words are perserved in a language that less than 2% of the world understand.

[Ryguy969]

Yes they are. God doesn't have to say anything twice. It was in Hebrew and Greek. Thats it.

Unless thee thinketh that the Lord speaketh in the Queens English.

[dreamvestor]

He never says anything twice?

Compare Ps. 14:1 with Ps. 53:1;

Compare Gen. 2:24 with Matt. 19:5 with Mk. 10:8 with Eph. 5:31.  I could go on forever.

[wamaricle]

Ryguy969, which Greek text IS 'God's words'? If you could post a copy of it on a website, it would nice, because we'd all like to see and admire it.

By the way, please include the reasons why you think YOU have the capability of deciphering which of the MANY Greek manuscript is God's actual word.

Lastly, can you read and understand these languages fluently enough to correctly understand and obey the Word of God?

[Ryguy969]

Warmaricle, that is called scholarship. It is what the KJV translators did. DO you think they had one manuscript? If they are different, then how did they know which ones, and where was the perfect word of God before? The earlier english Bibles differ in places.

[Ryguy969]

You have fallen into legalism. Read history and discover people saying the Latin Vulgate is the only words we should use because it was used by the Church. Oh, and Ruckman believes that the English can correct the Greek. OH and Warmaricle, did the KJV burn the perfect greek manuscript? If not, where is it so we can see it.

[wamaricle]

Having claimed that the Word of God is somewhere in the Hebrew and Greek, YOU have the burden of proof to show me a copy. You said 'scholarship' is needed to discern what God's word is. Ok. Use some of that scholarship and tell us which Greek manuscript IS the Word of God. Otherwise, retract your claim that you know such a document exists.

[Ryguy969]

Umm, no, you have the purden of proof. KJV translators said they used scholarship and have the footnotes to prove it. Then over 300 years later somebody says the Version is Inspired? With what proof? Adam Clarke, Matthew Henry, and Dean Burgeon, had no idea it was perfect and even offered corrections. Then people like Ruckman Hyles, and Riplinger just make some claim for an English translation? What about Tyndale, Geneva, Matthews? Why are they not perfect? They used scholarship.

[wamaricle]

Ryguy969 said, "God's words are Hebrew, and Greek." HE SAID IT. Unless someone else is using his name to post, HE SAID IT! So...WHERE is it?

The answer is simple. There was no single, perfect copy of Word of God that anyone was willing to point to and rely on. IT DIDN'T EXIST. KJV translators used scholarship and produced a perfectly reliable copy of the Word of God, the KJV.

[wamaricle]

If I ask for a photo of molecule, Ryguy969 will reply, "Sure, but I need a microscope." "Ok, Ryguy969. Use a microscope and snap us a picture." So he comes back with a nice photo of a microscope. I'm perplexed, "That's not a molecule!" "I know, but you use one of these to see molecules." "Well, where's the molecule photo?" He shoves the photo of a microscope in my face again...

Drop the "scholarship" line, and show us the perfect copy of the Word of God it supposedly allows us to see.

[Ryguy969]

Ruckman above calls Geneva, Matthews, and Tyndale all "Godly Bibles". Yet, they are different in many places. You are telling everyone that GOD gave use his perfect words in English, and left us without a perfect Word for 1500 years. You even admit that the KJV scholarship is accurate. Then why wasn't Tyndale or Geneva. And where was it before KJV in 1611? I am not the one who just comes out and says this is perfect and nothing else is.Stay on topic, where was it before KJV?  Your answer

[wamaricle]

I can't believe Ryguy969 just ordered me to "stay on topic." He has NEVER answered the question which first brought us into conversation. He said, "God's words are Hebrew, and Greek." I have now asked post after post the same question: Which Greek Bible is God's actual perfect Word? This has been the topic the whole time.

Why can't he answer my plain, simple question? Even "I don't know" would be an answer. Evasiveness is very lousy answer.

[Ryguy969]

Well, it what the KJV used. You talk about perfect preservation, well it is what the KJV translators used. They used one manuscript right? Your KJV only cult is blinding you. PAUL WROTE IN GREEK, NOT ENGLISH. Now, my questions: 1) Where was the perfect Bible before 1611, and 2) Why did we need the KJV to replace it. You said yourself perfect preservation, well were is the perfect preservation to the KJV?

