On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 "John Henry" (KJV@LandmarkBibleBaptist.net) wrote:


Brother Cloud,

If you will show me where I have spoken amiss, I will be happy to apologize for it, but I have not slandered you. On the other hand you have branded me and many others as a heretics, because we unashamedly proclaim that the KJV is Scripture and "is GIVEN by inspiration of God." To be specific you slandered me in your article, Why I Did Not Sign The New Dean Burgon Society Statement where you said, "The KJV is not given by inspiration, and it is heresy to say that it is." That is a lie and it is slander! But even at that Brother Evans and I have not called you a heretic for your view, even though it is dead wrong, but we rather have tried to reason with you. Last year I tried nicely to explain to you the error of your loose use of the word "heresy" and show you where it absolutely is not heresy to say that the KJV "is GIVEN by inspiration of God," but you insist that to do so is Ruckmanism. More slander, because I had already explained in some detail that I do not believe like Dr. Ruckman. I am blood bought, salvation by grace through faith in every dispensation, local church, unaffiliated, fundamental, and KJV only. In other words a true Baptist. But rather than listen to reason you told me this in an e-mail back then, "Yes, I said that to take a different view is heresy, and that appears to be what has set you fellows off -- that and my negative references to Ruckmanites, which gets too close to home with you fellows. Perhaps that was too strong a word, I don't know, but I will let it stand. I feel strongly about what 2 Timothy 3:16 is teaching. If one teaches contrary to the Scriptures, is that not heresy? So yes, in my book, to teach that 2 Timothy 3:16 is referring to something other than the giving of Scripture is heresy." Now after a year I sent the below message from last year to you as a reminder after sending my recent article, David Cloud Charged Believers Who Claim That The King James Bible Was Given By Inspiration Of God With Heresy which to the best of my knowledge and sincerity is civil to you and not contrary to the Scripture, but you reply to me saying, "The slander is on your part and your buddy Herb Evens. The slander is vicious and you will answer to God for it." Where did I say anything vicious to you?! You have clearly falsely accused me again. Where does it end, brother Cloud? You either need to get right or get out of the ministry.

Sincerely,
John Henry


On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 22:50:50 +0545 (NPT) "David Cloud" (dcloud@wayoflife.org) writes:

The slander is on your part and your buddy Herb Evens. The slander is vicious and you will answer to God for it.


On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:33 +0700 "John Henry" (Baptist@udon.ksc.co.th) wrote:

Not debating, just wanted to give you an opportunity to do right and correct your unconscionable slander. I'll try to remind you of your slander again next year if you haven't repented before. It's me who is trying to help you, my friend. -- John Henry


On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 00:29 +0545 (NPT) "David Cloud" (dcloud@wayoflife.org) writes:

Hello. I don't know why you keep sending these to me. If you are unable to understand plain English, there is not much I can do to help you and I am extremely busy with things that I believe are more important that debating the issue with you. In Christ, David Cloud


----- Original Message -----
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 01:33:52 +0700
To: dcl-@wayoflife.org, herbe-@juno.com
From: John Henry
Subject: [KJBaptist] Fw: Re: CC addresses about David Cloud

David Cloud wrote:

<< Yes, I said that to take a different view is heresy, and that appears to be what has set you fellows off -- that and my negative references to Ruckmanites, which gets too close to home with you fellows. Perhaps that was too strong a word, I don't know, but I will let it stand. I feel strongly about what 2 Timothy 3:16 is teaching. If one teaches contrary to the Scriptures, is that not heresy? So yes, in my book, to teach that 2 Timothy 3:16 is referring to something other than the giving of Scripture is heresy. If that shoe fits a certain man, he will have to wear it. Most KJV defenders will agree with me on this one and will not have a problem with any of this. It is the Ruckmanite who has the problem with it, and I always like to distance myself from Ruckman and his "its." I do that because I am deeply convinced that the man, by his weird and unscriptural doctrines and his ungodly spirit, has done great harm to the cause of Jesus Christ and to the King James Bible. >>

