Alpha and Omega Ministries, The Christian Apologetics Ministry of James R. White
















"Our ambition...is to be pleasing to Him" (2 Cor. 5:9)
Office Hours (MT)
Dr. James White, Director
Richard Pierce, President
Sean Hahn, Vice President
Monday - Friday
10:00AM - 5:00PM
(602) 973-4602

 

 

Here We Go Again
A Brief, But Hopefully Necessary, Response to Texe Marrs

 


by James White

[On our web page you will find another article I have written refuting Mr. Marrs' wild accusations regarding God allegedly striking Dr. Don Wilkins of the New American Standard Bible dumb on the John Ankerberg Show. I also document there the language of Texe Marrs, and how in his first communication with me, he called me a "servant of Satan."]


The following article came to me electronically. It was preceded by the following notice:


[The following is a very interesting and accurate analysis of one of the biggest two-faced, lying fakirs in the Body of Christ: Mr. James White. We recently documented him to have lied seventy nine times in 271 pages of text (The King James Only Controversy), and here we see the facade under which Jimmy operates. This excellent article is by Texe Marrs, who publishes some excellent material on the King James Bible and present world conditions as they head up to an International Police State with global control and Genocide for Christians and Jews. - BBB]

The material is coming, then, from the Bible Believer's Bulletin, the publication of the most rabid of the KJV Only advocates, Peter Ruckman. If you are sensitive to constant insults, unfounded accusations, and twists and turns of logic that can make the sensitive stomach (and mind) queasy, you may want to stop here. Ruckman, and Marrs, are known for their wild language, and their wilder theology and argumentation.

Before we begin with the actual article, keep a few items in mind. Mr. Marrs has been challenged to debate me in public. He was invited to do so on KIXL radio in Austin, Texas, back in 1994. He refused. He did call in while I was discussing textual issues with Dr. D.A. Waite. You can hear how he behaved, and how he was shown to be dishonest, by simply picking up the phone and dialing (#Temporarily Unavailable), and following the directions to the KJV Only area. There you can listen as Marrs calls in to the program. His comments will be even more relevant when we see a section of his article below. Also, keep in mind that Mr. Marrs is not a scholar of anything. In fact, he seems to be proud of that, and engages in the all-too-common "anti-intellectualism" of much of modern fundamentalism. He has not taken the time to even do as Paul exhorted Timothy, to be zealous in one's preparations for ministry. For some reason, he seems to think that ignorance is a plus in ministry, and regularly takes shots at anyone who has dedicated themselves to learning so as to be able to more accurately, and truthfully, handle the Scriptures, history, and a defense of the faith. This fact comes out with painful clarity in the article that follows.

The reader is warned to beware of Marrs and his type. He is feeding off the body of Christ, drawing disciples away unto himself, spreading half-truths and pure lies at the expense of the sheep of Christ. He is a loner, not under the authority of a local church or elders, unaccountable to God-ordained authority. As for me (and the question is honestly asked, in light of what I just said), I am a member of the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church, under the authority of the eldership of that local assembly.

James White, a boastful King James Bible opponent, continues on his baseless crusade to bash King James only believers. It makes for a rather sad spectacle to observe critics of the King James Bible like Mr. White humiliate themselves and show disrespect for servants of God. I am praying he will be given a repentant heart and know the grave damage he is doing to the kingdom of our Saviour.

First, we notice that Marrs, like most KJV Only advocates, cannot break out of the circularity of his own system. I am not an opponent of the KJV. I am an opponent of KJV Onlyism. There is, of course, a vast difference. I defend the KJV for what it really is, and for this, those who wish to pervert it into something different, label me an opponent of the KJV. Their writings are filled with this kind of word-twisting.

Next, I would encourage the reader to compare my book, The King James Only Controversy, with just a few months worth of Texe Marrs' Flashpoint newsletter. Compare the language, the backgrounds, the style of writing. Ask yourself who is on a crusade. Ask yourself who is boastful. Ask yourself who is bashing whom. I think the answer is plain to any fair-minded person.

Before they are sucked into this man's flawed arguments, Christians should carefully consider the downside of Mr. White's seamy attacks on the King James Bible. Mr. White calls his organization "Alpha and Omega Ministries." It must be very embarrassing to White when people ask him about Revelation 1:11. You see, most of the satanic and confused new "Bible" translations Mr. White so avidly supports have butchered Revelation 1:11 and stripped the correct wording as found in the King James Bible. In the King James, we read Jesus Christ's glorious declaration, "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last..." But -get this!- the false new versions shamelessly delete the very words "Alpha and Omega."