[wamaricle]

Ryguy969, when you said God's words are Hebrew and Greek, you were implying that they were not in English. Therefore, I wanted you to tell me where we could read God's perfect Word. After going round and round, you have made it clear that you can't provide a clear answer. YOU don't have God's perfect Word in any language.

[Ryguy969]

I have answered your question. KJV is a translation. I really think you don't get it.  Read about translations and get back to me.

[wamaricle]

I'm sorry. If you really answered my question, you are right. I didn't get your answer. Even looking back, I haven't found it.

Try using this format: A COPY OF THE PERFECT WORD OF GOD CAN BE FOUND AT <CITY>, <STATE>, <COUNTRY>. I think my thick head might absorb this method. Thanks.

[Ryguy969]

Well God wrote in Hebrew and Greek. Not English. So it would be the Hebrew and the Greek. Some KJV onlyists says the Masoretic Text for the Hebrew and the Textus receptus for the Greek. I am sorry, you can't just claim something without evidence.

[wamaricle]

God finished giving his Word 2000 years ago. These originals aren't in existance now. So, are you saying that the Word of God no longer exists?

In the future, please stop bringing up 'KJV onlyist.' Their opinions don't help you explain where you think the perfect Greek Word of God is now.

You still haven't answered my question!!!

[Ryguy969]

Well first, I can see your not a Ruckmanite. Two, you make no sense. I am going ask you questions and in those answers will be my answer, ok? Where is the perfect manuscript that the KJV used? IF they used more then one then how did they know which one at which time? Do you believe God inspired 2000 years ago, then again in 1611? Why is Geneva, Tyndale, Matthews, etc., all different?

[wamaricle]

You speak of me making no sense, how odd. Possibly, I make too much sense for you. What I asked for is quite simple: I said, "Try using this format: A COPY OF THE PERFECT WORD OF GOD CAN BE FOUND AT <city>, <state>, <country>."

Here's your best answer: "I am going ask you questions and in those answers will be my answer, ok?..."

NO, that's not ok! Why can't you give just simple, precise answers?

[Ryguy969]

Read again. You are not sastified with my answers, and that's fine. So, now I have questions for you. The ones below. Can you answer them? I doubt it. You can't just make a claim out of thin air. Latin Vulgate folks say they have the only Word of GOD. They are just making a claim without evidence just like you. KJV translators used the Greek and scholarship.

[wamaricle]

Dear Ryguy969,

You are very strange. You have NEVER answered my initial question. Your suggestions otherwise are plainly wrong. You have never plainly answered where the perfect Word of God in Greek is. If you think you did, please quote this elusive answer from a pervious post.

Until you answer my question, I'm not going to touch yours.

So far you only know how to disagree with others.

[Ryguy969]

Umm, did you not read my previous post. WHERE WAS THE WORD OF GOD BEFORE 1611? It that was the final authority then why did we need the KJV? You have a brain and must yourself these questions. If you do not, then you are a cult. Plain and simple. Stop asking and start answering. YOur KJV only trife doesn't work here. Your perfect words argument doesn't add up. IT WAS NOT WRITTEN IN ENGLISH.

[wamaricle]

How dare you order me to "stop asking and start answering"! You are a hypocrite! I initiated our little exchange with a question for which you have given NO answer except to probe me with questions.

You think you can logically stump someone's position, and thereby validate your own. Wrong. In the same way that you expect others to give logical, straightforward answers, you also should do the same.

[Ryguy969]

Ok, I believe GOD has preserved his word. We have not lost one doctrine or piece of information. In all the Greek manuscripts and Hebrew we have the Word. I am sorry that you do not like that answer.

Now, my questions . . . Sorry for making you feel bad, but it is time to step up and think.

[wamaricle]

Ryguy969, you still have not answered the question. You only reworded your initial assertion which was that God's Word is in Greek. My question still remains: Where is this perfect copy of the Greek New Testament which isn't missing one piece of information?

[wamaricle]

To say ALL of the manuscripts together make God's Word only proves you don't know where God's Word is. After all the scholarly attempts to put together the perfect Greek Bible, you are unwilling to accept any one of them. What's wrong? Is scholarship not the answer?

[wamaricle]

But by failing to espouse any Greek NT, you have proven that (1) you won't give any Bible absolute authority and (2) you don't know where God's Words in Greek are. Therefore, (3) you hold your position solely on faith that it exists because God said He would preserve His Word. Actually, you are no different from a "KJV onlyist" except that he believes by faith in a book (authority) he can read, and you believe in a book you can't (no authority to submit to unquestioningly).