Dear Bro Cloud,

As I have stated, Dr. Herb Evans is NOT a Ruckmanite. He and Ruckman believe differently, I think, on every point of what you and I think of as heresy. Major points being Dispensational Salvation, and Advanced Revelation, Double Inspiration, and Universal Church. However, he associates with Ruckmanites on the Internet in order to win them over to sound doctrine. I do the same thing on my e-mail lists with all kinds of people (From Hyper-Calvinist to Campbelites). He has a unique tolerance for them and thus a unique ministry to them. He lifts up many of the same men that you do (J. J. Ray, David Otis Fuller, E. L. Bynum, Edward Hills). Bro Evans has been in the forefront of battle for the KJV since before you were even saved. Another thing about Herb he is not playing; he is teaching. And he knows his stuff and is very serious, especially about this KJV issue. It is by far the most important issue of these last days. Now just because he is more tolerant of Ruckmanites than you and I is no reason to call him a heretic. That is what one who holds heresy is, you know?

You said, "Perhaps [heresy] was too strong a word, I don't know, but I will let it stand." You know very well that "heresy" is an inappropriate word to use, or you ought to anyway! Neither Bro Evans nor I have ever called you an heretic and neither do we believe that you are one, even though we do believe that you are in great error by believing in an expired (uninspired) KJV. Bro Cloud, the charge of heresy is a very serious charge. I have given you Scriptural proof that derivative inspiration is literal inspiration, and therefore absolutely NOT heresy. And I have tried to reason with you over this issue, but you continue insist on a false schism.

You say, "I feel strongly about what 2 Timothy 3:16 is teaching." Well, so do I. You ask, "If one teaches contrary to the Scriptures, is that not heresy?" Not necessarily (Phil 3:12-16; Eph 4:11-15). Even thought we spend hours every day studying the Word, we still do not know everything.

John Henry


Brother Cloud,

If you will show me where I have spoken amiss, I will be happy to apologize for it, but I have not slandered you. On the other hand you have branded me and many others as a heretics, because we unashamedly proclaim that the KJV is Scripture and "is GIVEN by inspiration of God." To be specific you slandered me in your article, Why I Did Not Sign The New Dean BurgonSociety Statement where you said, "The KJV is not given by inspiration, and it is heresy to say that it is." That is a lie and it is slander! But even at that Brother Evans and I have not called you a heretic for your view, even though it is dead wrong, but we rather have tried to reason with you. Last year I tried nicely to explain to you the error of your loose use of the word "heresy" and show you where it absolutely is not heresy to say that the KJV "is GIVEN by inspiration of God," but you insist that to do so is Ruckmanism. More slander, because I had already explained in some detail that I do not believe like Dr. Ruckman. I am blood bought, salvation by grace through faith in every dispensation, local church, unaffiliated, fundamental, and KJV only. In other words a true Baptist. But rather than listen to reason you told me this in an e-mail back then, "Yes, I said that to take a different view is heresy, and that appears to be what has set you fellows off -- that and my negative references to Ruckmanites, which gets too close to home with you fellows. Perhaps that was too strong a word, I don't know, but I will let it stand. I feel strongly about what 2 Timothy 3:16 is teaching. If one teaches contrary to the Scriptures, is that not heresy? So yes, in my book, to teach that 2 Timothy 3:16 is referring to something other than the giving of Scripture is heresy." Now after a year I sent the below message from last year to you as a reminder after sending my recent article, David Cloud Charged Believers Who Claim That The King James Bible Was Given By Inspiration Of God With Heresy which to the best of my knowledge and sincerity is civil to you and not contrary to the Scripture, but you reply to me saying, "The slander is on your part and your buddy Herb Evens. The slander is vicious and you will answer to God for it." Where did I say anything vicious to you?! You have clearly falsely accused me again. Where does it end, brother Cloud? You either need to get right or get out of the ministry.

