Dr. Ruckman did not mistaken Robert Breaker in the 2010 letter or 1, 2, 3 John, Jude 2010 track 3 study

Robert Breaker says that Dr. Ruckman mistook him for other individuals in Milton. This is false, and I wrote in detail why this is so.

The first time Robert Breaker said this was on January 12, 2026, in a comment where he also said that Dr. Ruckman beat his wife.

See below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxmt6zA9j48

"animejefftv MUST READ IF YOU WANT THE TRUTH... How interesting. First, he's not my Pastor, but my old Pastor. Now, thanks for posting this. I just listened to it. Wow! Hard to believe that's the Ruckman I knew. What I see is Ruckman erroneously lumping me in with a Church in Milton (called Faith Baptist Church) where Dewey Marrs was once Pastor. But, I was NOT a part of that church, nor did I have anything to do with Dewey. (I did meet him once. Nice guy). Dewey was on the radio preaching all the time. What he preached was backwards to me (and apparently to Ruckman too). That church said the whole world was already reconciled to Christ. They always went to 2 Cor. 5:19 and changed "reconciling" to "reconciled." I don't see that. And, they'd never read the next verse: "Be ye reconciled to Christ!" That is, a sinner must accept it, so Ruckman got that right! And that's what I preach too! You must appropriate the atonement by faith!" - Robert Breaker on January 12, 2026.

While Robert Breaker and Dewey definitely do not share the same beliefs, i.e., universal reconciliation (except that doubting one's salvation means one was not saved, along with the issue of calling and the blood as one's required distinct object of saving faith), I believe Dr. Ruckman's logic for lumping him in with Dewey is demonstrated in how he connects Mormonism to Roman Catholicism because they share the same core tenet of calling themselves the church:

"The name of the Mormons’ church, for one, shows the Roman Catholic nature of it. Mormons call their church 'The Church of Jesus Christ' (notice the definite article). If it is 'THE Church of Jesus Christ,' then it has to be the church of Matthew 16:18 ('upon this rock I will build my church'). That is, in claiming to be the one true church that Christ founded, the difference between a Mormon and a Roman Catholic is nothing; they are exactly the same." - Dr. Ruckman, Why I Am Not a Mormon, Chapter 1: "The Church of the Blockheads"

Dr. Ruckman sees that they share a core tenet, so he lumps them in with each other.

Robert Breaker and Dewey both believe that calling as a condition for salvation is a work, that doubting one's salvation means one was not saved, and that the blood of Jesus Christ is one's distinct object of saving faith, so Dr. Ruckman lumps Robert Breaker in with him.

Dr. Ruckman, in Track 3 of his 2010 Jude study, demonstrated that he very much did know Robert Breaker's theology:

https://kjv1611.org/products/1-2-3-john-jude-mp3

This is the full transcript of him introducing it:

"Uh, you you want to find out whether you're saved, it's real simple. If you don't If you don't know you're saved, don't have assurance, I can tell you how to get assurance. You might have been saved 30, 40 years ago, I don't know. If you thought you were saved then, maybe you were, maybe I wasn't there. But I can tell you how to know you're saved right now. All you have to do is ask yourself this one question, Christian: What am I trusting to keep me out of hell? Right now. I take for granted you trusted him back then when you did it. I preach hell to the kids. I tell them they're going to hell without Christ. I tell them they need Christ, give invitation to receive Christ. If they're sincere, that's done. Ask yourself right now, what am I trusting to keep me out of hell? And when you land on that right thing, if you're trusting nothing but the blood of Christ to save you, you are saved, whether you understood that or not. That old Dewey Morris, that fellow there, Breaker going around saying, "Well, you got to have the blood in your confession of faith. If they don't pray for the blood of Christ to save, and the blood that's been shed." Philip led that Ethiopian eunuch to the Lord, and the word blood isn't mentioned one time in that conversion. You see, he's reading Isaiah 53. You won't find the word blood in Isaiah 53. It isn't there. And it's on the atonement. That's what you're getting from those fellows. You're getting a bunch of dumb, stupid people who can't read the Bible. I say that with charity, of course. All right, back to 1 John. Uh that's what comes from fooling with that kind of stuff there." - Dr. Peter S. Ruckman

1. He says Robert Breaker believes calling as a condition is a work.

He connects Robert Breaker with Dewey because both of them believe it:

"Well, Brother Breaker, who graduated in this school and is trying to sell his own Mexican Bible right now, has gone all over the country saying, and I've got it in print, that if you doubt your salvation, you've never really been saved. So you know what they do? His kind of people, and they got, they got a missionary conference coming up here this week, I think. Bringing all these fellas around to teach this junk. And what they're telling you is that if you doubt your salvation, you couldn't have really been saved. Well, that's a crock. (Laughter) They take that passage in Romans that says: 'Whosoever calleth upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.' You know what I've heard him do? Oh, Dewey over there? He goes back in the Old Testament and says to call upon the name of the Lord is not a reference to you getting saved, because everybody in the Old Testament when they called upon the name of the Lord, it was just to save them from some kind of trouble."