[Ryguy969]

No there is a difference. I follow truth and not some man made doctrine. I just told you below the Masoretic text and the Textus Receptus. Many Onlyists believe those to be GOD's words, why? AGAIN, GOD DID NOT INSPIRE ENGLISH, THE BIBLE WAS WRITTEN IN GREEK, HEBREW, AND ARAMAIC. PERIOD

[Ruckmanite]

What is your Final Authorithy? Say it clearly. and if you say "the greek" which greek text.Prove that God didn't inspire the King James Bible.period

[Ryguy969]

I can't prove Pluto isn't made of Green cheese. I am not the one making the claim. YOu have to prove that it is. You are making the claim, not me.

[dreamvestor]

Scholarship onlyism IS a man-made doctrine.

[wamaricle]

Ryguy969, let me get this straight: You do you really believe that the Textus Receptus is the PERFECT, PERSERVED, INERRENT WORD OF GOD?

[Ryguy969]

No, I believe it is very accurate. It is the Word of GOD. YOu keep arguing for the English. God's Word in Greek literally means, God breathed. God did that in Hebrew Greek and Aramaic.

[wamaricle]

Ryguy969, how can something be GOD's Word and not be accurate?

"When God speaks, he's 99% accurate." Wow, Ryguy969, that's a petty lame boast. How about, "God breathed a book and He only missed perfection by 1%." Now, scholarly Ryguy969 can analyze His Word and show us and God where He went wrong.

Am I understanding you right?

[Ryguy969]

You know what. I am done. We cannot reason together and that is fine. You cannot translate one language to another and have 100%.  Sorry, I wish you well and I pray GOD guides you into all Truth.

[wamaricle]

Ryguy969, sorry to see you go. You were just beginning to see the difference between a man of sight like you and a man of faith.

The man of sight reads in his Bible about the 6 day creation and accepts it. A man of sight demands proof. The man of sight reads in his Bible about the virgin birth and accepts it. A man of sight demands proof. Likewise, this is true for the trinity, resurrection, every miracle...

You've shown that you're unable to accept that which your logic can't understand.

[Ryguy969]

What? I accept all those things. Shows your judging attitude. The Scriptures have come alive to me. I just have trouble understanding 17th century old English. Maybe, I am not smart enough for the KJV. God bless. May God show you grace and deliver you from your legalism.

[dreamvestor]

What scriptures have come alive? Did God "breathe" them to you personally? Or is it the Roman Catholic manuscripts? Maybe the TR? It's too bad that if you don't know greek, hebrew, or aramaic, then you will never hear God's words. (seeing as how God's words are only greek, hebrew, and aramaic)

[wamaricle]

Ryguy969, how can a man accept preposterous things as the virgin birth and putting ears back on people's heads, while at the same time rejecting God's promises to preserve every 'jot and tittle' of His Word based on some flimsy reasoning as 'You cannot translate one language to another and have 100%.' Where I come from, this is called hypocrisy.

Forgive me for expecting you to be consistent in your beliefs and need for human reasoning.

[wamaricle]

Ryguy969, you have also made it clear that you fear being bound to one standard. This is the common fear that all liberals have about everything. You are unwilling to unreservedly submit to a final authority other than yourself.

[Ryguy969]

The KJV had to translate from something. How can something be better than a translation? What were they translating? Whatever they were was the Word of GOD. Did they burn that copy? WHere is it?

[Ryguy969]

He believes in advanced revelation. Want to know a heretic, ask him if he think the Bible today has more "information" then when it was originally written.

[dreamvestor]

They say you lose a lot in a translation...guess what, you gain a lot also. The english text can at times shed light on the originals. For instance, the articles in exodus 12 help show the passover lamb as a type of Christ.

[Ryguy969]

That is shown in the Hebrew. You can gain anything more than a source. Anybody text that adds or takes away from the originals needs to be corrected.

[dreamvestor]

Look at chapter and verse numbering. Isaiah has 66 chapters (just like the canon). There's a clear division between chap. 39 and 40 (just like Old and new Testament). Chapter 40 begins with the prophecy of John the Baptist (just like the gospels). YOU COULDN'T GET THAT FROM THE "ORIGINALS"!

[Ryguy969]

That has nothing to do with the text. It was written in Hebrew and the English does not relate it all. Also, 41-66 is not all NT prophecy, so it doesn't relate that way. That might be cool, but not an advancement.