Now, since Mr. White's organization is, strangely enough, named" Alpha and Omega," you can see what a royal problem that is for him to try to explain away. I'm sure he'll desperately attempt to claim that the words "Alpha and Omega" are also found elsewhere, in Revelation 22:13. Fine, Mr. White, for now. But what are you going to do when the apostate Bible scholars remove these holy words from that passage as well?

As I documented in my response to Gail Riplinger's book, New Age Bible Versions Refuted (soon to be added in text format to our web page), Mr. Marrs originally thought this variant was in Revelation 1:1. When I wrote to him, providing him with all the textual information on the variant, I corrected his confusion about the location of the variant. Did he even bother to read what I wrote for him? Obviously not, since when he wrote back (returning my faxed letter with red-ink on the front calling it "garbage") he wrote on the envelope, "Revelation 1:1." Finally, when he called in to the radio program on KTKK, he again said "Revelation 1:1." This seems to be about the only textual point Mr. Marrs brings up against me. I again corrected him on the air, and he dishonestly avoided the correction by saying, "That's what I said. Revelation one . . . one one." If you don't believe anyone would be that misleading, call (602) 973- 0318 and listen for yourself.

Now Mr. Marrs has not taken the time to read The King James Only Controversy, or any other work that explains textual criticism. He has no idea upon what basis textual decisions are made, nor does he seem to care. He doesn't realize that his own KJV was based upon textual decisions made by men like Desiderius Erasmus, Stephanus, Theodore Beza, and the KJV translators. He doesn't seem to recognize that they used the same kind of means of making such decisions as modern scholars. Blind to these facts, Marrs asks me what I'm going to do when "apostate Bible scholars remove these holy words from that passage as well" (i.e., Revelation 22:13). [The reader should realize that any Bible scholar who disagrees with KJV Onlyism is an "apostate." That's how KJV Only devotees view the world.] If Marrs knew something about how such decisions are made, he'd know that is not in the realm of possibility. He'd know that textual scholars (believing textual scholars, men who believe in Christ and confess His name) are seeking to give us what was originally written, and since the phrase "Alpha and Omega" appears in the earliest and best manuscripts of the book of Revelation, no one can simply come along and "remove" the phrase. What Texe Marrs doesn't seem to realize is that by defending a merely traditional text as he does, he is in fact saying that we should believe whatever later scribes thought the text should say.

Just give them time, and they will, too. Nothing is sacrosanct with the new translation scholars. If they can so callously omit thousands of other holy and majestic words from the King James Bible, even converting God into "Our Father-Mother," these wicked scribes might do anything.

Marrs is again confused. He doesn't seem to be able to differentiate between translation of the original text, and the transmission of the text over time. He also fails to recognize the vast difference between the liberal concepts that lie behind such egregiously silly "translations" as "Father-Mother" and the conservative, God-honoring concepts that lie behind a translation like the New American Standard Bible. Throwing all translations into one pile as he does shows how little Mr. Marrs cares about fairly representing the facts. Yet, despite his ignorance of the issues surrounding translations and texts, Marrs is unafraid to speak of "wicked scribes," casting this accusation against liberal and conservative alike, believer and unbeliever, all in the same breath. It is this kind of reckless behavior that has caused so many in the believing community to identify Marrs as a dangerous influence.

I also note that Mr. White has signed correspondence with the pompous and arrogant title, "Scholar in Residence, School of Christian I Studies, Grand Canyon University." Scholar in Residence? We checked to see . If such an institution as Grand Canyon University, which I'd never heard of before, even exists. It does. But, we discovered that its teeny-tiny and just begun "School of Christian Studies" has only "2, 3, or 4 instructors on staff." And Mr. White? Well, yes, the school confided, he is listed as a "Scholar in Residence." But the official we talked to couldn't explain why. The school told us flat out that James White is not "in residence," has no office on campus, and has never taught a single course there, though he's expected to do so starting this spring - in an adjunct status. (How curious - to claim to be a lofty "Scholar in Residence" when one is not even in residence!)

Here we begin to see how shallow is Marrs' research, and how desperate he is to do nothing more than attack those who present conclusions he cannot even begin to dispute. I was installed as Scholar in Residence in the College of Christian Studies at Grand Canyon University by Dr. Bill Williams, the President of the University, in June of 1995. Mr. Marrs' comment about not having heard of the school is somewhat humorous: does Mr. Marrs claim to be an expert on higher education? Grand Canyon has existed since 1948, and is owned by the Southern Baptist Convention. Until recently it was named Grand Canyon College. The name was changed to Grand Canyon University at the beginning of this decade as growth allowed the change. Mr. Marrs doesn't seem to understand that universities are made up of individual colleges, such as the College of Business or the College of Biological Sciences, etc.