Sincerely,
John Henry


On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 22:50:50 +0545 (NPT) "David Cloud" writes:

The slander is on your part and your buddy Herb Evens. The slander is vicious and you will answer to God for it.


On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:33 +0700 "John Henry" wrote:

Not debating, just wanted to give you an opportunity to do right and correct your unconscionable slander. I'll try to remind you of your slander again next year if you haven't repented before. It's me who is trying to help you, my friend. -- John Henry


On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 00:29 +0545 (NPT) "David Cloud" writes:

Hello. I don't know why you keep sending these to me. If you are unable to understand plain English, there is not much I can do to help you and I am extremely busy with things that I believe are more important that debating the issue with you. In Christ, David Cloud


----- Original Message -----
To: David Cloud
From: John Henry
Date: Wed, 22 Sept 2004 10:27 +0700
Subject: Cloud Charged Bible Believers With Heresy - 2
Cc: HerbEvans@juno.com, John@LandmarkBibleBaptist.net

----- Original Message -----
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 01:33:52 +0700
To: dcl-@wayoflife.org, herbe-@juno.com
From: John Henry
Subject: [KJBaptist] Fw: Re: CC addresses about David Cloud

David Cloud wrote:

<< Yes, I said that to take a different view is heresy, and that appears to be what has set you fellows off -- that and my negative references to Ruckmanites, which gets too close to home with you fellows. Perhaps that was too strong a word, I don't know, but I will let it stand. I feel strongly about what 2 Timothy 3:16 is teaching. If one teaches contrary to the Scriptures, is that not heresy? So yes, in my book, to teach that 2 Timothy 3:16 is referring to something other than the giving of Scripture is heresy. If that shoe fits a certain man, he will have to wear it. Most KJV defenders will agree with me on this one and will not have a problem with any of this. It is the Ruckmanite who has the problem with it, and I always like to distance myself from Ruckman and his "its." I do that because I am deeply convinced that the man, by his weird and unscriptural doctrines and his ungodly spirit, has done great harm to the cause of Jesus Christ and to the King James Bible. >>

Dear Bro Cloud,

As I have stated, Dr. Herb Evans is NOT a Ruckmanite. He and Ruckman believe differently, I think, on every point of what you and I think of as heresy. Major points being Dispensational Salvation, and Advanced Revelation, Double Inspiration, and Universal Church. However, he associates with Ruckmanites on the Internet in order to win them over to sound doctrine. I do the same thing on my e-mail lists with all kinds of people (From Hyper-Calvinist to Campbelites). He has a unique tolerance for them and thus a unique ministry to them. He lifts up many of the same men that you do (J. J. Ray, David Otis Fuller, E. L. Bynum, Edward Hills). Bro Evans has been in the forefront of battle for the KJV since before you were even saved. Another thing about Herb he is not playing; he is teaching. And he knows his stuff and is very serious, especially about this KJV issue. It is by far the most important issue of these last days. Now just because he is more tolerant of Ruckmanites than you and I is no reason to call him a heretic. That is what one who holds heresy is, you know?

You said, "Perhaps [heresy] was too strong a word, I don't know, but I will let it stand." You know very well that "heresy" is an inappropriate word to use, or you ought to anyway! Neither Bro Evans nor I have ever called you an heretic and neither do we believe that you are one, even though we do believe that you are in great error by believing in an expired (uninspired) KJV. Bro Cloud, the charge of heresy is a very serious charge. I have given you Scriptural proof that derivative inspiration is literal inspiration, and therefore absolutely NOT heresy. And I have tried to reason with you over this issue, but you continue insist on a false schism.

You say, "I feel strongly about what 2 Timothy 3:16 is teaching." Well, so do I. You ask, "If one teaches contrary to the Scriptures, is that not heresy?" Not necessarily (Phil 3:12-16; Eph 4:11-15). Even thought we spend hours every day studying the Word, we still do not know everything.

John Henry