[Ryguy969]

That is a nice point, but doesn't give it more credit.  Isaiah talks about Jesus in Isaiah 7. He talks about Cyrus II after chapter 39.

[Ruckmanite]

Dr.Ruckman is THE top Bible teacher in these times. People who don't like him are liberals and Bible rejectors. They can't refute him so they tear down his charcter and spread lies about him. Nice bunch of fellows! PBI-1999 to 2000

[Ryguy969]

What?  Can't refute him? Of course they can. If he claims the earth began as a jellybean, then of course they cannot prove him wrong. But, if you were not a Ruckmanite, then you would see the KJV was copyrighted, and the LXX is pre-Christian. Follow Christ, not Peter Ruckman.

[dreamvestor]

The original crown copyright of 1611 does not forbid anyone today from reprinting the Authorized Version. It was only copyrighted then for the purpose of allowing the printer to finance the publication. For nearly four hundred years now we have been printing millions of copies of KJV's without requesting permission from anyone.

[Ryguy969]

Wrong. In 1556, Queen Mary chartered the Stationers' Company, giving the members of this guild of London printers monopoly rights in the books they published. All books were required to be submitted for official approval and to be entered on the company's register; both unauthorized printing and failure to register were punished by the Court of the Star Chamber. That is what a copyright law is.

[dreamvestor]

No, it's not. The first copyright law in Great Britain wasn't in effect until 1710. Prior, the government controlled all printing and licensing. The crown copyright applied to all works produced by the British government. All printing had to be authorized (i.e. Authorized Version)

[Ruckmanite]

No you can't refute him, many have tried and failed.

The LXX is catholic. I remember you on hotmail chat. still going around in circles I see,must be very dizzy by now.Lib Troll

[WPBDoc]

He's a serial divorcee' and marries the wives of his students. He's no more qualified to be a pastor than Bill Clinton. PLUS...he's a racist, bigotted, heretic...but once you've drank his kool-aid, you don't care anymore, do you?

[dreamvestor]

Everyone has a right to their own opinion, but I don't know who YOU are to be calling anyone bigoted (and it's 1 "t", not 2). He's not racist in the sense that he thinks that white christians are superior to black christians, but he knows that people of different races differ. Everyone knows that, unless your blind, deaf, dumb, and have no sensory neurons.

[dreamvestor]

And as far as qualified, do you know ANYONE who is qualified to be a pastor? Please tell me someone who you think meets ALL the qualifications given in Timothy, but if you can't, don't look down your long, self-righteous nose at him!

[teddybear4u]

it really comes down to faith. look at the bible. the greatest men that god used, moses, samson, david, paul. what did these men have in common? they were all murderers, but they had something else in common... great unyeilding faith. keep the faith, look to god and not the mistakes of men.

[dreamvestor]

amen!

[WPBDoc]

One of the few people on the planet that is more insane than Fred Phelps. This guy is an ego-maniacal, heretical, lunatic. Ask him how many times he's been married...

[ldljll]

As usual you are one of the people who knows that someone is wrong but you never...never give scripture that is in context. It doesn't matter how many times someone is married...that doesn't nullify the truth they preach. I'm sure you've told lies but when you say that two plus two equals four does that make it wrong? Read the Bible in context and then grow thereby.

[dreamvestor]

What does how many times anyone's been married have to do with anything? In Corinthians, permission is given to remarry (art thou loosed from a wife, seek not a wife, but, and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned). In deut., it refers to someone that you divorced as your FORMER wife. What's you point, that you can't read!

[blakeblunkall]

Doc Rules:) And I used to play defense with him in goal. Good times:)

[Biblebeliever7]

Nice to see Doc on youtube. Maybe someone will see it and get some help! Praise God for the KJV and the Lord's junk yard dog!

[popsbuck]

Having gotten out of Campbellism after 44 years and getting saved , you should pay attention to Pete!!!

He's talking about "How To" and the assurance in the LORD JESUS CHRIST.

[ldljll]

I am not disagreeing with Dr. Ruckman...I am in agreement with him about being in the BODY OF CHRIST. Therefore if one "could" fall out of the body it would be a rupture...but we know that can"t happen and therefore when He comes back it will be for a rapture...not a ruptured body. Congradulations on getting out of Campbellism and getting saved.

[ldljll]

You can't fall out of His body. Praise God He's coming for a rapture not a rupture!!!