In the case of Grand Canyon, the process of transitioning into university status did not happen overnight. Certain areas of the school immediately became colleges unto themselves; others were joined together under broader categories until growth allowed them to become independent units. The Christian Studies department originally continued under a broader banner of liberal arts until 1995 when it became its own college, the College of Christian Studies.

Grand Canyon University is a private, liberal-arts college, with approximately 2000 students in its various programs. It is not the largest educational institution in the world; it is not the smallest either. It has a good reputation as a liberal arts school, and I am very pleased to teach on the staff.

Now, Mr. Marrs' methods of "research" are rather sadly exposed by his desperate attempt to attack me on a personal level (I'm sure the reader has already noted that Marrs does not even attempt to provide any kind of meaningful factual rebuttal or argument). Who did he contact? The secretary of the college, a young lady who does the clerical work, keeping student records, etc. She has not long worked at the school, and hence was unaware that I have, in fact, taught at Grand Canyon before, as early as 1990. I taught Church History in both 1990 and 1991, as the records show. This does not include substitute teaching in Greek that I have done for just as long. Marrs, of course, isn't really concerned about speaking the truth about me or my background. He has only one goal: to obfuscate the issues, to attack a man who presents facts that he can't refute, and can't begin to deal with.

Mr. White has written a confusing and sleazy book knocking the King James Bible. It's no doubt popular with the growing flock of so called "scholars" who promote the satanic, new "Bible" versions; but apparently, White's book has otherwise met with indifference since its release and has flopped in the Christian marketplace. Notable, the book was published by Bethany House, a press that, until the advent of Mr. White's "scholarly" tome, had mostly gained a measure of fame for publishing a series of romance-type, feminine, western novelettes.

I'm sure my book is confusing to Mr. Marrs. Any work of scholarship will be confusing to a person who refuses to even attempt to understand or even read it. I invite the reader to look at my book and see if there is anything "sleazy" about it. This kind of mud- slinging is the sign of a desperate man, unable to even begin to interact with what the book says.

Marrs likes to make up "facts" to substantiate his conspiracy theories, his theology, and his unusual interpretations of prophecy, etc. Here he makes up some more "facts." My book is in its second printing. More than twice the normal number of copies were printed in the first run. For a non-fiction work the book has done tremendously well. Marrs is simply lying.

As to Bethany House, the publisher does publish fiction works, many of them. But, Marrs forgot to mention such works as Walter Martin's Kingdom of the Cults or any of the other non-fiction works published by Bethany. Why? Because he is on a crusade, and those who engage in crusading don't care about the means they use to accomplish their ends.

Mr. White's book is pitifully flawed. In fact, it is so bad that, in his newsletter, Dr. Peter Ruckman, a well-known proponent of the King James Bible, has actually been encouraging his readers to buy Mr. White's twisted and distorted book and read it. According to Brother Ruckman, once you've read and digested White's book, you'll know for sure why the King James is God's only preserved Bible available today in English. White's error-filled propaganda book is his own worst enemy.

The reader will notice that Marrs is long on insults and attacks, but very short on facts. Ruckman's ravings against my book have, in fact, done little more than prove what I said about him in it. Knowledgeable people who review Ruckman's writings are naturally repulsed by his incredible attitude, which in many ways exceeds even the vitriol of Marrs. My files continue to expand with letters from those who have, by God's grace and the means of my book, been released from the deception foisted upon them by the likes of Ruckman and Marrs.

I believe that if it had not been for Dr. Ruckman supporting the sales of the book in this way, Mr. White's unscholarly volume would really have been a marketplace bomb.

Such commentary stands as its own refutation.

Interestingly, Mr. White's book attacking the King James Bible is endorsed by a Mr. Norm Geisler -his name is right on the cover. Now, Geisler also just happens to be a strong promoter of the ungodly Catholics and Evangelicals Together, the unity document put together by Chuck Colson and apostate Catholic priest Richard Neuhaus. That's the papal approved treatise which warns Protestants not to evangelize Catholics, among other atrocities. It is telling that White uses the pro Catholic, ecumenical Norman Geisler to publicly endorse his book.

Of course, it is Dr. Norman Geisler, not Mr. Norm Geisler. Dr. Geisler is not a "strong promoter" of the ECT document. If Mr. Marrs would bother to check his facts, he'd know that Dr. Geisler wrote a book with Dr. MacKenzie titled, Roman Catholics and Evangelicals that questions many of the conclusions of the ECT document.