2. He says Robert Breaker believes that if one doubted one's salvation, it means one was never saved:

"I said, 'Lord, fill me with the Spirit. Fill with the Spirit.' His brother said in the prayer, he said, 'Don't fill him, Lord; he leaks.' Now, the way a Christian doubts his salvation is a bad conscience. And there's a bunch of nuts over in Milton, you know, Mars or Dewey or whatever his name is, and all this Chris; they got one Chris now coming in, and he's giving you all the same baloney. And I heard Mac; they're playing Mac's tapes from about five years ago over there, Johnson, and he's giving you the same old baloney: 'None of you folks are saved, see, unless you do the works that I do. Now, if you do the works that I do, that proves that you're just kidding yourself. You thought you were saved. But if you do the works I do, that's proof that you're saved, see, right there.' And those fellows, they're all pretending that before they were saved, why, they just did terrible works. Mac Johnson didn't; he preached for about 10 years and then still said he wasn't saved and got saved. You gotta watch that bunch. I never met a Christian in my life (I may have met one without talking to him fully, but discussing these matters) who didn't at some time or another doubt his salvation because of stuff that happened after he was saved." - Track 12 of 1, 2, 3 John, Jude

"And when I thought to myself, when I did something wrong, mom and dad would say, 'Now, a Christian wouldn't do that.' See the little boy or girl, and you get your little boy or girl doubting their salvation, and why, she was saved the whole time, but she never got assurance because she got in here and in the book. And that's what happened to Mac Johnson over there, and that's what Dewey Mars over there, and L.R. Shelton, and Bob Ross, and let's see, Rolf Bonnard the evangelist, and L.R. Shelton out of New Orleans did. They try to talk everybody out of their salvation by the way they live or by the way they doubt, and claim they know that they were really saved and you don't. By the Lord, brethren, there are only three people in the world that know for sure that you're saved, and that's all who will ever know until you get home to glory. There's only three of them: one of them is the Lord, and one of them is the devil. You're not going to fool the devil about yourself; he knows whether you're saved or not, and if you're saved, he doesn't care; he's got no use for you at all. If you're saved, the Lord knows you're saved, and there's only one other person that can know, and that's you. And you'll never know until you believe what He said. And you can be saved and not know it because you don't spend time in the book. Okay, I didn't intend to get into a sermon; I was going to teach this morning. It kind of runs off with you sometimes. All right, let's take a break." - Track 03

3. He talks about Robert Breaker's Reina-Valera Bible:

"Brother Breaker, who graduated in this school and is trying to sell his own Mexican Bible right now"

4. He talks about Robert Breaker's view of salvation, where the blood of Jesus Christ must be consciously trusted as one's object of faith, and he says that no one in Acts knew about the blood atonement, yet they were still saved:

"Peter never mentioned the blood in the whole chapter! He didn't mention Christ dying for anybody's sins in Acts chapter 2. And they all got saved and got the Holy Spirit. And they didn't have any assurance because nobody even talked; why, he didn't talk about the blood atonement in Acts chapter 3. He said your sins will get blotted out when the Lord comes back. Peter didn't even know they were blotted out now, after he'd been preaching for two or three years. But they were saved right then when they did what? When they received Christ."

I am purposely providing commentary for this passage. Right here, he attacks Robert Breaker's theology of salvation:

"Brother Breaker and these boys got this idea, if you weren't saved like I was saved... Well, all of them got saved when they were about eight, nine, or ten years old and didn't understand it. Then, when they started living like the devil as teenagers, they got under conviction, got to reading the Bible, and then is when they thought they got saved. That's when they got assurance! (Laughs) (Amen.) And what they try to do is make retreads out of you people. They go around the country and try to talk everybody out of their salvation so they can say, 'Well, he was really saved under...' (Clears throat) '...under my preaching.' That thing back there in Sunday school when we went forward to take the preacher's hand, that didn't count. (Yeah.) That's what they're doing."

“Ask yourself right now, what am I trusting to keep me out of hell? And when you land on that right thing, if you're trusting nothing but the blood of Christ to save you, you are saved, whether you understood that or not. That old Dewey Morris and that fellow over there, Breaker, are going around saying, "well, you've got to have the blood in your confession of faith. If you don't pray for the blood of Christ to save and the blood that's been shed." Philip led the Ethiopian eunuch to the Lord and the word blood is mentioned one time in that conversion. You see, he's reading Isaiah 53. You won't find the word blood in Isaiah 53. It isn't there. And it's on the atonement. That's what you're getting, those fellas. You're getting bunch of dumb, stupid people who can't read the Bible. I say that with charity, of course. “ - Dr. Peter S. Ruckman, 1, 2, 3 John, Jude, Track 3

Dewey and the Milton church did not hold any of those beliefs outside of numbers 1 and 2 and 4.

