Texe Marrs: Part II

In our last video, we looked at the background of my encounter with Tex Mars in 1994 on KIXL Radio in Austin, Texas, specifically the letters that had been exchanged.

I had faxed them to him, he sent them back to me, and specifically his allegation that I was so arrogant, so ignorant, that I didn't even know that the name of my ministry,

Alpha and Omega, was removed from Revelation 1 .1. I had showed you the envelope where Tex Mars specifically puts

Revelation 1 .1 on the envelope. That provides the background then.

I had answered, I had given him the information about this subject. That provides the background then of his phone call to the debate between D.

A. Waite and myself on KIXL Radio in Austin, an eight minute clip. Let's listen in. Tex Mars.

Tex, are you there? I am, Dale. It's been good to hear your voice on the radio. Well, thank you.

You know, I enjoy seeing your television program as well, and Wanda sends her best also.

Okay, that's right. Tex Mars used to go to our church, and what church are you going to now,

Tex? Well, we have our own group now. As you know, we live way on the other side of town, but I still have great love for Christ Memorial.

Charles Bullock, the pastor there, he's doing great things, so I just want y 'all to continue in your great success.

Okay, and your comments to the debate here? Yes, Dale, I just want to compliment

Dr. Waite on defending God's word, the King James Bible. Maybe he could let people know how to get his book, because I have a copy of it, and it's tremendous.

But my specific question, and one of the things that I'm heartbroken about the new versions and what they've done to pervert

God's word, three things that are specific maybe Dr. Waite could comment on, is it true,

Dr. Waite, that the new versions have totally eliminated the statements by Jesus, for example, get thee behind me,

Satan? Another one, when Jesus told us to take up the cross and follow me.

Evidently those are missing from the new versions, and also, what about the Lord's Prayer?

I recently read the NIV, the NAS, the two versions of the

Lord's Prayer, and I found out that they were horribly gutted, and entire lines were totally missing in the new version, and maybe you could comment on that.

Okay, I'd be glad to comment, and of course Mr. Waite would want to comment equally. The statement for the

Mars, as far as the take up thy cross and follow me, it is eliminated in one of the

Gospels in the Westcott and Hort type text, the Neslallam text, the Eonoliph text. It is, however, found in some of the other

Synoptic Gospels, but at least in that area, that one portion, it is taken away. As far as the

Lord's Prayer, thy kingdom come, thy will be done, there are certain parts of it that are omitted, there's no question about that either.

And as far as the other one, get thee behind me Satan, that is left out also in that portion of the

Gospel there, and certainly we feel that the King James Bible is superior in the keeping of these areas and these portions that are in line with the truth and in line with doctrine and in line with correctness in all ways.

I would like to comment on each of those in regards to get thee behind me Satan that is found, of course, in Matthew chapter 16 verse 23 in the

New International Version. Mr. Marsman, you were on KXEG last week commenting on the

Lord's Prayer, you were referring only to the Gospel of Luke, many of the things that you said were deleted are actually in the Gospel of Matthew and were not actually taken out.

Take up the cross occurs four times in the King James Version, it occurs three times in the modern text, the only place where it's removed is

Mark 10 .21 because it's not in many of the early manuscripts, and interestingly enough, it is not in the parallel passages where Matthew and Luke record the same instance as Mark 10 .21,

specifically Matthew 19 .21 and Luke 18 .22. So there is very good reason why it is not found in many of the modern translations.

I would like to ask you, Mr. Mars, if 2 Timothy 2 .24 -26 is indeed found in your

Bible where it talks about how we are to address these particular issues of how we are to refute those who contradict us.

The Scripture says, And the Lord's bond -servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps

God may grant them repentance, leading to the knowledge of the truth. And they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will.

When I sent you information on the errors in Gail Riplinger's book, you wrote me a letter back that began,

Don't write me again unless in sincere repentance you are a devil, plain and simple. And I understand well why

Mrs. Riplinger does not respond to your ridiculous assertions. Why dignify the lying claims of a servant of Satan?

Would you maybe explain why you identify someone as a devil and a servant of Satan in light of 2

Timothy 2 .24 -26? Because, James, you are attacking the Word of God.

Also because what you have done, for example, is name your ministry Alpha and Omega and yet in Revelation 1 .1

some of the new versions take out the words Alpha and Omega and yet you have the audacity to give your ministry that name.

And by the way, you asked me a question. Could I answer it? Well, I just wanted to correct what you had just said.

I just wanted to correct what you had just said. You're confusing people. It's not Revelation text.

I would like to answer your question, James. Go ahead. Alright. As far as your being a researcher,

I received your treatise about Gail Riplinger's book and I noticed you misspelled her name throughout it.

If you can't spell her name right and all you had to do was call her up or call me or call any one of a thousand bookstores that have her name, if we can't trust the fact that you can't even spell an author's name right, how can we trust any other supposed scholar in this?

And by the way, I read your 40 -page missal, but it was full of errors and I really think that you need to get down and read some books.

Dr. Waite's book, Dr. Fuller's book, Riplinger's book, excellent books and they're much needed by Christians today.

Well, Tex, if I could point out a few things. First of all, it's not Revelation 1 -1, it's Revelation 1 -11 that you're attempting to refer to there and I provided you a full response to that in the letter.

Sir, I'm going to answer your question, Tex, I'm going to answer your question now. Revelation 1 -11, not

Revelation 1 -1, and I explained that, excuse me, it's Revelation 1 -11. That's what

I said, Revelation 1 -11, Revelation 1 -11. Actually, sir, on the front of the last letter you sent me where you sent back my facts with red lighting on, excuse me,

Tex, Tex. There has been no moderator to this debate yet, I guess, are you trying to take over the debate?

No, sir, Tex, I'm just responding to you. That's not me. Excuse me, Tex. Excuse me, I'm part of In Defense of Faith and,

Tex, you're going to have to let James respond now. You have to be quiet, they're going to turn you down. Sir? Dr.

Wade is the guy who's debated, not me. I'm going to let you good men go. Okay. All the best to you, my friend.

All right, that's fine. Go ahead, Tex. I have one question for you. Are you still there, Tex? He's gone. He's gone. Okay. If I could respond to that, first of all,

I sent a letter to Tex Myers explaining, responding to his letter to me.

He sent my fax back with red ink across it saying he didn't want any more of my evil trash and, interestingly enough, he just tried to say he didn't say

Revelation 1 -1. The front of the envelope has Revelation 1 -1 right here,

I'll show it to you, written on the front, not 1 -11. All right. Secondly, if I could finish responding to what he was saying, when he says

I attack the Bible, no, I do not. I love God's word. I preach God's word. A couple of you,

Dale, were there today as I opened God's word and spoke that word.

I love God's word. I do not attack it in any way, shape, or form, but I do attack those who would attempt to limit

God's word to a 17th century Anglican translation. And that just simply is, those are the problems with what

Mr. Myers said. And you'll notice he did not respond to my citation, 2 Timothy 2, 24 -26, to explain why he would identify someone as a servant of Satan.

That is not how Christians are to discuss this issue. I have respect for a person who can handle a discussion of this issue on a rational basis without resorting to names.

But Mr. Myers, obviously, is not one of those individuals who can deal with this issue. What he said about get thee behind me, take up the cross, the

Lord's Prayer, and each of those things, we could have a good discussion on those things. But he's in error about many of the things that he said.