The whole idea that there is any connection with Roman Catholicism in my book, or my ministry, is so silly that those outside the small, shrinking world influenced by Texe Marrs can only laugh at such accusations. Marrs has never even bothered to find out what other books I've written, or anything about me and my ministry. If he had, he'd know that there is not a single Protestant apologist in the United States that has engaged in more public, open debates against the leading Roman Catholic apologists than I have. And while this article was probably written prior to the publication of my next book with Bethany House, The Roman Catholic Controversy, it is truly ironic that he would make such absurd accusations in light of that work and my entire ministry to Roman Catholics.

The fact is that it is people like Texe Marrs that bring so much reproach to the cause of Christ in evangelizing Roman Catholics. Their surface-level, easily refuted arguments that come from the same unwillingness to do real, honest work in their writing and speaking (as seen in this attack upon me and other scholars working in the area of biblical translation and textual study) that provide Roman Catholic apologists with "target practice." Since such items as consistency, honesty, and integrity do not find a place in Marrs' attacks upon believing Christian men, why should we expect him to be fair even in his attacks upon error? But when bad and easily refuted arguments are used against error, the cause of truth is damaged, for when those arguments are refuted, all arguments against untruth are likewise weakened.

Let's put two and two together. First, we know that the Vatican has for centuries detested and assaulted the King James Bible. Understandably so, for it is the Holy Bible used by dedicated missionaries who over the years have won so many lost Catholics to Christ. We also know that the papacy loves and endorses the new, false "Bible" versions -just like the ones promoted by Mr. White and Mr. Geisler. Anyone see a connection there?

Here we see some more of Mr. Marrs' ability at creating connections and conspiracies where none exist. I have demonstrated how such irrational thinking can be used to prove anything in the pages of The King James Only Controversy.

Mr. White, unknown at the time, first gained notoriety when he began to slam Mrs. Gail Riplinger's bestselling, heavily documented book, New Age Bible Versions. He became a hero of the Bible bashers by authoring a "report" attacking the Riplinger book. However, Mr. White's report quickly had to be redone because, as it turned out, in the report the brilliant "Scholar in Residence" had repeatedly misspelled Mrs. Riplinger's first name. He had it as "Gayle,"rather than correctly as "Gail."

Mr. Marrs, so utterly unprepared to deal with anything of substance, has only two notes he can play in his song. The first is Revelation 1:11, the other the fact that when I first wrote my article responding to New Age Bible Versions, I incorrectly guessed at the spelling of Gail Riplinger's first name. So lame and is Marrs' response that most people have to read his words twice just to figure out that he is really asserting that my error has some impact upon my work on translation issues. You see, Mrs. Riplinger never put her first name in her book. She simply put "G.A. Riplinger," which, as she said later, represented to her, "God and Riplinger: God as author, Riplinger as secretary." I knew her name was "Gail" only because I had heard her addressed as such on a radio program. So, I had to guess at the spelling of her name, and I chose Gayle. When someone said she spelled it "Gail," I changed the spelling in subsequent editions.

Now, Mr. Marrs has had at least two full years to develop meaningful arguments against my documentation of the errors in Gail Riplinger's work. Yet, in two years, all he's done is repeat his assertions about Revelation 1:11 (without once showing the first bit of evidence that he's even looked at the textual evidence I provided to him) and the spelling of Riplinger's first name. I leave it to the reader: if that's all he can come up with in the space of two years, what does that tell you?

Mr. White reportedly lays claim to being a "Reformed Baptist." Now, the very liberal Dr. Robert Schuller is a proud member of the "Reformed Church." l also know I of Reformed ministers who wear fancy robes and who practice Catholic-style sacraments, including infant baptism. Some of the Reformed are into hyper-Calvinistic doctrines and are theocratic. They utterly reject the Bible's teaching of the rapture of the church and other prophetic teachings. I don't know if Mr. White is of this theological bent. Who knows his true doctrines other than that he definitely seems to abhor God's pure Word, the King James Bible?

Mr. Marrs obviously has no idea whatsoever of the meaning and application of the term "Reformed." He admits ignorance of my personal beliefs: yet, why should he be ignorant of them? He could find out quite easily enough, if he really cared to be accurate. He could have picked up Letters to a Mormon Elder (Bethany House, 1993), and derived a great deal of information about what I believe from its pages. He could have requested from our ministry our statement of faith (it's on our web page as well), or any number of other books I've written, such as God's Sovereign Grace, Drawn by the Father, Justification by Faith, etc., and could have found out exactly what I believe, and exactly what a Reformed Baptist is. In fact, he could have called the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church, where I am a member, and found out what the church I belong to believes about all these things. But did he? No, of course not, because he is simply interested in casting aspersions upon my character, and nothing more. If he's worried about infant baptism, maybe he could listen to my debate on the topic against two Reformed paedo-baptists from last summer. But he's really not worried about infant baptism: his goal is clear, and when the facts get in the way, he simply ignores them. It's the way of the conspiratorialist.