If Dr. Ruckman were understood through the lens of mistaking Robert Breaker's theology for Dewey's, he would have had no reason to address his distinct blood doctrine.

He never says Robert Breaker teaches universal reconciliation; he only says that he is judging Robert Breaker on the things that he very much overlaps with Dewey on. He does not mistake Robert Breaker.

Either Dewey and Robert Breaker share a soteriology that is predicated upon trusting the blood of Jesus Christ as one's distinct object of saving faith, or Robert Breaker does not believe that. Instead, Robert Breaker believes that any sinner can be saved without even knowing what the blood atonement is, and Dewey taught that.

But even then, that's a stretch, as this is Robert Breaker from 2010 (the same time as the Jude study):

"you see the confession isn't what saves you it's the belief in the heart so if you're not saved and you want to be saved and you don't want to go to hell why don't you just bow your head and close your eyes and just go to the Lord and tell him that what you've heard from the scripture today is true because the Bible says it is now why don't you say I accept what you've done for me I'd rely upon that finished work I trust your blood to save my soul see the prayer isn't what saves you it's whether or not your faith is in the shed blood of Jesus Christ if your faith is not in that blood then you're not saved if your faith is in that blood then you're on your way to heaven" - Robert Breaker, How to Be Saved, October 9th, 2010, starting at 10:15

This is Dr. Ruckman's own assessment of Dewey's theology in his 2003 Romans commentary:

"That is important to get, because there is a teaching traveling through Bible-believing Baptist churches (in my area, it is espoused by the Faith Baptist Church in Milton, Florida, and its former pastor, Mac Johnson, now deceased) that your salvation is already paid and your sins are already forgiven and you are welcome in Heaven. All you have to do is to consent to the fact that you are already saved; you are to thank God that He has already saved you, but for God’s sake, don’t ask God to save you: that is 'works salvation.' All the clowns are not in the circus." - Chapter 5

He later discusses the Milton church in his 2013 Gospel of Luke commentary (on Luke 18):

"There is a movement among Bible-believing Christians today that says if you pray to receive Christ, that is a work, and you aren’t saved by works (Eph. 2:8–9; Tit. 3:5). The logical conclusion to such an argument is that if you prayed to get saved, that you are lost and need to be saved (again!). It is the Baptist version of the Brownsville Revival retreaders. It’s propagated by pastors who aren’t seeing many people saved in their churches, so they turn on their congregations and try to reconvert them. In one of these churches over in Milton, the associate pastor (who was the son of the pastor) professed to have gotten saved seven times. That was six times past the first time when he prayed to be saved. And you are going to trust a man with no more assurance or stability than that to lead you to Christ?"

He says that the associate pastor professed to have gotten saved six additional times (without praying) after the first time he prayed.

And this is his commentary on Dewey's views before he mentions Robert Breaker:

"That fellow was sanctified by the blood of Christ and turned it down. And 30, 31, that fellow's an unsaved man. But he was sanctified, set apart by the blood to be shed for him. Now, if you want to see how the thing works, come to Second Corinthians. In Second Corinthians 5, notice how you can really get a real contradiction out of this if you fool with it like the folks over in Milton. And they really fool with it. But your salvation is when Christ dies on the cross; technically speaking, everybody should be saved right on the spot. And here's why: 2 Corinthians 5 verse 19, 'To wit' (a legal term that specifically means 'that is to say'), 'to wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself.' Well, then he's okay, isn't he? He was in Christ and reconciled the world to Himself. Well, it must be all right then, okay? No, it ain't. Well, now, keep reading: 'Not imputing their trespasses unto them.' Then their sins aren't charged to them. No one can say a man is going to hell; it's all taken care of. Christ died, reconciled Himself, and took all their sins and charged them to Christ. So when they die, they don't have any sin on them, right? No, no, it isn't right. Now that's what they're giving you over there in Milton. They're saying, 'Well, all you have to do is believe that, and if you believe that, you're saved; if you don't believe that, you're not saved.' So when you're out, you don't tell the fellow to receive Christ; you don't have him let Christ come into his heart or say, 'Save me.' Over in Milton, they teach over that radio station five days a week that calling upon Christ doesn't save you unless you believe this as it is worded. If you believe that as it is worded, you wouldn't have to call on Christ. But you must be able to. You say, why? Verse 20."

It is a defensible view that Dr. Ruckman knew who Robert Breaker was. Even if Robert Breaker says he was mistaken, Robert Breaker teaches all four of those things to this day, and in the material I have seen from him in 2010 to 2011, he taught them back then as well.

For that not to be Robert Breaker, and for Dr. Ruckman to have been mistaken, Robert Breaker would have to:

1. Believe calling as a condition for salvation is not a work.

2. Believe one can be saved without consciously trusting in the blood of Jesus Christ as one's distinct object of saving faith.

3. Believe one can doubt one's salvation and still be saved.

4. Believe there is nothing wrong with the 1960 RVG.