Recently, Mr. White was invited to debate the King James only issue. Dr. Ruckman, president of Florida's Pensacola Bible Institute, tendered the invitation after White bragged he wanted to take Ruckman on. But apparently, the brave Mr. White suddenly got cold feet. He declined to go and debate. Doesn't it seem that a "Scholar in Residence" like Mr. White would jump at the chance to show off all his worldly-gained knowledge? What's he afraid of? Dr. Ruckman, of course, is one of the planet's top Bible scholars: A real one. He doesn't have to cavort around pretending to be a "Scholar in Residence." Dr. Ruckman, for example, has an earned doctorate, and Mr. White does not. He's authored countless books defending the King James Bible. Could this be a factor in Mr. White's embarrassing reluctance to debate?

The reader is directed again to our web page where he or she can read for themselves the correspondence between the person that Marrs identifies as "one of the planet's top Bible scholars" and myself. There you will find that Ruckman is the one who will not, and cannot, engage in a public, scholarly debate on these issues. It's ironic: Marrs has been invited to do this, and it is in fact he, not I, who is unwilling to appear in public to debate these topics. I renew my challenge to Marrs to engage in a fully-moderated, public debate, of a minimum of 2 and one half hours, in Austin, Texas, if he wishes (his place of residence), on the topic of the King James Only controversy. Marrs has had this challenge for quite some time now. He continues to decline it.

I challenged Peter Ruckman to debate. He insisted that since I issued the challenge, he got to determine the format. He immediately refused to do a real debate. Anyone reading the correspondence will see he did not wish to allow anyone to fully develop their points, to engage in cross-examination, or to do anything remotely resembling a responsible interchange. Instead, he wanted to do short little sections on ten verses, and that was it. I suggested a modification that would at least allow some kind of development. Eventually, as the correspondence demonstrates, not only did he become tremendously abusive, addressing letters to "Dear Apostate" and "Dear Slick," but he began to use profanity and gross insults, and eventually presented an ultimatum: do it his way, at his time, or not at all. He demanded that the debate take place April 1st (we had never discussed this date until he demanded that I appear at his "April Fool's Day" gathering) and that it follow his unreasonable format.

Again, I truly doubt that Mr. Marrs has even read the correspondence. But that is no excuse for his making comments based upon ignorance. If he wants to accuse me of something, let him do so on the basis of facts, not on the basis of his own ignorance of the real situation.

This, then, has been a brief look at Bible critic, Mr. James White, who rejects the Truth but prides himself on being a "Scholar in Residence." How pitiful and tragic is the man who trusts in worldly scholarliness, who deceitfully hides behind a vain title. How blessed, in contrast, is that man whose identity comes not from college degrees or earthly distinctions but from Jesus Christ our Lord. In Him we are all equals. The blood of Jesus alone is our banner of strength and wisdom.

It is truly a shame that someone will use Christian terminology and language as a cover for a dagger of hatred. Mr. Marrs has not provided anyone with a "brief look" at me. He has provided lies, ignorance, and half-truths, and he covers this over with pious platitudes so as to deceive the followers of Christ. That is the true shame.

I am thankful to the Lord for the opportunity of serving the body of Christ. He has given me many opportunities of service, including Grand Canyon University (where I am currently teaching Church History), Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary's AZ Campus (where I am teaching the Systematic Theology core classes, and have taught Greek), and Faraston Seminary. I love to teach, for it allows me to focus upon God's truth, and leave, for a while at least, the distressing and sad field of combat created by troublers of the Church like Texe Marrs, Peter Ruckman, and Gail Riplinger. For a while, at least, I can focus upon the great truths of the faith, and encourage young and old alike in the things of God.

In closing, I invite my readers to take a test. Gather together copies of Texe Marrs' writings. Gather what you can of Peter Ruckman. Gather as well my books, including the works on the KJV issue, Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, etc. Read. Consider. Look at who is doing real research and providing you with sound biblical teaching. Look at the use of phrases like "fool," "apostate," "Bible hater," and the like. See who is dependent upon emotionally-charged words that cloud the issue, and who can provide an argument without relying upon such poor tactics. Then decide for yourself. I think the facts speak for themselves.

James White
8/20/96

Director, Alpha and Omega Ministries
Author, The King James Only Controversy


Copyright 2005-2006 Alpha and Omega Ministries